Here's what socialized healthcare will become in the U.S.

[pocketfullofshells]

Of course we operate. Of course the person involved pays.

I also have a problem with the no money, no insurance deal. As a matter of personal responsibility, you should be saving money. If you are not, then what happens to you is generally your own fault. Is there anyone in this world that never has something bad happen to them? Read the news paper. It's filled with stories about people who said it couldn't happen to them. I haven't met a set of parents yet who had a perfect uneventful life.

With all the evidence that you need to be ready for life's Katrinas, why do you not prepare? And by what logic should you not have to pay for those events, when they happen to you? Is "I didn't expect any problems" a valid excuse for personal responsibility, and reason to have others pay for your problems?

Now don't get me wrong, on a personal level, I have myself paid the starting premium for a girl from Somalia who needed health insurance. I did this because she wanted health insurance but didn't have money at the time.

But charity by choice of the heart, and being forced to pay for some boozo who refused to provide for himself, by an over bearing government, is not charity, it tyranny.

What we are talking about here, goes beyond health insurance even. I know of a guy who didn't save up any money, and one day his car broke down. He's all in a panic cause he has no money to repair the car, and no money to get to work. Well uh... yeah... that's why you need to save up money. Should everyone pay for his car repair because he "didn't expect any problems"?

I know a former manager where I worked that bought a bran new F-350 pickup, and then got laid off from his job. Of course he had no money, and obviously he couldn't pay for his truck. They repo'd the truck, then sued him for the difference, and then garnished his wages at his next job. Should anyone else be made to pay for his mistakes cause "he didn't expect any problems"? Of course not.

The point of all these is to show we need to get back to personal responsibility. You need to be the executor of "You Inc." Businesses only survive when they plan for the future. So too, do people only survive when they plan for the future. This is how life works.

I see so you operate...and she pays, even if she has no money. Well lets all just use that system, the hospital will do what you say, and then squeeze blood from a stone.


And I like this idea you have that evryone would have money just laying around for health care if they just did not buy some luxury things. Its like you have no real understanding of the fact there are actuly poor people.

 

[Andy]

I see so you operate...and she pays, even if she has no money. Well lets all just use that system, the hospital will do what you say, and then squeeze blood from a stone.


And I like this idea you have that evryone would have money just laying around for health care if they just did not buy some luxury things. Its like you have no real understanding of the fact there are actuly poor people.

It's worse than that I'm afraid. I actually have statistic that back up that point.

Out of supposedly 45 million uninsured in America, 9.1 million live in households making over $75,000 a year. Are these the poor that can't afford health care?

8.5 Million live in households making $50K to $75K a year.

14.5 Million live in households making $25K to $50K a year.

Now anyone living at any of those levels should be able to afford basic health insurance.

I earned $21K and have money set aside for health insurance. Is it easy? No. But that's life.

18 million of the uninsured spend more money on entertainment, than it would cost to have a basic insurance policy.

12 Million more are illegals that should not be here anyway.

In short very very few are literally too poor to get basic health insurance.

Here's something to consider. A couple, working minimum wage at Wendy's will earn more $30K a year. Are you telling me that you can't get health insurance on $30K a year? Because I have it at $21K.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

It's worse than that I'm afraid. I actually have statistic that back up that point.

Out of supposedly 45 million uninsured in America, 9.1 million live in households making over $75,000 a year. Are these the poor that can't afford health care?

8.5 Million live in households making $50K to $75K a year.

14.5 Million live in households making $25K to $50K a year.

Now anyone living at any of those levels should be able to afford basic health insurance.

I earned $21K and have money set aside for health insurance. Is it easy? No. But that's life.

18 million of the uninsured spend more money on entertainment, than it would cost to have a basic insurance policy.

12 Million more are illegals that should not be here anyway.

In short very very few are literally too poor to get basic health insurance.

Here's something to consider. A couple, working minimum wage at Wendy's will earn more $30K a year. Are you telling me that you can't get health insurance on $30K a year? Because I have it at $21K.

facts you forgot...income does not = how many in that family.
25,000 a year in New York vs Mississippi...not the same,,,not even same ball park.
Did they go to school and have debts they have to pay back? Maybe they lost insurance and have a sickness already and cant find coverage.
Companies are subsidizing alot of the cost for there workers...if you dont work for one of those companies...pay alot more.

Also min wage in my state, 5.25 for small buisness..
(52*40)* 5.25 =10,920 ok so both work thats lets just say 2200...F*** they had a kid as well just to keep in mind...and it was when they made more before so no bull about no kids unless you haev money.

so thast 1800 a month...rent on a cheap 2 bd is 800+so 1000 left
now food, trasnsportation to work....Now go tell me what health care, for even decent coverage is for a family of 3..( hint average cost in 2008 for a single person was $4,704 , for a family 12,680 ( aslo note that 12680 is more then half there income already)

"The average cost of premiums for single coverage in 2008 is $392 per month or $4,704 per year (Exhibit 1.1). The average cost of premiums for family coverage is $1,057 per month or $12,680 per year (Exhibit 1.1)."

http://ehbs.kff.org/?page=charts&id=1&sn=6&ch=608

now maybe my math skills are not up to par, but thats not working out well so far....

 

[PLC1]

Of course we operate. Of course the person involved pays.

I'm not sure I understand that point. You say, of course we operate (yes, I'm sure no one is willing to let a young healthy person die for lack of a basic procedure) and the person who has no money pays? How does that happen? Do we re install the appendix if he fails to pay?

And, your example of the person who didn't prepare for a car repair, does the garage work on it anyway, and does he pay? How? Isn't that a similar problem, only one that doesn't involve life and death?

But, I've been walking the dog and thinking, and I've come up with the almost perfect solution to health care, and a number of other issues as well. It has elements to please liberals, and conservatives, while being a pragmatic approach. The P in PLC does stand for Pragmatist, after all.

I remember taking a cat to the vet. The dumb cat got into a fight with another cat, and wound up with a big abcess. Talk about irresponsible, but, he was my cat, so he got his operation. A general anesthetic, a minor surgery, a night in recuperation, and medications. The whole nine yards cost a whole $40, paid for on the spot, no insurance or billing, just a swipe of the MasterCard.


Now, wouldn't it be great if a human could get a minor operation involving a general anasthetic and an overnight recuperation for even ten times what I paid for the cat? Our health care cost problems would be over.

Here's the plan: Every citizen and legal resident would get a picture card. It would be a medical MasterCard, to be swiped whenever a medical service was provided, regardless of what it was. The patient would be billed, just like any other MasterCard customer, but, when the bill (not including late charges, of course) went over 10% of his/her income, then the government would pick up the rest.

No one would be turned away, no one would go bankrupt because of medical bills, no army of clerks would be necessary to collect from Medicare, Medicaid, Medical, insurance company A to Z, all with different regs. The doctor would get his money up front, immediately. No playing of games, or raising the rates in hopes of getting a portion.

Liberals will like it, since it pays more for the poor than the rich. Conservatives will like it, since it uses market forces to lower rates. Libertarians will like it, since there is a real possibility that human medicine would not cost more than ten times cat medicine, and the need for government bureaucrats would shrink.

The only downside is potential abuse of the cards, both by individuals and the government. We don't need a Big Brother card, but, then we already have a Big Brother number (SS), so it wouldn't be so different.

And those other people, you know, the ones who aren't legal residents or citizens? The ones that like to be called "immigrants", but are really best described by the illegal alien phrase?

Treat 'em. We don't want them to die, after all, but then deport them and bill the country of origin.

We'd never get paid, of course, but we'd be making a point and would get rid of a whole lot of illegals that way.

There you have it. The almost perfect solution that includes a universal coverage that is not really insurance at all, a marketplace approach to bringing down costs, and a far smaller bureaucracy.

Problem solved.

 

[Pandora]

I'm not sure I understand that point. You say, of course we operate (yes, I'm sure no one is willing to let a young healthy person die for lack of a basic procedure) and the person who has no money pays? How does that happen? Do we re install the appendix if he fails to pay?

And, your example of the person who didn't prepare for a car repair, does the garage work on it anyway, and does he pay? How? Isn't that a similar problem, only one that doesn't involve life and death?

But, I've been walking the dog and thinking, and I've come up with the almost perfect solution to health care, and a number of other issues as well. It has elements to please liberals, and conservatives, while being a pragmatic approach. The P in PLC does stand for Pragmatist, after all.

I remember taking a cat to the vet. The dumb cat got into a fight with another cat, and wound up with a big abcess. Talk about irresponsible, but, he was my cat, so he got his operation. A general anesthetic, a minor surgery, a night in recuperation, and medications. The whole nine yards cost a whole $40, paid for on the spot, no insurance or billing, just a swipe of the MasterCard.


Now, wouldn't it be great if a human could get a minor operation involving a general anasthetic and an overnight recuperation for even ten times what I paid for the cat? Our health care cost problems would be over.

Here's the plan: Every citizen and legal resident would get a picture card. It would be a medical MasterCard, to be swiped whenever a medical service was provided, regardless of what it was. The patient would be billed, just like any other MasterCard customer, but, when the bill (not including late charges, of course) went over 10% of his/her income, then the government would pick up the rest.

No one would be turned away, no one would go bankrupt because of medical bills, no army of clerks would be necessary to collect from Medicare, Medicaid, Medical, insurance company A to Z, all with different regs. The doctor would get his money up front, immediately. No playing of games, or raising the rates in hopes of getting a portion.

Liberals will like it, since it pays more for the poor than the rich. Conservatives will like it, since it uses market forces to lower rates. Libertarians will like it, since there is a real possibility that human medicine would not cost more than ten times cat medicine, and the need for government bureaucrats would shrink.

The only downside is potential abuse of the cards, both by individuals and the government. We don't need a Big Brother card, but, then we already have a Big Brother number (SS), so it wouldn't be so different.

And those other people, you know, the ones who aren't legal residents or citizens? The ones that like to be called "immigrants", but are really best described by the illegal alien phrase?

Treat 'em. We don't want them to die, after all, but then deport them and bill the country of origin.

We'd never get paid, of course, but we'd be making a point and would get rid of a whole lot of illegals that way.

There you have it. The almost perfect solution that includes a universal coverage that is not really insurance at all, a marketplace approach to bringing down costs, and a far smaller bureaucracy.

Problem solved.

Actually it’s a doable idea. I still don’t like it but its better than what obama is proposing.

The minor surgeries are day surgeries not over nights, over night cost an arm and leg even day surgery is expensive but better than over night.

What I don’t like about it is this.

Some people will abuse it because they can; they will be going to the doctor for every ingrown toenail….migraine, sharp pain exc. I have friends who do this. And if 90 percent of it is paid by the government then that means a small few again is paying for all the needs of a larger group. We are already doing that now in taxes but at least in medical the burden is spread out a bit more.

Liberals won’t like it because they want it FREE not at 10 percent. Those people on medical cards now and SSI are getting their medical free, if you think they are about to pay ten percent after getting it free without complaining you are wrong.


But all in all its better than the alternative

 

[PLC1]

Actually it’s a doable idea. I still don’t like it but its better than what obama is proposing.

The minor surgeries are day surgeries not over nights, over night cost an arm and leg even day surgery is expensive but better than over night.

What I don’t like about it is this.

Some people will abuse it because they can; they will be going to the doctor for every ingrown toenail….migraine, sharp pain exc. I have friends who do this. And if 90 percent of it is paid by the government then that means a small few again is paying for all the needs of a larger group. We are already doing that now in taxes but at least in medical the burden is spread out a bit more.

Liberals won’t like it because they want it FREE not at 10 percent. Those people on medical cards now and SSI are getting their medical free, if you think they are about to pay ten percent after getting it free without complaining you are wrong.


But all in all its better than the alternative

Look again. It's not 10% of the cost of the procedure. The patient pays 100% of the cost of all medical care until his bill for the year exceeds 10% of his income.

That way, the patient shops, the care providers have to be competitive (that free market idea that conservatives like) anyone who goes to the dr. for every ingrown toenail will pay for it (that good old personal responsibility), and a real medical disaster won't have to result in personal bankruptcy. The providers get paid, there is no need for an army of specialists who know how to collect from the government and private insurance, and no one gets left out.

When a visit to the emergency room is needed, the patient pays for his own, but he doesn't have to depend on insurance to pay for his plus ten others who can't pay.

The liberals won't like the idea of the patient paying directly, but they will like the idea that the poor will meet their 10% a lot quicker than the rich, so there's something for everyone.

 

[TVoffBrainOn]

I'm not sure I understand that point. You say, of course we operate (yes, I'm sure no one is willing to let a young healthy person die for lack of a basic procedure) and the person who has no money pays? How does that happen? Do we re install the appendix if he fails to pay?

And, your example of the person who didn't prepare for a car repair, does the garage work on it anyway, and does he pay? How? Isn't that a similar problem, only one that doesn't involve life and death?

But, I've been walking the dog and thinking, and I've come up with the almost perfect solution to health care, and a number of other issues as well. It has elements to please liberals, and conservatives, while being a pragmatic approach. The P in PLC does stand for Pragmatist, after all.

I remember taking a cat to the vet. The dumb cat got into a fight with another cat, and wound up with a big abcess. Talk about irresponsible, but, he was my cat, so he got his operation. A general anesthetic, a minor surgery, a night in recuperation, and medications. The whole nine yards cost a whole $40, paid for on the spot, no insurance or billing, just a swipe of the MasterCard.


Now, wouldn't it be great if a human could get a minor operation involving a general anasthetic and an overnight recuperation for even ten times what I paid for the cat? Our health care cost problems would be over.

Here's the plan: Every citizen and legal resident would get a picture card. It would be a medical MasterCard, to be swiped whenever a medical service was provided, regardless of what it was. The patient would be billed, just like any other MasterCard customer, but, when the bill (not including late charges, of course) went over 10% of his/her income, then the government would pick up the rest.

No one would be turned away, no one would go bankrupt because of medical bills, no army of clerks would be necessary to collect from Medicare, Medicaid, Medical, insurance company A to Z, all with different regs. The doctor would get his money up front, immediately. No playing of games, or raising the rates in hopes of getting a portion.

Liberals will like it, since it pays more for the poor than the rich. Conservatives will like it, since it uses market forces to lower rates. Libertarians will like it, since there is a real possibility that human medicine would not cost more than ten times cat medicine, and the need for government bureaucrats would shrink.

The only downside is potential abuse of the cards, both by individuals and the government. We don't need a Big Brother card, but, then we already have a Big Brother number (SS), so it wouldn't be so different.

And those other people, you know, the ones who aren't legal residents or citizens? The ones that like to be called "immigrants", but are really best described by the illegal alien phrase?

Treat 'em. We don't want them to die, after all, but then deport them and bill the country of origin.

We'd never get paid, of course, but we'd be making a point and would get rid of a whole lot of illegals that way.

There you have it. The almost perfect solution that includes a universal coverage that is not really insurance at all, a marketplace approach to bringing down costs, and a far smaller bureaucracy.

Problem solved.

flesh it out some more. I like the concept, but it needs more work.

 

[Andy]

I'm not sure I understand that point. You say, of course we operate (yes, I'm sure no one is willing to let a young healthy person die for lack of a basic procedure) and the person who has no money pays? How does that happen? Do we re install the appendix if he fails to pay?

Well, here's what I did, when I rung up hospital bills I couldn't pay because I lost my job.

I got another job, and worked like hell.

It's that simple.

And, your example of the person who didn't prepare for a car repair, does the garage work on it anyway, and does he pay? How? Isn't that a similar problem, only one that doesn't involve life and death?

Well, here's what I did, when I rung up auto repair bills I couldn't pay. I got a job, worked like hell, and sent in whatever money I could each month.

Here's the plan: Every citizen and legal resident would get a picture card. It would be a medical MasterCard, to be swiped whenever a medical service was provided, regardless of what it was. The patient would be billed, just like any other MasterCard customer, but, when the bill (not including late charges, of course) went over 10% of his/her income, then the government would pick up the rest.

What happens when the government doesn't have the money to pick up the rest? What happens when the government start dictating prices because they have a monopoly on paying the price gap? What happens when that forces health providers to subsidize the cost of government regulations, by increasing the price of services?

For that matter, what happens when people quit their jobs, or hide their income to make it look as though they earn much less, and make the government pick up more of the tab?

Liberals will like it, since it pays more for the poor than the rich. Conservatives will like it, since it uses market forces to lower rates. Libertarians will like it, since there is a real possibility that human medicine would not cost more than ten times cat medicine, and the need for government bureaucrats would shrink.

There are massive amounts of regulations that drive up the cost of medications, many times what it costs for a cat. That's not going to change I'm afraid. A guy, who happens to be a Christian, who owns and operates a company that makes pharmaceutical equipment, once came to our church, and described some of the regulations that cover medications. The average medication, has been in testing for nearly 10 years before going to market. That's a major reason it costs so much.

If you can imagine paying a half dozen bio-chemical engineers for 10 years, not including the cost of the testing itself, plus the cost of having government people come out and administer all the tests, plus paying people to try out the drug during testing, it becomes less and less a surprise that new drugs cost so much to get on the market.

The only downside is potential abuse of the cards, both by individuals and the government. We don't need a Big Brother card, but, then we already have a Big Brother number (SS), so it wouldn't be so different.

This is exactly the logic republicans used to excuse more government programs and more spending.

Treat 'em. We don't want them to die, after all, but then deport them and bill the country of origin.

If we could get the country of origin to pay us for treating their people, like we bill Canada, I'd be so for that. As it is, I really think we should completely cut them off. As much as I hate the idea, I don't see any other solution.

There you have it. The almost perfect solution that includes a universal coverage that is not really insurance at all, a marketplace approach to bringing down costs, and a far smaller bureaucracy.

If only it were that easy. If you could promise me that government picking up the tab, would never result in taxation (which I'd say is immoral), or government interference in the market, or people abusing the system by hiding income, or quitting their job, then I'd be for it.

But see, if there is anything I can say conclusively, it's that government in control of something, no matter what it is, will abuse it.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

yea its that easy, just add another job to pay that 100,000 for the surgery right? cuz we all have unlimited time, and there are unlimted jobs

 

[PLC1]

Well, here's what I did, when I rung up hospital bills I couldn't pay because I lost my job.

I got another job, and worked like hell.

It's that simple.



Well, here's what I did, when I rung up auto repair bills I couldn't pay. I got a job, worked like hell, and sent in whatever money I could each month.

That's good for you. What happens when the hypothetical person who needs an emergency appendectomy doesn't follow suit? What's most likely to happen is what is happening now: He doesn't pay, but the rest of us pay more to make up the difference. That is one of the things that have to change if we're ever to stop the runaway freight train of escalating medical costs.

What happens when the government doesn't have the money to pick up the rest? What happens when the government start dictating prices because they have a monopoly on paying the price gap? What happens when that forces health providers to subsidize the cost of government regulations, by increasing the price of services?

If the corporations that currently pay for health care for employees were to pay to my plan instead, there would be more than enough money. There would be no need for further taxes. The marketplace would control costs.

For that matter, what happens when people quit their jobs, or hide their income to make it look as though they earn much less, and make the government pick up more of the tab?

They would be arrested for tax fraud, and wouldn't have to worry about health care. Prisoners get it for free. (another thing that needs to be looked at).

There are massive amounts of regulations that drive up the cost of medications, many times what it costs for a cat. That's not going to change I'm afraid. A guy, who happens to be a Christian, who owns and operates a company that makes pharmaceutical equipment, once came to our church, and described some of the regulations that cover medications. The average medication, has been in testing for nearly 10 years before going to market. That's a major reason it costs so much.

If you can imagine paying a half dozen bio-chemical engineers for 10 years, not including the cost of the testing itself, plus the cost of having government people come out and administer all the tests, plus paying people to try out the drug during testing, it becomes less and less a surprise that new drugs cost so much to get on the market.

Sure, medical research is expensive. So are brand name drugs. The pharmaceutical companies are doing very well, thank you, despite the costs of research. What needs to be ended is the enormous cost of TV advertising. If the drug is best for me, then my doctor should know about it. I don't base medical decisions on spot commercials anyway.

If we could get the country of origin to pay us for treating their people, like we bill Canada, I'd be so for that. As it is, I really think we should completely cut them off. As much as I hate the idea, I don't see any other solution.

So, if our hypothetical sufferer of acute appendicitis were to be an illegal alien, you'd be OK to just let him die?

Sorry, I can't go that far. We're more civilized than that, even if it is a drain on tax dollars. Patch him up, then deport him. It's not likely that his country of origin is going to pay, but at least we'll have a better idea just how much illegal aliens cost the system.

If only it were that easy. If you could promise me that government picking up the tab, would never result in taxation (which I'd say is immoral), or government interference in the market, or people abusing the system by hiding income, or quitting their job, then I'd be for it.

But see, if there is anything I can say conclusively, it's that government in control of something, no matter what it is, will abuse it.

That is the genius of my plan. The government is not in charge of it. The government simply has a bail out plan for people whose medical care costs exceed their ability to pay. The providers determine what is necessary and how much it should cost, with the proviso that the patients have to pay most of it, and have the right to go wherever they please. As it is now, you either have to go to a PPO or an HMO, and pay through the nose if you must go elsewhere.

My plan is pure genius, admit it.

 

[Andy]

That's good for you. What happens when the hypothetical person who needs an emergency appendectomy doesn't follow suit? What's most likely to happen is what is happening now: He doesn't pay, but the rest of us pay more to make up the difference. That is one of the things that have to change if we're ever to stop the runaway freight train of escalating medical costs.

We live in a day and age, that anyone can get a job. A friend of mine, way back in high school, started his own company making plastic drain hoses for Honda. Because the job was so easy, he hired mentally retarded people to do the work.

Go to
https://ssl206.chi.us.securedata.net/~lifewithoutlimbs/index.php
and buy Nick Vujicic's DVD. Here's a guy who grew up without arms and legs, and yet got a degree, and now runs his own consulting firm.

Really, what it boils down to sadly, is there are people who are not going to pay for services they get, no matter what. Even the MasterCard system, which btw is by far the best system I've heard of yet, still doesn't address what happens when person X simply refuses to pay.

If the corporations that currently pay for health care for employees were to pay to my plan instead, there would be more than enough money. There would be no need for further taxes. The marketplace would control costs.

Where do you think corporations get the money to pay for employee health care? (psst: Customers or Employee pay reductions) In either case, that's a tax. It might not go through government hands between business and health service, but it's still just a mandated tax on the public.

They would be arrested for tax fraud, and wouldn't have to worry about health care. Prisoners get it for free. (another thing that needs to be looked at).

Not what I meant. CEOs are already changing how they get paid to shelter income from the Obama tax plan they assume will raise their taxes. People can use the same tricks to hide their own income. They don't because it's not worth it, but your system might make it worth it.

Sure, medical research is expensive. So are brand name drugs. The pharmaceutical companies are doing very well, thank you, despite the costs of research. What needs to be ended is the enormous cost of TV advertising. If the drug is best for me, then my doctor should know about it. I don't base medical decisions on spot commercials anyway.

Erm... TV advertising normally doesn't raise the price of drugs, because it's paid out of the profits of selling those drugs. It's similar to CEO pay vs the cost of production. Further, if you can imagine all the doctors in the world, advertising is the only way to get information of a new medication to all of them in a fiscally effective way.

About the only thing at this level I wish would end, but I don't know how to stop it, is companies giving bonus money to doctors who prescribe their medications.

Of course the biggest abuser in this area is Medicare, which often pays such wildly differing amounts for various services, that doctors often give prescriptions based on what is the most profitable to bill Medicare for. That's another reason medicare is going sky high in cost.

So, if our hypothetical sufferer of acute appendicitis were to be an illegal alien, you'd be OK to just let him die?

If he can pay for it, go for it. Otherwise, it should be left to the hospital to determine what to do. After all, they are the ones who will go bankrupt for offering service to someone who will not pay.

Let me put it this way. In California, a 70 hospitals have actually closed down, since 1990. Shut the doors, sent everyone home. All the employees lost their jobs. All the patients lost their service. The entire community lost a hospital to go to.

So thousands of people lost their jobs. And thousands more have no place to go to the hospital at all.

So we have to make some choices. If we continue to let people who have no intention of paying, get free health services, then the logical result is no one gets health service.

Let's make another hypothetical. You are the doctor. An illegal immigrant with no intention of paying, has an illness. Question: Should you be forced, without any other option, to treat the illegal or face jail time? Or should you have the option to say sorry, I have a family to feed?

Sorry, I can't go that far. We're more civilized than that, even if it is a drain on tax dollars. Patch him up, then deport him. It's not likely that his country of origin is going to pay, but at least we'll have a better idea just how much illegal aliens cost the system.

Then you support socialism. Because not only are you going to pay the taxes to pay for an illegals health bills, but your going to pay to deport him, and then pay for both when the illegal comes back. You do know that most all deport illegals come right back?

Then to top it off, you going to pay higher premiums, or higher medical bills, when the system has to subsidize the cost of a federal program to pay for illegal aliens medical costs.

Sorry, but that's how economics works.

That is the genius of my plan. The government is not in charge of it. The government simply has a bail out plan for people whose medical care costs exceed their ability to pay. The providers determine what is necessary and how much it should cost, with the proviso that the patients have to pay most of it, and have the right to go wherever they please. As it is now, you either have to go to a PPO or an HMO, and pay through the nose if you must go elsewhere.

What happens when the cost of government bailouts gets high enough they start cutting payments? (refer to above subsidizing).

My plan is pure genius, admit it.

I wish
It's the best alternative yet, by far. But I have a rule, anytime the government is involved with something, it will screw it up. If you can cite me one example where government had any involvement with any issue, and didn't screw it up, let me know.

 

[PLC1]

We live in a day and age, that anyone can get a job. A friend of mine, way back in high school, started his own company making plastic drain hoses for Honda. Because the job was so easy, he hired mentally retarded people to do the work.

Go to
https://ssl206.chi.us.securedata.net/~lifewithoutlimbs/index.php
and buy Nick Vujicic's DVD. Here's a guy who grew up without arms and legs, and yet got a degree, and now runs his own consulting firm.

Why is it then that the unemployment rate keeps going up? Are all those unemployed simply not willing to work, or is it that there aren't enough jobs to go around just now? Did you hear about the 700 applicants for one janitorial job?

Sure, some are simply deadbeats and not willing to work, but that "anyone can get a job" is simply not true just now. Maybe when Obama's stimulus package starts to work... just kidding!

Really, what it boils down to sadly, is there are people who are not going to pay for services they get, no matter what. Even the MasterCard system, which btw is by far the best system I've heard of yet, still doesn't address what happens when person X simply refuses to pay.

Yes, the plan isn't perfect, and there will be deadbeats. The people at MasterCard, however, are a lot better at prying money out of them than the government is.

Where do you think corporations get the money to pay for employee health care? (psst: Customers or Employee pay reductions) In either case, that's a tax. It might not go through government hands between business and health service, but it's still just a mandated tax on the public.

I said my plan had something for everyone. It isn't purely a conservative plan, as someone has to pay. It might as well be those who are paying currently, so that there will be as little disruption as possible.

Not what I meant. CEOs are already changing how they get paid to shelter income from the Obama tax plan they assume will raise their taxes. People can use the same tricks to hide their own income. They don't because it's not worth it, but your system might make it worth it.

That is a weakness, of course. There will be cheaters no matter what.

Erm... TV advertising normally doesn't raise the price of drugs, because it's paid out of the profits of selling those drugs. It's similar to CEO pay vs the cost of production. Further, if you can imagine all the doctors in the world, advertising is the only way to get information of a new medication to all of them in a fiscally effective way.

Where do you think the money comes from for those ad campaigns? Profits are a part of the cost of the drug, and it is a part of profits that pay for those annoying commercials wanting me to try this drug or that one.

I TIVO most of them out anyway.

About the only thing at this level I wish would end, but I don't know how to stop it, is companies giving bonus money to doctors who prescribe their medications.

Maybe an anti bribery law? Oh, we already have that. Maybe admitting that paying a dr. to prescribe your medication is a form of bribery?

Of course the biggest abuser in this area is Medicare, which often pays such wildly differing amounts for various services, that doctors often give prescriptions based on what is the most profitable to bill Medicare for. That's another reason medicare is going sky high in cost.

Really? Well, once we go on the subsidized MasterCard plan, there will be no more need of Medicare.

If he can pay for it, go for it. Otherwise, it should be left to the hospital to determine what to do. After all, they are the ones who will go bankrupt for offering service to someone who will not pay.

Let me put it this way. In California, a 70 hospitals have actually closed down, since 1990. Shut the doors, sent everyone home. All the employees lost their jobs. All the patients lost their service. The entire community lost a hospital to go to.

So thousands of people lost their jobs. And thousands more have no place to go to the hospital at all.

So we have to make some choices. If we continue to let people who have no intention of paying, get free health services, then the logical result is no one gets health service.

Let's make another hypothetical. You are the doctor. An illegal immigrant with no intention of paying, has an illness. Question: Should you be forced, without any other option, to treat the illegal or face jail time? Or should you have the option to say sorry, I have a family to feed?

Dang, you're cold. I think we could save enough by simply deporting the illegals, but maybe letting them die in the streets is the only way. Probably the churches would help them out.

Then you support socialism. Because not only are you going to pay the taxes to pay for an illegals health bills, but your going to pay to deport him, and then pay for both when the illegal comes back. You do know that most all deport illegals come right back?

Yes, they do. We need to reform immigration while we're at reforming the medical system.

I wish
It's the best alternative yet, by far. But I have a rule, anytime the government is involved with something, it will screw it up. If you can cite me one example where government had any involvement with any issue, and didn't screw it up, let me know.

Thank you.

There is a limited potential for the government to screw it up, as there is a limited role for the government to play.

Of course, the way they will screw it up is to come up with a far more expensive and cumbersome plan than the one I've described.

And I came up with it while walking my dog. I should be in charge.

 

[Andy]

Why is it then that the unemployment rate keeps going up? Are all those unemployed simply not willing to work, or is it that there aren't enough jobs to go around just now? Did you hear about the 700 applicants for one janitorial job?

Sure, some are simply deadbeats and not willing to work, but that "anyone can get a job" is simply not true just now. Maybe when Obama's stimulus package starts to work... just kidding!

Don't make me scream!

Well I just checked the local classified ads job listings. There are 152 entries. I went through some of them.

One company is hiring 50 people for customer service.
Blood donation service needs someone to process paper work.
5 mail sorters
6 or 7 positions open at a local pilot travel center
Get this, a mortgage loan processor needed.
IT support tech
Billing assistant
Maintenance Machinist
Auto Damage Appraiser
Teachers
Day care helpers
Managers

The list goes on and on, and that's the week day list, not the massive Sunday classifieds that has hundreds more.

I've driven past help wanted signs all over my area. Pizza places hiring. Wendy's hiring. My bank is hiring. There's a landscaping company that's hiring, that cuts the lawn of my company. The construction firm that's building the road going past my work, is hiring. (from before the stealfromus) I even saw a sign saying 'need techs, will train'. How much clearly could that be?

The point is, there are jobs out there.

Why is unemployment rising? Recession might have something to do with it. Unemployment doesn't mean there are not jobs. It means people are losing jobs, and it means people are able to collect unemployment.

Dirty secret of unemployment figures is that they simply reflect how many people are collecting unemployment, not how many are unemployed. In 2002, what was considered an odd pattern emerged. The unemployment numbers increased, but GDP and other economic indicators showed no signs of a recession, or economic slow down that would cause the increase in unemployment.

What happened before 2002? In 2001, Bush signed into law that unemployment benefits would be increased. This meant more people could take unemployment, for a longer time frame, before having to get a job. So they did. This pushed the unemployment rate up, even though the economy was health and strong.

I have a roomate who specifically waited until her unemployment ran out, before getting a job. Why? Well, why get a job until you can't get unemployment? That was their logic anyway. I could never do that.

Yes, the plan isn't perfect, and there will be deadbeats. The people at MasterCard, however, are a lot better at prying money out of them than the government is.

I said my plan had something for everyone. It isn't purely a conservative plan, as someone has to pay. It might as well be those who are paying currently, so that there will be as little disruption as possible.

That is a weakness, of course. There will be cheaters no matter what.

Where do you think the money comes from for those ad campaigns? Profits are a part of the cost of the drug, and it is a part of profits that pay for those annoying commercials wanting me to try this drug or that one.

Maybe an anti bribery law? Oh, we already have that. Maybe admitting that paying a dr. to prescribe your medication is a form of bribery?

Really? Well, once we go on the subsidized MasterCard plan, there will be no more need of Medicare.

The problem is the same though. Medicare/Medicaid will pay X amount for one drug, but less or more for another. Why? Because the government covers those costs, and thus dictates prices.

If the MarsterCard plan is subsidized by the government, I can promise you they are going to dictate the cost that health providers can charge the card.

Dang, you're cold. I think we could save enough by simply deporting the illegals, but maybe letting them die in the streets is the only way. Probably the churches would help them out.

I have no problem there. My church has a program for helping low income people. But again, simply deporting will just mean they have to take another trip across the boarder.

See another problem is that it is not limited to illegals. There are people who travel here from Southeast Asia, have a child or surgery from our hospitals, and go right back. All of it legal, and we still get stuck with the tab.

Think of it another way... what happens is we were to go to India, and show up their hospital with no money? I'll give you a hint: what happens if you don't pay for your meal at Wendy's? We don't get service. Right. Because they'd go out of business. Right. So our hospitals are closing because of servicing people who don't pay. Right. Seems pretty clear to me.

Yes, they do. We need to reform immigration while we're at reforming the medical system.

I'd agree with that. But here's the key. Until we make it unfruitful, or unpleasant to come here illegally, they will simply find another way back. It's like the war on drugs. We keep locking up dealers, and that's fine and right, but that doesn't stop drugs. Why? Because it's profitable to break the law. As long as there is a demand for drugs, someone will provide a supply.

Similarly, until we make coming here illegal a massive negative, they are simply going to keep doing it. One way it to crack down on them getting jobs. Another is by denying all sorts of services. One could be hospital availability.

I think I'd apply for legal citizenship, if I broke my leg once, and the hospital refused to treat me because I wasn't legal. Legal citizenship isn't exactly a hard or an overly expensive thing. People just don't do it, because they don't have to.

And I came up with it while walking my dog. I should be in charge.

Just *not* coming up with the stealfromus plan, qualifies you in my book.

 

[PLC1]

Don't make me scream!

Well I just checked the local classified ads job listings. There are 152 entries. I went through some of them.

One company is hiring 50 people for customer service.
Blood donation service needs someone to process paper work.
5 mail sorters
6 or 7 positions open at a local pilot travel center
Get this, a mortgage loan processor needed.
IT support tech
Billing assistant
Maintenance Machinist
Auto Damage Appraiser
Teachers
Day care helpers
Managers

The list goes on and on, and that's the week day list, not the massive Sunday classifieds that has hundreds more.

I've driven past help wanted signs all over my area. Pizza places hiring. Wendy's hiring. My bank is hiring. There's a landscaping company that's hiring, that cuts the lawn of my company. The construction firm that's building the road going past my work, is hiring. (from before the stealfromus) I even saw a sign saying 'need techs, will train'. How much clearly could that be?

The point is, there are jobs out there.

Why is unemployment rising? Recession might have something to do with it. Unemployment doesn't mean there are not jobs. It means people are losing jobs, and it means people are able to collect unemployment.

Dirty secret of unemployment figures is that they simply reflect how many people are collecting unemployment, not how many are unemployed. In 2002, what was considered an odd pattern emerged. The unemployment numbers increased, but GDP and other economic indicators showed no signs of a recession, or economic slow down that would cause the increase in unemployment.

What happened before 2002? In 2001, Bush signed into law that unemployment benefits would be increased. This meant more people could take unemployment, for a longer time frame, before having to get a job. So they did. This pushed the unemployment rate up, even though the economy was health and strong.

I have a roomate who specifically waited until her unemployment ran out, before getting a job. Why? Well, why get a job until you can't get unemployment? That was their logic anyway. I could never do that.

Yes, the plan isn't perfect, and there will be deadbeats. The people at MasterCard, however, are a lot better at prying money out of them than the government is.

I said my plan had something for everyone. It isn't purely a conservative plan, as someone has to pay. It might as well be those who are paying currently, so that there will be as little disruption as possible.

That is a weakness, of course. There will be cheaters no matter what.

Where do you think the money comes from for those ad campaigns? Profits are a part of the cost of the drug, and it is a part of profits that pay for those annoying commercials wanting me to try this drug or that one.

Maybe an anti bribery law? Oh, we already have that. Maybe admitting that paying a dr. to prescribe your medication is a form of bribery?



The problem is the same though. Medicare/Medicaid will pay X amount for one drug, but less or more for another. Why? Because the government covers those costs, and thus dictates prices.

If the MarsterCard plan is subsidized by the government, I can promise you they are going to dictate the cost that health providers can charge the card.



I have no problem there. My church has a program for helping low income people. But again, simply deporting will just mean they have to take another trip across the boarder.

See another problem is that it is not limited to illegals. There are people who travel here from Southeast Asia, have a child or surgery from our hospitals, and go right back. All of it legal, and we still get stuck with the tab.

Think of it another way... what happens is we were to go to India, and show up their hospital with no money? I'll give you a hint: what happens if you don't pay for your meal at Wendy's? We don't get service. Right. Because they'd go out of business. Right. So our hospitals are closing because of servicing people who don't pay. Right. Seems pretty clear to me.



I'd agree with that. But here's the key. Until we make it unfruitful, or unpleasant to come here illegally, they will simply find another way back. It's like the war on drugs. We keep locking up dealers, and that's fine and right, but that doesn't stop drugs. Why? Because it's profitable to break the law. As long as there is a demand for drugs, someone will provide a supply.

Similarly, until we make coming here illegal a massive negative, they are simply going to keep doing it. One way it to crack down on them getting jobs. Another is by denying all sorts of services. One could be hospital availability.

I think I'd apply for legal citizenship, if I broke my leg once, and the hospital refused to treat me because I wasn't legal. Legal citizenship isn't exactly a hard or an overly expensive thing. People just don't do it, because they don't have to.



Just *not* coming up with the stealfromus plan, qualifies you in my book.

You remind me of Ronald Reagan holding up a newspaper with want ads and saying, "See? There are plenty of jobs out there."

You and he both have a point. So long as the applicant can't find a job that pays more than unemployment, he/she is likely to keep drawing unemployment. It just makes more sense, at least in the short term.

Another reason is that anyone with a family has to have health insurance. Of course, once my subsidized MasterCard plan is put into operation, health care won't be connected to employment any longer, so it will be a lot easier to start at the bottom with a job with no benefits, or to start a small business.

And, the government won't be setting prices under my plan. The marketplace will, as the patients will be paying for the first few thousand dollars worth. The government doesn't set prices for groceries or gasoline, does it?

 

[Andy]

You remind me of Ronald Reagan holding up a newspaper with want ads and saying, "See? There are plenty of jobs out there."

You and he both have a point. So long as the applicant can't find a job that pays more than unemployment, he/she is likely to keep drawing unemployment. It just makes more sense, at least in the short term.

Back in the mid 90s, when welfare reform was passed, our local TV station sent out reporters to talk to welfare queens about to be kicked off the public dole. Now, I'm going to paraphrase because that was more than 10 years ago now, but it went almost exactly like this...

Reporter: "So how do you feel about being kicked off welfare?" (I'm sure she said it better than that)

Welfare: "Oh this will be much better for us. My new job will pay me much more" (for us referring to her kids)

Reporter: (confused look) "Oh um... well why didn't you do this before?"

Welfare: "Well because I didn't have to."

There it is my friend. People, when given the option to not work, many times don't. When they have to, they do. Just like when you increase the time people can suck up unemployment, they tend to stay unemployed and suck up unemployment.

Another reason is that anyone with a family has to have health insurance. Of course, once my subsidized MasterCard plan is put into operation, health care won't be connected to employment any longer, so it will be a lot easier to start at the bottom with a job with no benefits, or to start a small business.

Well I do agree with this much. Health insurance shouldn't be connected to work. Of course, do you know who's responsible for that? Government! Yup, government encourage business supplied health insurance by making large tax breaks for company funded health plans. Funny how the best sounding plans, years later, cause the biggest problems.

Ironically HMOs are the same thing. HMOs were created by government. Then government systematically cut back on HMO funding, which caused them to systematically cut back on service. Of course HMOs got the blame, but government was the cause. No one seems to remember government made HMOs back in the early 80s.

And, the government won't be setting prices under my plan. The marketplace will, as the patients will be paying for the first few thousand dollars worth. The government doesn't set prices for groceries or gasoline, does it?

Yeah, but government doesn't subsidize the cost of gasoline and groceries... yet...

But I can promise you, if they subsidize the cost placed on that Master Health Card of yours, they are going to start adding rules to health care providers, on what they can charge to those cards, and how much.

Remember the bailout for banks? First it was just "we want 70% shares in the company", then it was " and no bonuses", and now it's " and a max CEO pay of XXX thousand" plus a " and you have to use it to make loans" and soon it will be " and we don't want you only borrowing to those who can pay back".

Every week for months, they came out with a new rule on what they could do with the money already given to them.

Now, if they can go back and add 20 stipulations to money already handed out to banks all over America, why do you think they are not going to start controlling health care providers when they start footing the bill for all expenses over 10% of the patients annual income?

Sorry, I'm not convinced. I guess the biggest problem is, I simply don't trust government. Not in the slightest. Anytime you have them with their finger, even just a finger nail, in something, I think they'll screw it up. If we had trustworthy people in government, perhaps I might be more hopeful. As is, even your plan which is very good, will be screwed all to hell if you give them the chance.

It's the same reason I'm against the fair tax. Logically the fair tax makes the most sense. But I know this government too well. They might implement the fair tax, but then they'll just reinstall the income tax, and we'll end up with both.