Healthcare?

[mikedege]

Can we also all agree that the govt can't do anything well? Can anyone give me any examples of something they did/do well? I personally would love health care for all, I just don't see the gov't getting us there! Sorry for being so sceptical!

imo, Mike

[ironranger]

"nothing" is a big word. Although I'm far from a fan of the public option, I find it hard to be on the same side of the table with people whose decisions are based only on superlatives.

I think when you remove policymakers, special interests, and political appointments, and the influence of the newsmedia (on idiot voters) from the mix, the government tends to do a good job of accomplishing specific tasks.

(1) Maryland State Police. They operate a very well run medical helicopter system for trauma. French Dauphin helicopters are top of the line, and the safety record of the program is enviable for any private firm. OK, that was too specific, let me take a step back.

(2) Special veteran care programs. For all of the problems of the VA healthcare system, their approaches and abilities for certain special veteran disabilities programs are better than private sector

(3) emergency preparedness. setting standards and training. coordinating plans through multiple government agencies and private entities.

(4) research. hard to imagine how far along we would be if the NIH wasn't coordinating research grants and priorities.

(5) safety regulations. there are areas here that are debatable, but the government has largely stepped in where private busineses haven't to ensure that the drugs/devices produced and the care provided are safe.

[MountainMan]

American Sage - The Pre-Existing Conditions Farce

[ironranger]

MountainMan previously said:

American Sage - The Pre-Existing Conditions Farce

That article was not written by someone who actually understands healthcare, health insurance, or applied economics. He tries to impress me with his use of the phrase "Stage One Thinking," and using it to mockingly describe the Congressional plan. He doesn't apply it to his own ideas however. Abandoning the employer-based system? That *will* make costs go up. Your employer is your group-buy co-op for health insurance. The individual markets cost more for insurers to administer versus batching everyone's risk and overhead into large pools.

Pre-existing conditions exclusions and underwriting can result in some pretty abusive behavior to save a buck. But this guy is just a blow hard who wants to tell you why regulating that is a dumb idea. And even if you did it, here's six reasons why it won't work. It reads more like an Op Ed piece rather than an informed article.

[mikedege]

I think when you remove policymakers, special interests, and political appointments, and the influence of the newsmedia (on idiot voters) from the mix, the government tends to do a good job of accomplishing specific tasks.

I agree, unfortunately I just don't see it ever happening. And health care for all is a tad bit more than a "specific tasks". Maybe if they started with "baby steps" and proved that this time it would be different. They may get a lot more support. For example, maybe save the money in waste Obama talked about 1st, then spend it. Dont spend it first, then save the waste. imo...

-Mike

[Gonzo]

Maybe..just maybe,if we got every politician,lawyer,drug rep & dirtbag Litigious dip**** out of the equation we could resolve it.But I don't see that ever happening.

[scottyms]

ironranger previously said:

But this is the beauty of the free market. Your brother gets a better rate on his insurance premium, because he participates in a massive "group buy" with his co-workers. Insurance administrative fees to manage your individual policy is maybe 50% of cost. For your brother, who's part of a uniform company plan, it's much less, maybe 15%.

That same purchasing power argument works for healthcare providers too. If the price of a surgery is $10,000, who's most likely to get a discount on that surgery? Someone who's buying one of them, or someone who's buying 50,000 per year for all their insured members? Think Costco.

Costco = Medical Mutual

medical mutual is who is "buying" the surgery. I'm buying a service that medical mutual is providing. your argument that the administrative cost maybe 50% more is wrong. my cousin works for medical mutual and says the smaller the group the easier it is to manage. larger groups are a more "sure" bet that they will pay their premium every month and have more to offer in revenue for them. that's why they get better rates. it's all about money.

This process is also a by-product for why aspirins cost $5 each on your bill. A while back, there were agreed-upon amounts for each service. During "managed care" days, total healthcare spending was getting to be "too much", and the insurance companies tried to manage cost by refusing to pay the entire hospital bill. Paying only 99% of what was charged, and thumbing their nose at the hospital. And because the insurance company brought a lot of paying customers, the provider had to eat the loss. Big deal. Except 99% became 98%, became 90%, became 50%, became 30% in some instances. Once profit approaches zero, the only way to keep playing that game is to increase the price, so that after the x% withhold, you're still whole at the end of the day.

you obviously are not self employed, and before you go in to the that's your choice to be self employed rant. think about where this country would be if every mom and pop shop closed their doors tomorrow. this country would be in a he!! of a lot worse place than it is now. the government is against the little man, all ways has been all ways will be. i didn't get a bail out check, did you?

[mikedege]

Boy, some of these quotes really ring true!

-Mike


'The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'

'I have wondered at times about what the Ten Commandments would have looked like if Moses had run them through the U.S. Congress.'

'The taxpayer: That's someone who works for the federal government but doesn't have to take the civil service examination.'

'Government is like a baby: An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other.'

'The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this earth is a government program..'

'It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first.'

'Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it.. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it'

[abophx]

scottyms previously said:

you obviously are not self employed, and before you go in to the that's your choice to be self employed rant. think about where this country would be if every mom and pop shop closed their doors tomorrow. this country would be in a he!! of a lot worse place than it is now. the government is against the little man, all ways has been all ways will be. i didn't get a bail out check, did you?

Xs 2 been self employed my whole life.
My wife and I are in our 50s and it was less than 10 years ago that we "could" get health ins.

Could meaning that literally, self employed, pre existing conditions (skin cancer) pretty much made us untouchable. We have ins. now which costs us more than our mortgage and FJ payment together and we're afraid to use it for fear of being canceled....

[MountainMan]

ironranger previously said:

Abandoning the employer-based system? That *will* make costs go up. Your employer is your group-buy co-op for health insurance. The individual markets cost more for insurers to administer versus batching everyone's risk and overhead into large pools.

Pre-existing conditions exclusions and underwriting can result in some pretty abusive behavior to save a buck. But this guy is just a blow hard who wants to tell you why regulating that is a dumb idea.

This guy, i.e. me - is not trying to impress you at all. The employer based system messes up things because the employer gets to 'group' all the healthy people (those who can work are by and large much more healthy than those out of work) and keep their plans cheaper while the individuals needing plans are grouped into a much more expensive options. It doesn't work, it skews the market. This guy doesn't blast regulation at all, he is criticizing some specific ideas.

Besides, why do people do this, you jump all over and attack the person offering his perspective, it's as if you presume he is motivated by some wicked reason. This is what is SOOOO wrong with our dialog on politics and religion. Rather than stay on the ideas and discuss the merits - giving the person the benefit of the doubt by assuming they are motivated by a desire to make things better - folks do what ironranger has done and start making personal attacks - it's very sad.