tenncare is f'g bankrupt and has been scammed to death - gov healthcare always punishes the over achiever while the lazy ba$tard gets it for cheap................
Mass. Lawmakers OK Mandatory Health Bill
- Thread starter AR182
- Start date
not sure why anyone would think that healthcare cost less when the government runs it
since when has the government delivered better quality at a lower price
administrative overhead will be enormous and you will turn workaholic physician, PA's, lab techs and nurses into salaried employees with no incentive to work hard just like your typical government employee/county hospital worker/government bureaucrat
lines will form and you will get garbage treatment -- unfortunately the layperson has no idea how bad the treatment is in our Government funded health system -- the VA
what makes this model any different?
since when has the government delivered better quality at a lower price
administrative overhead will be enormous and you will turn workaholic physician, PA's, lab techs and nurses into salaried employees with no incentive to work hard just like your typical government employee/county hospital worker/government bureaucrat
lines will form and you will get garbage treatment -- unfortunately the layperson has no idea how bad the treatment is in our Government funded health system -- the VA
what makes this model any different?
Last edited:
You guys who are against this and any kind of universal plan for healthcare, what kind of ideas and solutions do you have that could possibly help the problem of skyrocketing medical costs? Not a challenge, really, just asking what you support?
I find it interesting that the administration pushed forth the current Medicare plan, which does not allow the government to shop around for better prices. Seems to me to be a big conflict to what I hear continually preached from them - free market, competition, etc. Are they just that blatant to give the medical and pharmaceutical donators to their coffers all the money they can stand?
I find it interesting that the administration pushed forth the current Medicare plan, which does not allow the government to shop around for better prices. Seems to me to be a big conflict to what I hear continually preached from them - free market, competition, etc. Are they just that blatant to give the medical and pharmaceutical donators to their coffers all the money they can stand?
look for more lies and embarrassment from the administration tonight on 60 minutes.
look for more lies and embarrassment from the administration tonight on 60 minutes.
The beat goes on, and the clowns and cronies keep on resigning and disappearing. Scooter, Scottie, Andrew Card, George Tennent, on and on the shit gets deeper, somehow more embarrassment than last week.
Can everyone finally agree this is the most useless embarrassment administration Washington has ever seen.
Where is Charlie & c town seems they haven't been posting much
look for more lies and embarrassment from the administration tonight on 60 minutes.
The beat goes on, and the clowns and cronies keep on resigning and disappearing. Scooter, Scottie, Andrew Card, George Tennent, on and on the shit gets deeper, somehow more embarrassment than last week.
Can everyone finally agree this is the most useless embarrassment administration Washington has ever seen.
Where is Charlie & c town seems they haven't been posting much
Chadman said:
1. Currently we have over 30% of our health care costs going to administration. No other industrialized country spends over 20%.
2. Litigation costs' real costs lie in the practive of defensive, NON EVIDENCE BASED medicine.
3. Litigation is now killing pharmaceuticals and is PROLONGING the time to get new treatments out in the market. The Vioxx cases are completely outrageous and demonstrate this brief case mafia's assault on health care in America. What drug will be the next to attack and what company will be the next to assault? One only can guess.
4. The market is being driven out of health care. We need to eliminate copays and instead push for 2000 dollar yearly deductables, etc. Put the consumer and the dollar back in charge. Force the local pharmacies to compete for the dollar instead of having all these copays. Check the prices on over the counter meds and ask yourself why are they so cheap? Obviously the dollar is at work in making it so. This will also free up staff and reduce overhead in clinics and hospitals as people will not have to be hired to fight with the insurance companies. Just think of that overhead.
5. Promote health savings accounts.
6. Raise the retirement age by phasing it up to the early 70's for socialist benefits. Then after 75 there will be plenty of money for those who need it most. There is no reason the taxpayer should be supporting someone else's life on easy street. If you want to retire on your own terms do so, but it is BS to ask me to work so you can retire at 65.
7. Promote the use of PA's and reduce their liability. Give them 1 extra year of education in residency as an intern for their money. This will help immensely.
"Something that DTB leaves out of his explanation of what happened in Kentucky is that Hillary's plan was for National Health Care. Of course if only one state choses to do something like that it leaves it open for the crooked, money grubbing, insurance execs to leave the state to be sure the plan fails. The last thing those greedy pricks want is a system that works and is fair to the working man."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Stevie without going into a lot of actuarial numbers let just explain on basic principal. Insurance premiums are dictated about probibily of losses. For insurance to exist you need blend of those that have claims and those that don't. The more that have claims the higher the premium--the bigger the pool of healthy people the lower the premium. Make sense so far?
now while mandating that everyone have same premium regardless of lifestyle and medical history sounds great--and those that apply at same rates are covered in full after 6 months waiting period makes it sound fantastic--let me tell you what happens.
The unhealthy rates are lowered extremely and the healthy are raised. Now who do you think will carry insurance and who do you think will drop. Why would a healthy person pay extreme premiums when they simply can carry none and wait till they do develop conditions then take out coverage.
What you end up with is extreme adverse selection--which means your pool of premiums payors is tilted heavily toward unhealthy people. Insurance can not fuction under those conditions. Can you imagine what insurance rates on home and auto would be if only those suspected to have claims apply?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Stevie without going into a lot of actuarial numbers let just explain on basic principal. Insurance premiums are dictated about probibily of losses. For insurance to exist you need blend of those that have claims and those that don't. The more that have claims the higher the premium--the bigger the pool of healthy people the lower the premium. Make sense so far?
now while mandating that everyone have same premium regardless of lifestyle and medical history sounds great--and those that apply at same rates are covered in full after 6 months waiting period makes it sound fantastic--let me tell you what happens.
The unhealthy rates are lowered extremely and the healthy are raised. Now who do you think will carry insurance and who do you think will drop. Why would a healthy person pay extreme premiums when they simply can carry none and wait till they do develop conditions then take out coverage.
What you end up with is extreme adverse selection--which means your pool of premiums payors is tilted heavily toward unhealthy people. Insurance can not fuction under those conditions. Can you imagine what insurance rates on home and auto would be if only those suspected to have claims apply?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dogs, that doesn't make any sense at all in the real world. I split the cost of health insurance with my employer as do every other employee in my company. We all pay the same rates. It doesn't matter how sick we are. I do not know how they come anout to the cost of what my company pays for insurance vs. what my wives company pays for insurance or what a self employed person pays for insurance. But one thing for sure is that it doesn't have anything to do with how healthy you are.
Lets hope it works well and is a start for answers. As status is now were going wrong direction. We need answers and new ideas.
I give up Stevie--doesn't make any diff --you can't or you refuse to grasp concept.
One more time--
Lets say You and your wifes employer had indenticle business with people with identicle ages with identicle plan from same company.
At your busness they were all moderately healthy--at your wifes business they had 2 ongoing cancer patients.
The premiums would NOT be identicle for both companys. There would be risk factor added in on your wifes plan.
All employee at wifes plant would be the same as would employees at yours however theirs would be higher because all shared extra rating.
Also plan where all people pay same per company is called community rating--18 year old same price 50 year old.
However many carriers are now doing banded ratngs for diff age brackets. Which makes older employees pay more.
One more time--
Lets say You and your wifes employer had indenticle business with people with identicle ages with identicle plan from same company.
At your busness they were all moderately healthy--at your wifes business they had 2 ongoing cancer patients.
The premiums would NOT be identicle for both companys. There would be risk factor added in on your wifes plan.
All employee at wifes plant would be the same as would employees at yours however theirs would be higher because all shared extra rating.
Also plan where all people pay same per company is called community rating--18 year old same price 50 year old.
However many carriers are now doing banded ratngs for diff age brackets. Which makes older employees pay more.
StevieD said:
In a national plan there is NO incentive to see you at any point in the near future for a good surgeon who is already busy
In a national plan there IS much incentive for a bad surgeon who has no business to get creative and try to remove that thyroid nodule which he might have seen done 25 years ago as a resident
Good surgeons are already busy. I don't see where a three week or three month wait would make any difference to the surgeon. But that was not the question, although it is basically the same argument Dogs made. He said under a national plan good risks would have to pay for bad risks. Then he described the situation as it is now and it is the same.
Can't really comment on national plan until I see it Stevie.
I would expect premiums for people would be less because there is not a profit factor--they could make highly adverse conditions and have the tax payor bale out the deficeit as usual.The result would be same as everywhere else gov healthcare exist--the tax payor will pay the brunt--the non tax payors will come out like bandits--the quality of care will suffer--these are certain-- if actuarial
guidelines are not implemented. With Medicare/Medicade-Social Secuity running record deficeits how on earth will they add the mother of all expense to it and survive? I'll grant you--entitlements all sound peachy till its time to pay the piper and at one time when the 80/20 rule applied it was feasable--but that has been already reduced to 60/40 (the % of population that carries the other %) and in 10 years your looking at 50/50.
I not concerned for myself--as am at position in life where I can pack in--go else where, where I can get 8/1 for every dollar I've accumulated here--pay little tax and climb on the entitlement wagon here --while you youngsters foot the bill.
In all seriousness Stevie--it is your generation I am concerned about.At 56 its not going to impact me much one way or another--
I would feel bad in not contributing to younger generations via taxes--but if the gov gets out of line on issue--I can and will cut em off--and I can quarantee you I won't be only one. Sure hope it doesn't come to that.
You might laugh at this but I can see time in future where you will see a reversal on mexican migration from distinct part of U.S. population.
I would expect premiums for people would be less because there is not a profit factor--they could make highly adverse conditions and have the tax payor bale out the deficeit as usual.The result would be same as everywhere else gov healthcare exist--the tax payor will pay the brunt--the non tax payors will come out like bandits--the quality of care will suffer--these are certain-- if actuarial
guidelines are not implemented. With Medicare/Medicade-Social Secuity running record deficeits how on earth will they add the mother of all expense to it and survive? I'll grant you--entitlements all sound peachy till its time to pay the piper and at one time when the 80/20 rule applied it was feasable--but that has been already reduced to 60/40 (the % of population that carries the other %) and in 10 years your looking at 50/50.
I not concerned for myself--as am at position in life where I can pack in--go else where, where I can get 8/1 for every dollar I've accumulated here--pay little tax and climb on the entitlement wagon here --while you youngsters foot the bill.
In all seriousness Stevie--it is your generation I am concerned about.At 56 its not going to impact me much one way or another--
I would feel bad in not contributing to younger generations via taxes--but if the gov gets out of line on issue--I can and will cut em off--and I can quarantee you I won't be only one. Sure hope it doesn't come to that.
You might laugh at this but I can see time in future where you will see a reversal on mexican migration from distinct part of U.S. population.
no one has heard of tenncare? i may not have a solution yet, but the socialist state medicine will not work with insurance as we know it today. insurance carriers are consistently covering less pct of the bill and the co pays continue to rise - and that is for those with good jobs....... the country cannot afford to guarantee healthcare because we are spending way too much on other crap. yes, i disapprove of the war. you wait until we get the national plan...... 12 million illegals will be a drop in the bucket. taxes will go through the roof and there will be a lot of (former middle class) people standing in line with poor people and people that can't speak english :sadwave: yet our f'k sack of $hat politicians and hollywood stars will still be taken care of.......................
Seem things work well in Brazil and there health care is rated higher then ours. If American companies can pay less through a national plan there going there.
StevieD said:
lol it doesnt and thats not the point
if you have a thyroid nodule that needs to come out and may be cancerous, you are not going to want to wait on that 3 month waiting list so you as the patient might go to Joe Schmoe doing his first one who needs some business next week
this will be the case especially for those of you who have no good connections ( no CLOSE relative as a physician or best friend as a surgeon)
Last edited:
djv said:
why then do we have rich south americans with Brazilians among them coming to the best hospitals in the states for treatment?
My point doctor is that good surgeons are already booked weeks and months out I concede a National plan could make a bad situation worse but it is already a bad situation.
Dogs, I am in your age bracket. What I was saying was that right now the cost associated with health care is going thru the roof and something must be done about it. I do not know the answer, that is not my business, but I don't see anyone coming up with anything new and costs continue to soar.As mentioned earlier as the costs skyrocket they cover less and less.
Dogs, I am in your age bracket. What I was saying was that right now the cost associated with health care is going thru the roof and something must be done about it. I do not know the answer, that is not my business, but I don't see anyone coming up with anything new and costs continue to soar.As mentioned earlier as the costs skyrocket they cover less and less.
Hey, Freeze, thanks for your post of ideas. Just back from a week in Costa Rica and will try to digest it.
Sweden and Finland's work well. And many from Europe go to those countries for care. We need answers and chance for change. Same old shit that's broken or dam near is no longer the battle cry. All Americans deserve better.
