Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: What is the solution?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: What is the solution? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: What is the solution? - 11/15/2013 11:30:17 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
Wasn't that the delirious refrain of St.Wrinklemeat when he was wracked by alzheimers and growing the government and taxes and interfering in freemarkets and trading arms for hostages and generally violating the constitution as his henchmen carried off national treasure?

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 11/15/2013 11:31:41 AM >


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: What is the solution? - 11/15/2013 11:31:02 AM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline
They're a lot more likely to help than anybody who has shareholders to pay, but don't let that bother you.

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: What is the solution? - 11/16/2013 6:41:03 AM   
leonine


Posts: 409
Joined: 11/3/2009
From: [email protected]
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

quote:

ORIGINAL: BenevolentM

If ObamaCare is not the solution, then what is the solution?


This is ALL CAUSED by coddling the Health Insurance Companies.

Step 1: Direct all practicioners to use the WORKING AND PAID FOR VistA EHR/PM system from the VA.

Step 2: Using birth records, enroll all citizens into medicare. Have a small system to handle old people/poor people WITHOUT PAPERS.

Step 3: There is no step 3 There are also no more health insurance companies.

Does anyone but the legislators OWNED BY HEALTH INSURERS care about health insurance companies?

Exactly what I was going to say, except you know what systems are already in place that could serve as templates.

The insurance companies are the Number One reason US healthcare is ten times the price of any other country's. So trying to fix it by making the insurance companies work for the government is only going to give them the chance to rip off the taxpayers as well as their clients.

No other national health service works through private insurers, because it's a self-evident waste of money and resources. Obama tried to compromise with them because their lobby was too strong to beat, and ended up being owned by them.

_____________________________

Leo9


Gonna pack in my hand, pick up on a piece of land and build myself a cabin in the woods.
It's there I'm gonna stay, until there comes a day when this old world starts a-changing for the good.
- James Taylor

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: What is the solution? - 11/16/2013 6:47:37 AM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline
In this case wasn't the Insurance companies' "lobby" most of the Republican party?
It's strange that it's only the Kenyan who's being given a hard time over this, in the light of the GOP's behaviour over this issue...

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to leonine)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: What is the solution? - 11/16/2013 7:45:31 AM   
igor2003


Posts: 1718
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline
--FR--

Okay, I haven't read all the way through this. In fact I've only read the first half-dozen posts, so I don't know what has been said or not said. I don't have much time this morning, so I'm just going to throw my 2 cents in and let them fall where they may.

About 3 months ago my mother fell and broke her hip. $1200 just for the 15 minute ambulance ride to the hospital. Health care costs in all areas is outrageous. She had to stay in a nursing home/rehab facility for about 3 weeks. Her co-pay alone was $50 per day.

For years, the American people have wanted something to be done about the rising cost of health care. My own feeling is that they did not want "forced" insurance. They wanted AFFORDABLE health care. Now, personally, I don't like Obamacare, but I'm glad that someone has finally tried to do something. I wish it had been a bipartisan project. I think that the give and take in negotiations would have ended with a better bill. I wish they would have consulted more with the American people to find out what they really want and what would really work for them before drafting this monstrosity. Hopefully, over the next few years changes can be made to the bill to make it more people friendly.

Now, what is the solution? Unfortunately, there are no easy answers, but I think the health care system needs overhauled from the ground up. Today's health care isn't driven by any desire to actually heal people. Health care professionals and pharmaceutical companies make more money treating symptoms rather than actually fixing problems.

I have no idea whether the following is true or not, but it does make sense. I heard that there are at least some outlying villages in China where the village doctor is paid by healthy people. They pay him a certain amount each month as long as they are healthy. If they fall ill or break a limb or something, they STOP paying him until they are healed and back in good health. To me, THAT is good health care. It benefits the doctors to actually heal people. He has a vested interest in keeping them healthy.

I know that exact system would not work here. But if our health professionals started making more profit from healthy people instead of sick people I can't help but feel that our entire health care system, including the costs, would probably benefit.

_____________________________

If the women don't find you handsome they should at least find you handy. - Red Green

At my age erections are like cops...there's never one around when you need it!

Never miss a good chance to shut up. - Will Rogers


(in reply to BenevolentM)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: What is the solution? - 11/16/2013 10:43:00 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: igor2003
For years, the American people have wanted something to be done about the rising cost of health care. My own feeling is that they did not want "forced" insurance. They wanted AFFORDABLE health care. Now, personally, I don't like Obamacare, but I'm glad that someone has finally tried to do something. I wish it had been a bipartisan project. I think that the give and take in negotiations would have ended with a better bill. I wish they would have consulted more with the American people to find out what they really want and what would really work for them before drafting this monstrosity. Hopefully, over the next few years changes can be made to the bill to make it more people friendly.
Now, what is the solution? Unfortunately, there are no easy answers, but I think the health care system needs overhauled from the ground up. Today's health care isn't driven by any desire to actually heal people. Health care professionals and pharmaceutical companies make more money treating symptoms rather than actually fixing problems.


Obamacare doesn't address individual costs. It might have an effect on aggregate costs. The "affordable care act" doesn't impact the cost of care, though. It shifts the cost of insurance from one group to another. That really isn't making care "more afordable" for everyone, but it isn't even making insurance "more affordable" for everyone.

Shifting to a more preventive style of medicine and less "curative" style will have an impact on aggregate costs by reducing more expensive procedures and services for less expensive procedures and services. That doesn't lower the costs of those procedures and services, but only changes the number of those procedures and services. Did that require legislation? No. That's a lifestyle shift that anyone and everyone could adopt right now.

"Cost-savings" through efficiencies in Medicare operations didn't require the entirety of Obamacare, either. The Paul Ryan budget plan included those cost-savings without the rest of Obamacare, too. Those efficiencies may have required legislation, but not all that was passed was necessary to effect those cost savings.

If you don't lower the costs of individual procedures and services, the only way to reduce the aggregate cost of care, is to limit the number of procedures or shift to less expensive procedures and services.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to igor2003)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: What is the solution? - 11/16/2013 11:06:27 AM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
I have no clue, Obamacare is a clusterfuck.

How about we take the idea of fixing the healthcare system out of senate and house committees, and I dont know, have people from all parts of the health industry work on it.

The major problem is we have a for profit system. I am not saying taking profit out of health care, but maybe set a percentage cap on the markup?

Hell the government subsidizes other industries like agriculture and the railroads, why not the health care industry? I am talking about in the infrastructure area of health care. The equipment costs are outrageous.

But then I am on post op pain killers and probably should not be involved in discussions that require a lot of thought.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: What is the solution? - 11/16/2013 11:34:30 AM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Hell the government subsidizes other industries like agriculture and the railroads, why not the health care industry


Why does the government subsidize anything?


_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: What is the solution? - 11/16/2013 11:50:26 AM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Hell the government subsidizes other industries like agriculture and the railroads, why not the health care industry


Why does the government subsidize anything?




Hate to tell you this, but the Republicans started the farm subsidies and rail road stuff, the farm stuff to either get them to raise or not raise certain crops, and the railroad subsidies were to improve tracks for high speed rail. I think that in the thirty years since it started, there is only about 400 miles of track that can handle high speed rail.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: What is the solution? - 11/16/2013 12:21:02 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Hell the government subsidizes other industries like agriculture and the railroads, why not the health care industry

Why does the government subsidize anything?

Hate to tell you this, but the Republicans started the farm subsidies and rail road stuff, the farm stuff to either get them to raise or not raise certain crops, and the railroad subsidies were to improve tracks for high speed rail. I think that in the thirty years since it started, there is only about 400 miles of track that can handle high speed rail.


So, why does government subsidize anything?


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: What is the solution? - 11/16/2013 2:01:54 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Hell the government subsidizes other industries like agriculture and the railroads, why not the health care industry


Why does the government subsidize anything?




Hate to tell you this, but the Republicans started the farm subsidies and rail road stuff, the farm stuff to either get them to raise or not raise certain crops, and the railroad subsidies were to improve tracks for high speed rail. I think that in the thirty years since it started, there is only about 400 miles of track that can handle high speed rail.



Jlf, true and likewise the Dept of Energy in the last 30 to 40 years hasn't produced one once of energy. That needs to go too along with "Education" EPA, Railroad and Farm subsidies.
Who in their right mind is going to think that 20 something year olds are going to be lined up down the sidewalks outside insurance company's offices to buy health insurance @ $300 per month?
After something is signed into law that's it, you don't get to "tweak" it or change it like President Pantload is doing! "Delay it" for another 12 months?
Like I've said before, this guy is just plain stupid!
Harvard must be sooo proud.

_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: What is the solution? - 11/16/2013 9:45:41 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle
REAL Conservative don't give a shit about anything but "Does the Corporation bring in revenue to the treasury?"

Keep this in mind when talking to 'Self-Identified Faux Conservatives" ( A.K.A. Republican/Tea-Party Members )

They're also NOT Libertarians. REAL Libertarians know that THE SYSTEM is the problem and that by voting, which is pointless, you sanction THE SYSTEM.

Again, my "Paleo-Con Who Got THROWN OUT OF THE GOP" POV, which is arguable more conservative and libertarian than any tea-party-member is that The People create Artificial Legal Entities for a reason, and if they're not Promoting The General Welfare, then WHAT BENEFIT TO The People is there at all?

( Real Libertarians RUN THEIR OWN BUSINESSES WITHOUT HIDING BEHIND A LLC )

This is so outside mainstream thought I have no idea where to go.
Conservatives believe in small government
Small business.
Maximum liberty for people. This means freedom to succeed - and freedom to fail on your own merits.

Help those that need a hand up not a handout.


HAHAHAHA.....

Always pushing that political viewpoint, regardless of how much it is a total lie. Do you really think liberals are as dumb as people in the Tea Party?

Conservatives do not believe in small government. That's LIBERTARIANS.

Small Business is NOT something conservatives give a crap about. Most small businesses wanted a better healthcare system to which conservatives tried to torpedo back in 2010 and each year since. Further making it hard on many of them to grow their business thanks to the failed economy that nearly went into an economic meltdown in 2007. Oh, and that government shutdown from a few weeks ago? Do you know there are many small businesses whose entire livelihood is based on national parks being open? Some of those businesses didn't have a good summer this year and were hoping for a strong fall turn out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Maximum liberty for people. This means freedom to succeed - and freedom to fail on your own merits.


If this was true, than why is the Tea Party STILL part of the Republican Party? Shouldn't they trek out on their own and not be the little bitches of the Grand Old Party?

Having complete freedom without restraint or rule, leads to anarchy in every case. Stating that maximum freedom is tied directly into success, implies changing the form of government from a 'Democratic Republic' to a 'Meritocracy'. Which generally turns into a 'Socialism', 'Dictatorship' or 'Authoritarian', or 'Totalitarian' after a while. Yeah, not what you thought, right? That's what happens when you don't think the whole plan out to its logical conclusion when you calculated how mankind treats itself.


Yea, what you, as a far leftie, think or know about the Republican Party is of zero interest, since you participate in zero republican blogs, read zero republican magazines, goto zero republican conventions, attend policy groups for zero republican planks.

In sum: you know nothing about republicans. Whereas you know a great deal about what democrats think about republicans.

You read the HufPo and the New York times
You go to thinkprogress, media matters web sites.
etc etc.


(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: What is the solution? - 11/16/2013 9:48:17 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline

Once again I suggest - if you want the solution it helps to define the problem.

First, I don't think there's A problem. I think there are several problems.
The solution you get depends on the question you ask - so what do you think the problem is?

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: What is the solution? - 11/17/2013 4:59:50 PM   
njlauren


Posts: 1577
Joined: 10/1/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

REAL Conservative don't give a shit about anything but "Does the Corporation bring in revenue to the treasury?"

Keep this in mind when talking to 'Self-Identified Faux Conservatives" ( A.K.A. Republican/Tea-Party Members )

They're also NOT Libertarians. REAL Libertarians know that THE SYSTEM is the problem and that by voting, which is pointless, you sanction THE SYSTEM.

Again, my "Paleo-Con Who Got THROWN OUT OF THE GOP" POV, which is arguable more conservative and libertarian than any tea-party-member is that The People create Artificial Legal Entities for a reason, and if they're not Promoting The General Welfare, then WHAT BENEFIT TO The People is there at all?


( Real Libertarians RUN THEIR OWN BUSINESSES WITHOUT HIDING BEHIND A LLC )



This is so outside mainstream thought I have no idea where to go.
Conservatives believe in small government
Small business.
Maximum liberty for people. This means freedom to succeed - and freedom to fail on your own merits.

Help those that need a hand up not a handout.






Really? Then how come so much of the time and effort by conservatives has been in propping up big business? Want some examples? Take a look at farm subsidies, that go to huge agribusinesses like ADM and Cargill. Or the 'conservative' branch of SCOTUS that ruled that corporations are people? Or the refusal to break up big financial companies, arguing that this is 'efficiency' and so forth, or the idiotic conservative mantra that regulation 'ruins business', when the lack of regulation trashed our economy,which almost everyone acknowledges except Jamie Dimon, the scumbag that is head of Goldman Sachs, and the tea party dumbbells that bleat that the government is bad, yet whine about wall street and banks (like, you dumbass pig farmers, who the hell do you think if going to stop the banks and such? Ma and Pa Kettle with their pitchfork?).

As far as freedom to succeed, the problem with the so called conservatives is that they want to maintain the privilege system that doesn't make for a level playing field, they want to maintain the privilege of the rich and corporations by allowing them to buy elections, they want to do so by getting rid of any attempt for poor and rural americans to have as decent an education as well off districts get (put it this way, and I dare anyone to challenge this, the top performing school districts in this country are all from very well off areas with large tax bases, places like Potomac, Maryalnd, Scarsdale, NY, Basking Ride, NJ and so forth....while the lowest are in poor, rural states, like the red state belt and inner city areas).

One of the ironies of small government conservatism is that they support the very things that lead to concentration of power in big business. As far as the hand up instead of the hand out, the problem with that is that many of them don't even both to look at the kind of welfare state we have and where the money goes, a lot of it goes to the 'small state' conservative strongholds, like the south and midwest. Hate to tell them, but those big state favoring states on the coast end up paying for all the 'small government' types, because they don't realize how much they depend on everyone else. I would rather get back from the government what I pay into it, rather than the 60c I get back, and I would wish that Alabama, Georgia, Arkansas, Mississippi and the like would get a let less from the government, actually put their money where their mouth is, but it will never happen.

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: What is the solution? - 11/17/2013 5:41:20 PM   
njlauren


Posts: 1577
Joined: 10/1/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: igor2003

--FR--

Okay, I haven't read all the way through this. In fact I've only read the first half-dozen posts, so I don't know what has been said or not said. I don't have much time this morning, so I'm just going to throw my 2 cents in and let them fall where they may.

About 3 months ago my mother fell and broke her hip. $1200 just for the 15 minute ambulance ride to the hospital. Health care costs in all areas is outrageous. She had to stay in a nursing home/rehab facility for about 3 weeks. Her co-pay alone was $50 per day.

For years, the American people have wanted something to be done about the rising cost of health care. My own feeling is that they did not want "forced" insurance. They wanted AFFORDABLE health care. Now, personally, I don't like Obamacare, but I'm glad that someone has finally tried to do something. I wish it had been a bipartisan project. I think that the give and take in negotiations would have ended with a better bill. I wish they would have consulted more with the American people to find out what they really want and what would really work for them before drafting this monstrosity. Hopefully, over the next few years changes can be made to the bill to make it more people friendly.

Now, what is the solution? Unfortunately, there are no easy answers, but I think the health care system needs overhauled from the ground up. Today's health care isn't driven by any desire to actually heal people. Health care professionals and pharmaceutical companies make more money treating symptoms rather than actually fixing problems.

I have no idea whether the following is true or not, but it does make sense. I heard that there are at least some outlying villages in China where the village doctor is paid by healthy people. They pay him a certain amount each month as long as they are healthy. If they fall ill or break a limb or something, they STOP paying him until they are healed and back in good health. To me, THAT is good health care. It benefits the doctors to actually heal people. He has a vested interest in keeping them healthy.

I know that exact system would not work here. But if our health professionals started making more profit from healthy people instead of sick people I can't help but feel that our entire health care system, including the costs, would probably benefit.


Igor, the problem is the republicans didn't want to negotiate, the tea party morons party line was that the answer is to do nothing, and if people fall sick and so forth, or don't have insurance, no big deal. They are like that idiot Santorum, who too much communion wine and wafers rotted what little brain he has, when he said if people don't have insurance they should go to emergency rooms, which is what a lot of tea party morons believe (worse, a lot of tea party types are old people on medicare, who are complete hypocritical assholes..want to get rid of socialized medicine? Then get your ass of medicare and pay for your health care). The republicans make noise about the market solving it, but it hasn't, for a lot of reasons (among other things, it is very very difficult to have an open market with health insurance, too few companies have the resources for it). I debated this crap in high school almost 35 years ago, and nothing has solved the problem. Insurance across state lines? Going to fail because doctors are local, a plan in Arkansas is cheaper because doctors and such make less there, not to mention everyone would locate their plan in Arkansas who would promptly tell them "locate here, I'll make sure you don't have to pay for anything' to try and get jobs). There is simply no competition on health insurance, and won't be, small businesses can't get into it. 35 years ago HMO's were supposed to cure all the ills, they failed, in part because to make money, doctors and providers found ways to game the system, PPO's have failed, it just hasn't worked. We are told medicare is efficient, but that is only because the cost of medicare is in effect shifted on other people's insurance, medicare pays 40 bucks for a 200 buck procedure, doctor overcharges other people.

Some have argued the answer is high deductible medical insurance, with HSA's (health savings accounts) to cover the deductibles, but they have gotten expensive, too, because health insurers play all kinds of games with what they are supposed to pay out in the non deductible region, they claim costs are too high, and often leave the patient stuck with it.

The other problem as Desideri puts it is the health industry itself. Doctors do things like invest in MRI clinics, so when a patient comes in with a sprained ankle, they send them for a MRI, which is ridiculous, because they make more money off it. Pharm companies run ads touting their latest meds (which should be outlawed IMO, those ads for crap to regulate urination, etc), and they get ma and pa coming in wanting the 'miracle' arthritis drug that will allow them to run like teenagers, rather than a generic that would probably work just as well. There is just too much incentive to load on costs.......

There are no magic answers, but here are some of my thoughts:

-We should be regulating our food supply better. First of all, thanks to the corn lobby, a lot of the food out there is subsidized shit, and I am tired of hearing how we have 'freedom to eat what we want'...the problem is, we don't even know what is in food out there. Crap that is the main component of silly putty is allowed in many processed foods and cheap corn that makes Iowa bible thumping, dumbass farmers rich, has contaminated everything with HFC to who the hell knows what (the guy who wrote the "Omnivore's dilema" said that studies of food shows that something like 40% of what people eat has corn in it, which isn't healthy). Meat is loaded with antibiotics and hormones, foods are loaded with pesticides, many of which have not been fully tested (and the antibiotics in meat is one of the reasons antibiotics are failing to work with some bugs). We allow shit in food that isn't even on the label, and even organic food allows compounds like Carageen, that is a known irritant that can cause all kinds of issues. One of the downsides of all this is people getting obese, the kind of food they are producing is a disaster, the meat is fatty and unhealthy, baked products have all kinds of sugar and crap in it, and that is costing us.

-Doctors are pretty decent at treating diseases caused by bacteria, or things like getting a bad cut or a broken bone, but when it comes to preventing disease they stink. Last I just read doctors are going to start treating people with Statin drugs to prevent cholesterol issues on a much larger scale, treating 10's of millions more...yet no study has shown that doing so is particularly effective in treating heart disease.

And on nutrition doctors are still in the dark ages. They preach the whole 'red meat' is bad mantra, which is crap, and promote eating grains a la the FDA food pyramid, which is crap, too. In the food pyramid grains are at the bottom, it should be vegetables, and meat and saturated fats in moderation are not bad for you, but doctors tell the 'thou shalt not eat red meat', and that is not backed by science. They still promote the idea of dietary cholesterol causing heart disease, when cholesterol comes from the liver, and cholesterol itself is not evil per se (it is why they tell people to take folic acid, it prevents cholesterol from sticking)....yet they are putting people on statins, that reduce the liver's ability to produce cholesterol (which also reduces coq10, which the heart needs, and can cause muscle damage). Doctors nutrition and exercise advice is quite frankly a joke (if you want to get healthy, doing cardio alone is pretty much useless, and if you don't change diet you might lose weight, but you won't be healthier).

We spend a tend of money on treating disease, but little on preventing it.Among other things, the good industry has been allowed to operate almost unregulated, and then to top it off government subsidies (that the tea party scream cannot be cut) for farm programs make our food less healthy, not more. If we made a serious effort to fix our food supply, stop allowing the kind of thing where the 'low fat' products doctors tell people is more healthy to be loaded with sugar and chemicals, if we got rid of the corn subsidies that turn out cheap but crappy food like McDonalds, we probably could bring down health care costs, especially in old people where a lifetime of bad eating gets you. And oh, yeah, get rid of crop subsidies for tobacco while they are at it, and try to find a way to eventually make tobacco illegal (somewhere between 50 and 100,000 people are year die from tobacco related issues, all of which are expensive to treat).

The chinese idea of paying a doctor when you are healthy and not paying when you are sick was sort of the basis for HMO's, in the sense that they had an impetus in 'keeping people healthy'. The problem is that in the end they didn't, they just did what traditional medicine did.

In the end I suspect the only solution that might work is some sort of single payer system, whether it is pure governmental or some sort of private/industry hybrid. United Healthcare might not be happy, but given that the health insurers are a big part of the reason health costs have skyrocketed (take a look at their profits, and you will see why premiums went up). One of the reasons for a single payer of some sort is that they have the ability to make prices transparent, since doctors all over would have to use them. A woman on NPR was talking about how she asked her health insurer to find out how much a procedure would cost from various doctors and hospitals, and it took them 6 weeks to get back to her with what it will cost her, which is ridiculous. Doctors get away with not saying, because it is all so fragmented now, but if they all had to report what they charge cause it is all one provider, then maybe people could figure out the best place to go. Maybe the single payer would be underwritten by health insurers in a pool but run by a not for profit group whose prime interest, rather than making money, would be to make sure that care was given efficiently and transparently, but I think to get a pool where the healthy subsidize the ill is going to take that route. Medicare is a disaster in the send that it has a pool that is almost entirely high risk and high cost, the elderly, medicare for all citizens would have a pool of the young and old, sick and healthy, which should drop the cost.

We also need to figure out the doctor office end of things. For one thing, we need to break the AMA's hold on things.Sorry, but you don't need an md when you need stitches, have athletes foot or a sore throat, or routine treatment like that. Nurse practicioners and trained med techs could do that just as easily, and it is a lot cheaper than a doctor, especially these days when it often is a specialist doing basic stuff.

Too, maybe the government could take over a significant portion of doctors costs. Doctors argue the cost of medical school and coming out with several hundred thousand in debt, maybe kind of like the military, doctors would work in government clinics serving those in need of medical care for 7 years, and once done, their debt is over. This way there would be a pool of doctors handling ill served rural and poor areas. Same with malpractice insurance (which is one of the biggest rip off's in terms of insurance; the rates have skyrocketed because insurers are making a ton of money), a government pool would be a lot cheaper for doctors then the greed mongers in the private insurance racket.

We also need to regulate things like doctors owning labs, mri clinics and the like, then seeing patients and sending them there, it is just a reason to order unnecessary tests.

Desidiri is right, the problem with Obama care or any solution is that it doesn't cover the whole spectrum of health care, you can't just look at insurance, the whole thing needs to be changed. The AMA and the health insurance companies aren't going to be happy,but it is the whole thing that needs changing.

(in reply to igor2003)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: What is the solution? - 11/18/2013 2:15:12 AM   
leonine


Posts: 409
Joined: 11/3/2009
From: [email protected]
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


Once again I suggest - if you want the solution it helps to define the problem.

First, I don't think there's A problem. I think there are several problems.
The solution you get depends on the question you ask - so what do you think the problem is?

The problem is the insurance system. That's why Obamacare is not the solution, because it works along with the problem. It's not a national health service, which the public are crying out for but the insurance lobby will never allow, it's just an attempt to make the existing system less murderous.

The insurance system is a dead weight on US business which makes every firm that employs people less competitive than their counterparts in countries with civilised healthcare. That's why US firms outsource even high level jobs when they can. State health systems cost both workers and employers less in taxes than they pay in the US for a poorer service. But that's OK with right wing ideologues, because being robbed blind by the private sector is better than paying tax.

My son and his wife have well paid jobs in New York with a good health plan, but they have a chronically ill child, and they're having to consider whether they'll have to come home to the UK just to get him properly looked after without bankrupting themselves. I wonder how many other productive tax paying citizens the US loses as healthcare refugees?

_____________________________

Leo9


Gonna pack in my hand, pick up on a piece of land and build myself a cabin in the woods.
It's there I'm gonna stay, until there comes a day when this old world starts a-changing for the good.
- James Taylor

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: What is the solution? - 11/19/2013 5:15:49 AM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: leonine


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


Once again I suggest - if you want the solution it helps to define the problem.

First, I don't think there's A problem. I think there are several problems.
The solution you get depends on the question you ask - so what do you think the problem is?

The problem is the insurance system. That's why Obamacare is not the solution, because it works along with the problem. It's not a national health service, which the public are crying out for but the insurance lobby will never allow, it's just an attempt to make the existing system less murderous.

The insurance system is a dead weight on US business which makes every firm that employs people less competitive than their counterparts in countries with civilised healthcare. That's why US firms outsource even high level jobs when they can. State health systems cost both workers and employers less in taxes than they pay in the US for a poorer service. But that's OK with right wing ideologues, because being robbed blind by the private sector is better than paying tax.

My son and his wife have well paid jobs in New York with a good health plan, but they have a chronically ill child, and they're having to consider whether they'll have to come home to the UK just to get him properly looked after without bankrupting themselves. I wonder how many other productive tax paying citizens the US loses as healthcare refugees?


So, we actually agree to a tiny extent.

I think the idea of buying insurance, and then running every healthcare decision through that insurance company is ludicrous.

I think that prices should be negotiated for procedures - but how well a single person can do this when they are sick - its not possible.

So what you need is groups of people to negotiate procedure prices, in advance.

Do we agree on that?

(in reply to leonine)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: What is the solution? - 11/19/2013 1:54:35 PM   
MariaB


Posts: 2969
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: leonine


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


Once again I suggest - if you want the solution it helps to define the problem.

First, I don't think there's A problem. I think there are several problems.
The solution you get depends on the question you ask - so what do you think the problem is?

The problem is the insurance system. That's why Obamacare is not the solution, because it works along with the problem. It's not a national health service, which the public are crying out for but the insurance lobby will never allow, it's just an attempt to make the existing system less murderous.

The insurance system is a dead weight on US business which makes every firm that employs people less competitive than their counterparts in countries with civilised healthcare. That's why US firms outsource even high level jobs when they can. State health systems cost both workers and employers less in taxes than they pay in the US for a poorer service. But that's OK with right wing ideologues, because being robbed blind by the private sector is better than paying tax.

My son and his wife have well paid jobs in New York with a good health plan, but they have a chronically ill child, and they're having to consider whether they'll have to come home to the UK just to get him properly looked after without bankrupting themselves. I wonder how many other productive tax paying citizens the US loses as healthcare refugees?


Then why don't the people lobby the government. Its time the American government worked for its people and not the other way round.

I think the only realistic solutions is nationalization. Either that or put your money under your mattress and when you do fall ill get on the first flight to Cuba.

America is a great example of capitalism gone wrong.


< Message edited by MariaB -- 11/19/2013 2:20:24 PM >


_____________________________

My store is http://e-stimstore.com

(in reply to leonine)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: What is the solution? - 11/19/2013 4:22:21 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

I think the only realistic solutions is nationalization.


Now you've done it. You've gone and mentioned nationalisation, which is just a euphemism for communism. Tut, woeful tut.

There's bugger all sense of social democracy in the USA, nor modern liberalism (and the idea of positive freedoms as opposed to negative freedoms) nor even, from what I can make out, much more than a minimal sense of enlightened self interest. There's capitalism, and there's communism, and that's it.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to MariaB)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: What is the solution? - 11/19/2013 11:14:07 PM   
tj444


Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB
or put your money under your mattress and when you do fall ill get on the first flight to Cuba.

America is a great example of capitalism gone wrong.

Legally, Americans cant just catch the first flight to Cuba..

"the US government restricts its citizens from travelling there, except with a license issued by the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control. The specific restriction is against spending money in Cuba. However, US authorities consider any visit of more than one day to be prima facie proof that one has spent money there.""

http://wikitravel.org/en/Americans_in_Cuba

but there are lots of other countries that medical tourists can travel to.. saves them money and they get a nice trip out of it too.. of course it would be wise to have that all researched prior to needing it

_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to MariaB)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: What is the solution? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094