Proper health care requires everybody in the same boat

[slipslidingaway]

http://pnhp.org/news/2010/february/proper-health-care-requires-everybody-in-the-same-boat

"...But those stalled efforts fell far short of what is needed: Twenty-million people would remain uninsured. The system would be more complex than ever. These reforms would cost an extra trillion dollars over the next 10 years and contain no effective means of reducing the rapid rate of growth of health care expenditure. More middle-class families would face financial disaster as insurance companies issue policies inadequate in serious illness. The mandate to buy insurance would push huge sums into the hands of the already powerful private insurers.

What should be the essential features of the future American health care finance system?
- We need to have everybody participate. That is the way insurance works — you spread the risk of illness across as many people as possible.

...Medicare is costly, paying for care of the oldest and sickest people in society. We have caused that by allowing private insurance to “cherrypick” the healthiest, lowest-cost working people. Every healthy person brought into “Medicare for all” will reduce the per-patient cost. Elimination of the multiplicity of insurance companies and the use of global budgeting of institutions like hospitals will result in an estimated savings of $400 billion yearly, enough to pay for all the uninsured, and improve the quality of coverage for both present and new Medicare enrollees.

Shouldn’t we expect more from our elected representatives, the Congress and the president? Shouldn’t we insist that they place the interests of the American people ahead of the special interests of insurance companies and drug companies? A workable solution won’t emerge unless each of us makes it clear to our elected officials that we want a system based on the principles listed above.

So, if no reform comes out of Washington this year, we may have been given a chance to do it right. Our first consideration ought to be a “single-payer” Medicare for all."

George Jolly is a geriatrician with Saratoga Medical Associates in Saratoga Springs.

[Captain Hilts]

1. Yes, like the military and Canada. Everybody's 'in' or nobody's in. nt

[slipslidingaway]

2. Yes and it would be in everyone's interest to make sure it is the best...

possible system.

:)

[Captain Hilts]

3. Right. In Canada, everybody pays to participate through taxes. So, no free riders. nt

[Raspberry]

4. Everybody pays taxes?

What about the homeless? What about the unemployed? What about really low-income people? Doesn't seem very fair.

[xchrom]

5. You pay for them now at a higher rate

How fair is that?

[Oregone]

11. You really think Canada would make homeless people pay taxes?

Why even suggest that?

No, it doesn't happen (other than GST).

You are taxed according to your income/consumption.

[Captain Hilts]

26. Ontario and GST combine to about a 14% sales tax. But everybody's in. nt

[slipslidingaway]

6. And they are all covered for just over half the cost of what we pay...

maybe we need to have a real discussion.

:shrug:

[Captain Hilts]

7. Yes. nt

[AngryAmish]

8. No, Medicaid for all

That way every gets something. But those of us who want a better standard of care can pay our own way.

[slipslidingaway]

9. Are you speaking about a private room or quicker access to care...

I have no problem with the first, although with the second example it causes longer wait times for other people.

That is one of the differences between the UK and Canadian systems.

[AngryAmish]

10. Private doctor and hospitals

A doc or hospital can decide if they want to take all Medicaid and no private patients, a mix or no Medicaid.

[slipslidingaway]

12. Some docs in the UK mix both private and public patients, if I have private

insurance and want to use that then I can get a quick appointment.

What that does is make the wait time longer for those wanting to see the doctor under the national system.

[AngryAmish]

14. Last time I checked doctors are not our slaves

(notwithstanding the wisdom or foolishness of such a system)

You can't make someone work for the government.

[slipslidingaway]

15. I would not want doctors to be our slaves ...

my daughter is in her third year of med school, slave wages would never pay off that debt.

Doctors want to treat patients while making a decent living, not fight with insurance companies as to whether or not they will pay for certain treatments and drugs.

HR 676 does not make dotors work for the government, it negotiating payment with them, just like they do now with various insurance companies.

[slipslidingaway]

18. So your answer is quicker access to care, even though someone else...

might have more of a medical need.

:(

[BeFree]

13. Equality?

You mean judge people and deny them health care if they don't have a big enough bank account is wrong?

That the quality of human lives is not more important than money?

[slipslidingaway]

17. Something like, prioritize according to need instead of bank balance...

:)

[BeFree]

25. Hmmmm

Makes perfect sense to me. Equality makes good sense.

[Cleita]

16. People don't seem to get the concept. If everyone is in the same boat, then

everyone has an interest in keeping it at its shipshape best and also keeping it from sinking. If you have many boats, the people in the yacht aren't going to give a shit about the people forced onto the rusty scow.

[slipslidingaway]

19. EXACTLY!!! And it is also a matter of finances, allowing private companies

to profit from the healthiest patients and the government picking up the tab for the most needy, the elderly.

[whattheidonot]

20. young people

Young people have to be educated, employed, and working good jobs for any of this to work. if young people are not working then all of this talk is nonsense. We need to hit the reset button big time. The whole model of our society and economy has to be reviewed. what we have is not working. a big swing in either direction would be better. people would get off the fence and get into the action. that is what it is coming too. seeing income evaporate and a few get very rich makes people edgy.

[Cleita]

21. Well, many of our jobs that disappeared to other countries like Canada

and New Zealand, did so because they had national health care. It got so expensive to provide private health insurance and worker's comp in the USA, that a lot of the movie industry, TV industry do their production there instead. Many of the car manufacturers fled to Canada. Union job workers have had to accept lower wages too here in the states because of the cost of health insurance.

[slipslidingaway]

24. It all ties in together, many people stay with a bad job for the benefits...

or do not go back to school because they would lose their HC benefits. And employers would be more willing to add employees if HC expenses were not so expensive.

[unblock]

22. what's amazing to me is that people don't realize that YOUR health depends on MY health

nevermind insurance pools and expenses and who pays and all the financial aspects of it.

if *I* am walking around with an untreated, infectious disease, then *YOU* are at greater risk of catching it. i might be your gardener or your kid's teacher or the janitor at your kid's school or secretary or just the person who used the atm right before you did.

WHY WOULD YOU WANT ME TO CONTINUE TO CARRY AROUND NASTY GERMS?


so act in your own damn selfish interests and get some health care for all those people who are only making *YOU* sick!

[slipslidingaway]

23. Correct, it is in all of our interests, both personally and for our nation. n/t

[slipslidingaway]

27. Well I really want to be on yacht or an ocean liner, but not at the expense

of seeing others drown on a rowboat, so I guess we should all work together to build the best vessel. That's what I think, good luck everyone.