Politics

[observe]

 

[observe]

 

[observe]

 

[observe]

 

[observe]

 

[observe]

 

[observe]

 

[observe]

 

[observe]

 

[wesheltonj]

. . . To maximize the societal benefit and mitigate extraneous costs in a private healthcare system, there must be near full participation by the population. This means both cost sharing to compensate for more expensive treatments. The most efficient and equitable method of cost sharing is private insurance. If the healthcare system is to rely on private insurance, then there must be some mechanism to allow for all citizens to afford it. the simplest solution would be to dissolve Medicare/Medicaid and instead subsidize the cost to insurance companies for offering coverage to the population. With the dramatically increased participation in the insurance pool, as well as the elimination of administrative costs associated with Medicare/Medicaid and the decidedly cheaper overall cost from a private healthcare system, the total investment in subsidies would be quite smaller than the current spending on Medicare/Medicaid.

Yes, its called Community Rating, and the insurance industry has fought it for years. Instead, we ended up with the Affordable Care Act, which is neither care or affordable.

 

[WAB]

With regard to healthcare, I believe that people have the right to not die from a sickness, and it is not sustainable for a society to have a large percentage of the population go bankrupt every time they have a large medical expense. Furthermore, forcing people to decide on treatments due to cost is both unconducive to desirable outcomes and morally wrong, making it essential that citizens have some means of affordable access to healthcare.

When corporations have been forced to establish a blanket healthcare fund for affected parties as part of a settlement, the amount allocated to the fund is determined by the cost associated with critical conditions resulting directly from the wrongdoing by the corporation. However, when the beneficiaries are of a population that has not had widely available access to routine healthcare, initial health assessments expose a multitude of underlying conditions, quickly exceeding the cost estimates and depleting the fund. Medicare-for-all and other free healthcare options like those championed by Sanders are disingenuous in their cost estimates because they do not consider such ballooning costs. In order for such healthcare plans to be sustainable, care would have to be limited to only necessary expenditures, thus eliminating much preventative care, which in turn will result in more unfavorable health outcomes and exacerbate already expensive costs.

Since citizens need access to affordable healthcare that does not overburden the healthcare system, an alternate to socialized medicine is required. With preventative care is so critical to favorable outcomes, thereby reducing overall health costs, there is a profit motive for private organizations to deliver both affordable and quality healthcare, especially to the most underserved communities.

To maximize the societal benefit and mitigate extraneous costs in a private healthcare system, there must be near full participation by the population. This means both cost sharing to compensate for more expensive treatments. The most efficient and equitable method of cost sharing is private insurance. If the healthcare system is to rely on private insurance, then there must be some mechanism to allow for all citizens to afford it. the simplest solution would be to dissolve Medicare/Medicaid and instead subsidize the cost to insurance companies for offering coverage to the population. With the dramatically increased participation in the insurance pool, as well as the elimination of administrative costs associated with Medicare/Medicaid and the decidedly cheaper overall cost from a private healthcare system, the total investment in subsidies would be quite smaller than the current spending on Medicare/Medicaid.

Saul, the last time I checked we all die of a sickness. Where are you going to draw the line, because you have no choice but to do so with government mandated health care.

If the government provides it, it becomes a budget line item which then must be allocated, read that ‘rationed’. I have lived in both systems. I’ll take a market based system over a social system every time.

 

[Newboomer]

Every time the govt gets involved in anything it gets screwed up to a fair thee well and no one benefits except a bunch of crooked politicos. Leave it to free enterprise.

 

[Saul]

Saul, the last time I checked we all die of a sickness. Where are you going to draw the line, because you have no choice but to do so with government mandated health care.

If the government provides it, it becomes a budget line item which then must be allocated, read that ‘rationed’. I have lived in both systems. I’ll take a market based system over a social system every time.

This is what I get for posting something that I typed while waiting to board my flight!!! Let me go into more detail about what I mean by government subsidy for private insurance paid by the dissolution of Medicare/Medicaid as being the best system. As others have pointed out, government subsidy does result in increased expense. If you are offering a patient a knee replacement for 25K, they are probably going to say no if they have to foot the bill, but if the government is paying for it, then of course they will say yes. What I meant to suggest is that instead of having the government DIRECTLY subsidize the cost of healthcare through mandated programs like Medicare/Medicaid, we could take a fraction of the money allocated to these programs and instead use it to subsidize the cost of private insurance ONLY for individuals who are too poor or old to access even basic care at an affordable price due to exorbitant premiums. Costs would further be reduced by adjusting copay to account for detrimental health choices (drug use, smoking, etc.), eliminating the administrative costs of Medicare/Medicaid compliance, and focusing on preventative care, which results in generally more favorable outcomes at a lower cost. Think of it like a scaled back version of Medicare Advantage. By ensuring that everyone has access to preventative care, the overall cost of healthcare would be reduced, and by ensuring that everyone participates in paying for care that results from their health choices, the insurance system would not become burdened by the addition of these higher risk patients. Finally, by keeping healthcare providers private, the market will adjust to offer the best quality care at an affordable price.

 

[tigris115]

Could anyone from Europe please give some input?

The reason I bought up healthcare is that it seems even the middle class are struggling to afford health care. I heard France and Germany has the most satisfaction in the regard of price but I want native verification.

 

[mdwest]

The reason the middle class is struggling to afford healthcare is ACA (Obamacare)... premiums have increased at ridiculous rates each year since inception, while deductibles also increase and coverage decreases...

You pay A LOT more.. but get significantly less..

Simply put, socialized healthcare doesn’t work..

According to this source, ACA has actually resulted in an INCREASE in uninsured people in the US..

https://www.cms.gov/blog/thank-obamacare-rise-uninsured



Plenty of other references on why the middle class is getting hammered by ACA

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...aused-premiums-to-increase-substantially/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/1444804002

https://news.ehealthinsurance.com/n...ed-140-according-to-ehealth-com-shopping-data

 

[Ray B]

What caused the healthcare pricing problem was the labor shortage in WWII. The US was fully engaged in producing war materials. That and trying to meet domestic demand resulted in labor shortage. As with any shortage a bidding war started for labor. To curtail the bidding in terms of wages the govt jumped in and imposed wage controls. so the employers kept wages the same dollar amount but started adding fringe benefits, the most significant one being health insurance that the health insurance companies broadened with group policies. that opened the door to labor unions started requesting different benefits rather than dollar wages, so now labor/management contracts have various conditions & benefits in addition to wages. It has become so commonplace that virtually any company will have a benefits package for their employees that includes at least minimal health coverage. Now the US has a political party that is promoting elimination of all those gains by saying the government will now pay the bill. So the worker will be hammered from both directions. The health insurance that he/she has given up wage increases to obtain will be eliminated he/she has to have a tax increase to pay the government to pay the healthcare provider. Considering the normal inefficiencies of government, the tax payer can count on at least a 50% increase in taxes over what his insurance premium had been.

 

[Saul]

What caused the healthcare pricing problem was the labor shortage in WWII. The US was fully engaged in producing war materials. That and trying to meet domestic demand resulted in labor shortage. As with any shortage a bidding war started for labor. To curtail the bidding in terms of wages the govt jumped in and imposed wage controls. so the employers kept wages the same dollar amount but started adding fringe benefits, the most significant one being health insurance that the health insurance companies broadened with group policies. that opened the door to labor unions started requesting different benefits rather than dollar wages, so now labor/management contracts have various conditions & benefits in addition to wages. It has become so commonplace that virtually any company will have a benefits package for their employees that includes at least minimal health coverage. Now the US has a political party that is promoting elimination of all those gains by saying the government will now pay the bill. So the worker will be hammered from both directions. The health insurance that he/she has given up wage increases to obtain will be eliminated he/she has to have a tax increase to pay the government to pay the healthcare provider. Considering the normal inefficiencies of government, the tax payer can count on at least a 50% increase in taxes over what his insurance premium had been.

Well said! Reducing the steps between your money and your healthcare provider is key to reducing costs and increasing quality of care!

 

[tigris115]

Ok so I know that everyone here has a fairly sturdy hateboner for climate activist Greta Thunberg (I usually plead neutral, too lazy to really give nuanced commentary tbh), but I think anyone here can agree that whoever made this is an idiot or a total edge lord.

https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/disturb...ield-company-logo-drawing-criticism-1.4830344

 

[wesheltonj]

Ok so I know that everyone here has a fairly sturdy hateboner for climate activist Greta Thunberg (I usually plead neutral, too lazy to really give nuanced commentary tbh), but I think anyone here can agree that whoever made this is an idiot or a total edge lord.

https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/disturb...ield-company-logo-drawing-criticism-1.4830344

Not the first sticker, I hear Germany beat Canada to the punch.
https://climatechangedispatch.com/fck-you-greta-stickers-climate-activism/

 

[Ray B]

I don't have any love/hate emotion for that little girl. I consider her to be the outcome of a school system that rewards rote learning of propaganda.