Hey Brer, did you read the study produced by the Heritage Foundation?
it's not a long read, but remember that this is a study, not a proposal, on health care and it's future.
[url] https://www.heritage.org/social-security/report/assuring-affordable-health- care-all-americans[/url]
Had not read the whole thing before,Jerry. it is a well thought out and sensible approach. Thanks for posting the link - set up a new thread to reply because that ridiculous Blacks Love Trump thread is pretty much a surrealistic cesspool of belligerent idiocy.
This is a good topic and deserves its own thread .
[Edited on 9/1/2019 by BrerRabbit]
I firmly believe we need some type of national health care program, just not one run by the government.
Single payer might work if the charge for medical procedures was the same from coast to coast.
I don't think that's going to happen since the cost of living is different from region to region, and even from town to town.
It costs less for me to live in Byron that it did to live in Macon, and I only moved a little over 15 miles.
If Byron opened a surgical mega-center, it should cost less to have your knee replacement or whatever surgery done here than in the places like Atlanta, Augusta, Columbus, or even Macon.
So I propose that as part of the national health care program projects like those be included. The price for medical procedures done in those centers be the national average what is charged to them across the nation.
Some area centers would have prices higher than local, but most would be lower than local.
Any suggestions?
I firmly believe we need some type of national health care program, just not one run by the government.
The Health Care/Insurance industry isn't just going to change itself when it's raking in profits left and right. How do you propose a national system would be implemented across state lines without Federal shepherding?
I firmly believe we need some type of national health care program, just not one run by the government.
The Health Care/Insurance industry isn't just going to change itself when it's raking in profits left and right. How do you propose a national system would be implemented across state lines without Federal shepherding?
There are already some country wide companies such as Humana and United Healthcare. Blue Cross/Blue Shield are franchises that are done state by state and is not a national company.
You would first have to get rid of the individual laws from different states that prevents the health care industry from working across state lines.
You would have to form an independent oversight organization to help set up the centers and figure the costs.
Each center would be independent of any local institution, doctors would be contractors-not employees, and the centers would have to compete with other health centers for patients.
I firmly believe we need some type of national health care program, just not one run by the government.
Single payer might work if the charge for medical procedures was the same from coast to coast.
I don't think that's going to happen since the cost of living is different from region to region, and even from town to town.
It costs less for me to live in Byron that it did to live in Macon, and I only moved a little over 15 miles.If Byron opened a surgical mega-center, it should cost less to have your knee replacement or whatever surgery done here than in the places like Atlanta, Augusta, Columbus, or even Macon.
So I propose that as part of the national health care program projects like those be included. The price for medical procedures done in those centers be the national average what is charged to them across the nation.
Some area centers would have prices higher than local, but most would be lower than local.Any suggestions?
Medicare payment rates vary by location to factor in COL. Interestingly enough, except for high paid specialists who can afford to not participate in insurance physicians are probably the only professionals who can make more working in a "poorer" "less desirable" area
I firmly believe we need some type of national health care program, just not one run by the government. Single payer might work if the charge for medical procedures was the same from coast to coast.
The Health Care/Insurance industry isn't just going to change itself when it's raking in profits left and right. How do you propose a national system would be implemented across state lines without Federal shepherding?
Yes, it is regulated differently from state to state, but we have a national healthcare system. Everyone in the nation can buy health insurance if they can afford it. It is regulated differently from state to state, but that is what the ACA was working to fix. Namely, making baseline requirements that policies in every state had to meet. The ACA also expanded Medicaid in states that accepted funding for it. It is not a government-run system (exept for the Medicaid part) as all of the private insurance companies still offer the policies.
A single payer system not run by the government is called a monopoly. I do not see that helping the cost of healthcare come down.
The political debates about affordable care all end up in the wrong place. They almost never focus on the real source of the problem: costs charged by the providers. Instead, they all want to talk about changing how and who pays the bills. Anyone thinking gov't will be dramatically more efficient than private industry - even including profits - is hoping for something that has never happened.
We spend the most on healthcare because costs are hidden and there is no transparency to permit consumers to shop the way they would with every other product or service. Add to that the perverse dynamic of the insurance companies not having to treat the consumer (you) as a real customer (employers buy most health insurance - not the consumers) and we have a system ripe for the abuses that more open free market forces would curtail.
As we hear the latest crop of political idiots prattle on about what they would do with healthcare, keep two things in mind...
-- Are they talking about attacking the root costs from the providers, or about some new scheme over who pays? Attacking the costs will be hard work, but vital to really solving the problem. Shifting who pays is about power and control - nothing more.
-- Keep in mind that the last time gov't screwed with healthcare, premiums went up dramatically. I'll leave some links below, but one of the articles sums up the key point...
Overall, Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) premiums actually decreased 4.6% in the four years before the ACA reforms came into effect (that is, from 2009 to 2013), but increased 46.4% in the first four years under the ACA. Point-of-Service (POS) premiums decreased 14.9% before the ACA, and increased a whopping 66.2% afterwards. Premiums for the more common Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) plans increased 15% in the four years before the ACA, and 66.2% afterwards.
I've experienced numerous incidents where Obamacare has cost me thousands that I was previously covered for prior to its enactment. I'd rather not see another genius plan from any politician.
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/health-care-costs-obamacare-ibd-tipp-poll/
Sheer population realities as compared to the facilities available to provide care is already a much larger issue than affordability. This country is nowhere near prepared for 75 million elderly people.
If we are going to prioritize the freedom to be irresponsible, then we’ll always have healthcare problems.
Boom!.....And just like that, we have found something about which we agree.
If we are going to prioritize the freedom to be irresponsible, then we’ll always have healthcare problems.
Boom!.....And just like that, we have found something about which we agree.
True as that may be, there's nothing that can be done about that.
If we are going to prioritize the freedom to be irresponsible, then we’ll always have healthcare problems.
Boom!.....And just like that, we have found something about which we agree.
True as that may be, there's nothing that can be done about that.
A lot of the thread re: ACA - obesity etc. I can't envision a way to refuse care to obese people etc. What about a 20 year old who can't accept his/her diabetes and shows in the ER after not taking their insulin?
The costs of caring for the sick/elederly/uninsure in our society is huge. Insurance companies have cherry-picked with the truly ill/indigent ending up on the shoulders of society. We are faced with some hard choices.
A huge percentage of our lifetime health care costs are in our final illness. A lot of that is in futile truly end of life keeping dead people alive. Economically the system is not viable. Somehow society needs to make the decisions
