An outsider watching the US health care debate

Last post on this thread (TF! :lol: ):

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faldur

Couple simple questions:

1) If health care is such an urgent need, why doesn't it kick in until after the 2012 elections? What are they afraid of? If this is indeed such an urgent issue enact it immediately.

---

Ermm, Clinton tried to reform the system but hit the same snags Obama has. Remember? Reform has been needed for decades now.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/20...from-the-pack/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faldur

2) The CBO estimates the bills currently presented WILL impact the US budget:
"The blog of the C.B.O. director, Douglas W. Elmendorf, taking into account new “gateways” for access to health insurance, says:
According to our preliminary assessment, enacting the proposal would result in a net increase in federal budget deficits of about $1.0 trillion over the 2010-2019 period. When fully implemented, about 39 million individuals would obtain coverage through the new insurance exchanges. At the same time, the number of people who had coverage through an employer would decline by about 15 million (or roughly 10 percent), and coverage from other sources would fall by about 8 million, so the net decrease in the number of people uninsured would be about 16 million or 17 million."

Who is going to pay for all of this?

---

The bills currently presented are being drafted by politicians in the pay of the health insurance companies. And the winner is... the health insurance companies!

How Insurance Companies Will Make Even More Money from "Health Care Reform"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&gl=US&v=R0dmPX_hdBw

It's just fucking "beautiful" how the free-market continues to stiff the majority. Greedy insurance companies, greedy bankers, the list goes on and on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faldur

3) So if there is all this fraud out there, how about we just pass a healthcare fraud bill, collect all the billions you say are available in fraud over the next three years. Put that money in the bank, and buy the 47 million people you say don't have health care, but buy it for them in 2013, just like ALL of the proposed health care bills do.

---

What fraud? It's all legal. The funding of politicians is legal. Paying doctors to give "expert testimony" against further expensive treatment for a patient is legal (that'll be the "death panels" that clueless cunt Palin was blathering on about). Dragging out insurance claims so that the patient either gives up or dies is legal. The law protects more crooks than it convicts. If this wasn't the case then the bastards Cheney and Feith would be in the Hague for war-crimes right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faldur

The motives and numbers just don't add up. This is clearly about a power grab and a move towards socialism. If they can screw up the US economy so badly over the next 3 years with cap and spend, health care, stimulus 1, stimulus 2, and God only knows how many more little brothers and sisters that will have. If they can get things so screwed up, and the US so far in debt that the only option, as they will propose it to us, is for the government to take over private enterprise and to become our Nanny.

America is not drinking the cool-aid, someone tell me how your going to pay for the 10 trillion in additional debt your going to pile on to our economy in the years 2013 - 2019.

The only thing we should be rushing to the Presidents table, unread like all the other congressional bills, is one that is titled, "BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT"!

---

"God"? :lol: More right-wing drivel. Blah, blah, blah. You can't see it but I really am laughing my ass off right now. Did you read any of the links I've posted? Here's one again so that you can MAYBE, JUST MAYBE understand:

Why Does U.S. Health Care Cost So Much? (Part II: Indefensible Administrative Costs)
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/20...trative-costs/

Although I Found the random highlighting of text amusing I still can't see anyway your proposing we pay for this!

10 trillion dollars, where does it come from????

Of the 1,695 federal subsidy programs, can you name me 3 that are well managed and efficient?

The postal service?
Medicare?
Social Security?
Food stamps?
Helium subsidies?
The study of the breeding habits of the woodchuck?
The study of the Hatfield-McCoy feud?
The restroom added on Mt. McKinley?
The Seafood Consumer Center?
The Executive Branch for gold-embossed playing cards on Airforce two?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faldur

Although I Found the random highlighting of text amusing I still can't see anyway your proposing we pay for this!

10 trillion dollars, where does it come from????

---

Hahaha. My highlighting of your text WASN'T RANDOM, God-boy. :wink:

We maybe shouldn't have invaded Iraq then, huh? But that's what you get from having a bloated military and a free-market pushing even more "efficient" weapons to kill little kids with. But that's patriotism for you. Oops, sorry, right-wing jingoism!
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/29/...-embassy-iraq/

And you clearly still haven't grasped why Americans' pay almost twice as much for their healthcare as nearly everywhere else in the developed world have you? Like I said in my first post on this thread (NOTE: THIS IS MOST DEFINITELY MY LAST :lol: ) it's like talking to a dumb, brick wall. :banghead

From the New England Journal of Medicine:
"Conclusions The gap between U.S. and Canadian spending on health care administration has grown to $752 per capita. A large sum might be saved in the United States if administrative costs could be trimmed by implementing a Canadian-style health care system."
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/349/8/768

"In the real world, nothing except a single-payer system makes any sense. There are currently more than 1,300 private insurers in this country, forcing doctors to fill out different forms and follow different reimbursement procedures for each and every one. This drowns medical facilities in idiotic paperwork and jacks up prices: Nearly a third of all health care costs in America are associated with wasteful administration. Fully $350 billion a year could be saved on paperwork alone if the U.S. went to a single-payer system — more than enough to pay for the whole goddamned thing, if anyone had the balls to stand up and say so."
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...ck_and_wrong/1

"$350 billion a year" on paperwork. Now that IS fantastic free-market efficiency for you, Faildur! :roll:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rogers

We maybe shouldn't have invaded Iraq then, huh?

---

I couldn't agree with you more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rogers

And you clearly still haven't grasped why Americans' pay almost twice as much for their healthcare as nearly everywhere else in the developed world have you?

---

Well I do know when you tell an insurance provider that your boundaries of business lie within this state and you are not allowed to cross the state lines. But in return we will make sure no one comes in a pisses in your play yard.. that doesn't tend to drive costs down. Without reform of our insurance regulation to allow competition it's going to remain expensive.

Without tort reform to reduce the amount of frivolous lawsuits it will continue to rise. $126 billion awarded in jury awards last year alone. The fear of lawsuits results in an additional $50 billion each year in un-necessary medical tests.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rogers

$350 billion a year" on paperwork.

---

In what world has the federal government ever reduced paperwork? Two thirds of what the insurance companies require is due to the governments regulation.

Have you ever done work for a state or federal agency? The concept that government can reduce paperwork or spending is completly absurd.

Still looking for 3 well run, efficiently run government subsidy programs. Hell I will take one! Name one of the 1,695 programs that actually works?

The CBO currently tells us health care reform will cost us $1 Trillion each year for the first 10 years its implemented. Lets look at the governments accuracy in budget projections... Medicare, in 1966 the house ways and means committee estimated that medicare would cost only about $12 billion in 1990, (the figure took into consideration inflation). The actual cost in 1990? $107 Billion!!! Ooops! Missed that one by 850%

So what happens if we have blown the estimate of what health care reform costs, like we did with medicare?

And oh by the way, Who the heck is going to pay for all this???

^ You want an example of "well run" govt subsidy programs ? I'll just discuss programs. Well, it's going to depend on what you mean by "well run".

The postal service runs pretty well, in my opinion. It's cheap and pretty reliable. Plus, they allow competition like Fedex and UPS.

Look at how water delivery works. There's the government-run stuff, which works pretty well, and then there are non-government alternatives (bottled water, purifiers). Public schools, trash pickup, national defense, TSA -- they all work.

So, some private / govt competitive options work pretty well, though it's a matter of opinion, I suppose.

It seems to me setting up a non-profit government-run health insurance agency is worth a try. Make it a temporary mandate and review its success after 10 years. It should be as self-sustaining as possible. To the extent that it needs new revenues, however, I would try hard to cut other programs first. I am nervous about the government growing much further and I'm especially nervous about huge deficits. Hard to say what to cut; I'd start with the military. Maybe the bloated homeland security department needs a trim. But the cuts have to be gradual so the workers can find other jobs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faldur

Of the 1,695 federal subsidy programs, can you name me 3 that are well managed and efficient?

---

No need, you already named 4 which are better managed and more effecient than private equivilents.

Quote:

---

The postal service?

---

Works fine and delivers mail pretty much everywhere, it doesn't just cherry pick profitable delivery regions.

Quote:

---

Medicare?

---

Better managed and more efficent than private healthcare. Medicare helps keep medical costs down. It also does a better job than private health insurance companies at actually paying doctors for services rendered.

Critics say that Medicare costs are becoming unmanageable. That may be true but they fail to mention that private healthcare costs are growing in an even more unmanageable manner.

Quote:

---

Social Security?

---

It's administered extremely well. the old folks get thier checks like clockwork.

And the beauty of it is that unlike your 401K contributions, WallStreet bankers cannot steal it.

It may have to somewhat reduce payment rates at some point in the future but compared to private corporations it's extremely solvent. How many banks have been closed this year? Over 90. Not to mention the number of private companies gone bust or the fact that many banks still in operation are horribly insolvant(including the big ones... Citi&co). And lets not forget that the FDIC has run out of cash.

Quote:

---

Food stamps?

---

Works fine and doesn't cost much at all.

Quote:

---

Helium subsidies?
The study of the breeding habits of the woodchuck?
The study of the Hatfield-McCoy feud?
The restroom added on Mt. McKinley?
The Seafood Consumer Center?
The Executive Branch for gold-embossed playing cards on Airforce two?

---

Yes, there is definently some wasteful spending on the fringes... retarded even. But how much does this add up to really? As much as the cost of the Iraq war? Does it compete in size with normal peacetime defense spending? Why bitch about a pork mole hill when you are confronted with a mountain of military waste?

I think the folks that listen to right wing radio need to grow up and realize that government and government institutions are required to run a modern society. And that brings us back to health care.

Should healthcare be considered a right, a privalege or an obligation?

If it's a right then just form a government institution to maintain and protect that right. Something like a single payer system funded by a VAT(a form of sales tax) that everyone would pay.

If it's a privilage then stick with the Republican plan and just let ppl die when they run out of cash. I'm not a fan of this but the current Democrat healthcare bill sucks bad enough that I wonder if it will be a noticable improvement.

Congress seems to have decided that healthcare is an obligation. A perspective that seems deranged to me but does make sense from the point of view of the health insurance industry. The way the current healthcare bill is shaping up it looks like the IRS will be forcing people to buy a private health insurance product even if they feel that product to be defective. And oh yeah... no sign of any real cost controls so this bill is far from a complete solution.

This thing is getting very interesting.

There are plenty of things the government does well, and the model of government competing with private enterprise can work. Take for example public schools. I know there can be a lot of complaints about public schools, but there are private schools if you prefer them. A lot of "high class" people choose to put their kids through private schools; it's their choice, and perhaps they deserve a suitably calibrated tax break since they didn't benefit from the public schools. But the public schools can produce good results -- it depends a lot on the student's capabilities and the engagement of the parents.

This just amplifies what I said above about the model for a government-offered health insurance.

Edit: I just saw an interesting story on the PBS newshour about health care in the Netherlands; the story is on their website together with a comparison of six countries. The USA looks pretty bad in comparison.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/globalhe...ance_1006.html

Wow, really...

Postal Service, never had a profitable year in its history. Estimated to loose 7 billion dollars in the 2009 year. Just a general business rule, business that loose that kind of money go bankrupt. One of its counterparts, UPS, earned $908 million dollars in 2008. And contrary to a government run business UPS and its employees actually generated tax revenue, rather than just spent it.

Medicare/Medicaid will consume 19% of GDP by the year 2013. The systems is fraught with fraud and the only time anyone discusses fixing the fraud is when they want to buy something they cant afford they point to Medicare and say well we have $200 billion in fraud here that we can pay for it. Left to run its own coarse it will fail from lack of funding, or the youth of today will see a very steep tax increase. Estimates put employee portion of medicare/social security taxes at 17% by the year 2020.

Social Security, where to start.. the systems is broke, and will fail within 15 years unless major changes are made to it. Services will be drastically cut, and taxes will be increases substantially if the program is to survive. Social Security may hit its first cash shortfall this year, projected to have a positive cash flow of $119 billion in 2009, that projection has been revised to $19 billion, and many feel that will also reduce due to the high unemployment. Had this program done as it was set up to do, and safely invest the monies it received, rather than spend every penny like drunken sailors this program could have worked.

Not going to touch food stamps ... too late and its not worth the effort. Any program that every illegal alien in the country is on should be eliminated.

Government does one thing well.. it protects its citizens.