The solution to Medicare and the health care system

[Hobo1]

This isn't about skiing in Colorado, it's about being able to get up out of a chair or being able to walk on level ground and go out to your mailbox to check your mail. You've never been around anyone who's either needed or had a hip replacement, have you?

I understand your compassion. My point is our tax money can only pay for a certain level of treatment. We can debate where that cut-off point should be. You will always have the compassion argument on your side, and I will always have the economic efficiency on mine.

And just like Rick's post above, nobody will ever be happy where you draw the line. You must always remember, if grandpa can't go check the mailbox, it is because he didn't save his money when he was younger; not because the government is stingy. He can ALWAYS pay for it himself. And always remember, grandpa's hip replacement is being paid for by the entire year's income taxes paid by a single mother who is struggling to pay the monthly rent.

Everything in life is a trade-off. Grandpa could have saved his money and the single mother could have taken birth control pills. This is America and we are not a socialist country yet. You have the responsibility to care for yourself and not rely on the government.

 

[Rick]

I understand your compassion. My point is our tax money can only pay for a certain level of treatment. We can debate where that cut-off point should be. You will always have the compassion argument on your side, and I will always have the economic efficiency on mine.

And just like Rick's post above, nobody will ever be happy where you draw the line.

What the HELL makes you think you have the right to draw ANY damn "line"??? These f__king leftwingers want the government to be like Himmler, pointing left or right as the jews got off the train at Auschwitz, deciding who is to live and who is to go to the gas chamber. My healthcare is none of your damn business, none of obozo's business, and none of anybody's business - it's between me and my doctor - period.

 

[Hobo1]

What the HELL makes you think you have the right to draw ANY damn "line"??? These f__king leftwingers want the government to be like Himmler, pointing left or right as the jews got off the train at Auschwitz, deciding who is to live and who is to go to the gas chamber. My healthcare is none of your damn business, none of obozo's business, and none of anybody's business - it's between me and my doctor - period.

Absolutely correct, as long as you are paying the bill. I happen to believe in a highly developed country such as the US, society has an obligation to provide a safety net its residents. That safety net, by definition, should be enough government support to keep people from dying in the streets and living in culverts. That would include a minimal level of health care.

With that philosophy in mind, then someone must draw the line on how much care we should or could give to maintain a safety net existence.

 

[Rick]

Absolutely correct, as long as you are paying the bill. I happen to believe in a highly developed country such as the US, society has an obligation to provide a safety net its residents. That safety net, by definition, should be enough government support to keep people from dying in the streets and living in culverts. That would include a minimal level of health care.

With that philosophy in mind, then someone must draw the line on how much care we should or could give to maintain a safety net existence.

You don't understand what they're aiming at. A statist system like what the leftwingers are proposing has a certain dynamic, a certain state that it evolves to. In canada for example, it is >>>ILLEGAL<<< to pay a doctor for services. It's not an issue of pay for it yourself, it's that YOU CAN'T GET IT AT ANY PRICE, unless you become a medical tourist. As for it being a minimal level of care, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU GET. The damn "safety net" isn't UNDER you - it's OVER you. And taxes under obozocare and ANY statist system are gigantically raised, so you CAN'T pay for it yourself - they've taxed away your money! For crissake - READ UP on the unfunded mandates obozocare puts on the states.

>>READ<< how statist systems operate in practice - canada, UK, cuba, then ask yourself why you have the bizarre idea that such HORRIBLE systems are an improvement over what we have, even without the REAL reforms I cited that would bring prices way down.

 

[Gipper]

You don't understand what they're aiming at. A statist system like what the leftwingers are proposing has a certain dynamic, a certain state that it evolves to. In canada for example, it is >>>ILLEGAL<<< to pay a doctor for services. It's not an issue of pay for it yourself, it's that YOU CAN'T GET IT AT ANY PRICE, unless you become a medical tourist. As for it being a minimal level of care, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU GET. The damn "safety net" isn't UNDER you - it's OVER you. And taxes under obozocare and ANY statist system are gigantically raised, so you CAN'T pay for it yourself - they've taxed away your money! For crissake - READ UP on the unfunded mandates obozocare puts on the states.

>>READ<< how statist systems operate in practice - canada, UK, cuba, then ask yourself why you have the bizarre idea that such HORRIBLE systems are an improvement over what we have, even without the REAL reforms I cited that would bring prices way down.

Well said.

It is apparent to all thinking people that Obummercare is nothing more than an effort to expand the power and influence of the state...and enslave the people to the whims of the state.

The American statist dreams of imposing a Euro style government. Hence, government run health care is nirvana to them. Once they have enslaved the people to a socialist HC system, we are all socialists then. That ends limited government once and for all.

 

[Centrehalf]

I understand your compassion. My point is our tax money can only pay for a certain level of treatment. We can debate where that cut-off point should be. You will always have the compassion argument on your side, and I will always have the economic efficiency on mine.

No we can't, not in a free country. I also do not believe that you have economic efficiency on your side, there are too many variables to calculate.

He can ALWAYS pay for it himself. And always remember, grandpa's hip replacement is being paid for by the entire year's income taxes paid by a single mother who is struggling to pay the monthly rent.

I just want to make sure I read this correctly. Are you suggesting that the income of the poor little old single mother would skyrocket if it weren't for Medicare/Medicaid? Talk about trying to pull on the heartstrings.

I don't have a problem with government putting up a safety net, but I have a serious problem with individual mandates and with prohibiting people from spending their money as they see fit. Rick wasn't kidding about it being illegal to see a doctor in some countries and pay with your own money.

 

[Hobo1]

Ok, this thread is messed up. We are not all on the same page.

First, we already have Medicare and that is an expensive program. But it basically serves the old farts. Congressman Ryan's program is to give money to the states which would be issued as vouchers (right?).

The second issue is Obamacare. The basic focus of that program is to bring more people into a health care system using many different methods. The program makes no concrete effort to reduce health care costs. It does have some "trial programs" which may could eventually translate into cost reduction. But right now it is an expensive little mother, and gets government into everyone's face. Statist, that is.

The third issue is the current "state of the art" of medical care. This is an issue of the bio-medical companies coming out with new, expensive drugs. It also includes the lawyers standing ready to sue any doctor that does not use the most modern techniques (even if the old ones are just as good). And we, as a society have an attitude that if we are not getting "high-tech" medical care - then we are not being abused!

My position is if we correct the third issue we can fix Medicaid. That is, if we can stop using a CAT scan every time a patient stubs their toe, then we can cut costs. Doctors need to get in the habit of saying, "take two aspirin and call me in the morning". We need some legal reform that gets lawyers out of the doctor's office. And ordinary people should be able to buy high blood pressure medicine without a prescription. Not too many people using high-blood pressure as a recreational drug.

And with regard to Obamacare, I hate the idea of a governmental health program. BUT, if some form of Obamacare is destine to stick around, then it needs major improvements. One improvement is setting guidelines on what the Feds are going to pay for. In other words, if we have to have that monkey on our back, then we should be looking at other countries so we can learn from their mistakes.

Does that clear up anything?

 

[TruthSeeker]

I'm probably going to shock a lot of you, but I believe that the only way to save our health care system is to make all hospitals non-profit organizations and place all physicians and nurses and clinicians and psychiatrists and all other health care professionals on a salary structure, based on years of service, where they practice, and competency.

The massive fraud needs to stop. The pharmaceutical bribery and extortion needs to stop. The "assembly-line" attitude of many physicians needs to stop. Unnecessary medical testing and procedures need to stop. The list goes on and on and on.

 

[Rick]

And with regard to Obamacare, I hate the idea of a governmental health program. BUT, if some form of Obamacare is destine to stick around, then it needs major improvements. One improvement is setting guidelines on what the Feds are going to pay for. In other words, if we have to have that monkey on our back, then we should be looking at other countries so we can learn from their mistakes.

Does that clear up anything?

Obamacare has to be overturned or we're all screwed big time. Statist medical systems don't solve any problem - they don't expand health care, don't make anything cheaper. They use the crude, blunt stupid mechanism of government control, which only ever "solves" the problem with exactly, precisely one tool: rationing.

 

[Rick]

I'm probably going to shock a lot of you, but I believe that the only way to save our health care system is to make all hospitals non-profit organizations and place all physicians and nurses and clinicians and psychiatrists and all other health care professionals on a salary structure, based on years of service, where they practice, and competency.

You shocked me all right - you are absolutely, totally wrong. What is needed is to remove the problems caused by government:

- importing tens of millions of illegal aliens
- giving full rein to tort lawyer predators
- refusing to stop medicare/medicaid fraud
- allowing intrastate insurance company near-monopolies
- refusing to stop international piracy of US medical intellectual property
- allowing state mandates for coverage of medical procedures that are not for diseases or injuries
- refusing to reform the extremely long time needed for FDA drug approval

The highest level of competition needs to be facilitated (see bullet 4 above) to reduce costs further - this also requires the end of third party payers (employer insurance). And of course, the choice isn't between third party payer and single payer - both are bad, and the latter is by far the worse. The reduction in costs needs to come from >>>MARKET COMPETITION<<<, not politically-oriented bureaucrats deciding arbitrarily that this drug should cost this or this doctor should earn that .... LET THE MARKET DECIDE.

 

[Hobo1]

You shocked me all right - you are absolutely, totally wrong. What is needed is to remove the problems caused by government:

- importing tens of millions of illegal aliens
- giving full rein to tort lawyer predators
- refusing to stop medicare/medicaid fraud
- allowing intrastate insurance company near-monopolies
- refusing to stop international piracy of US medical intellectual property
- allowing state mandates for coverage of medical procedures that are not for diseases or injuries
- refusing to reform the extremely long time needed for FDA drug approval

The highest level of competition needs to be facilitated (see bullet 4 above) to reduce costs further - this also requires the end of third party payers (employer insurance). And of course, the choice isn't between third party payer and single payer - both are bad, and the latter is by far the worse. The reduction in costs needs to come from >>>MARKET COMPETITION<<<, not politically-oriented bureaucrats deciding arbitrarily that this drug should cost this or this doctor should earn that .... LET THE MARKET DECIDE.

Plus, don't forget the private insurance companies. They should have an incentive to force medical care to be efficient. They can't go along for the free ride of increasing premiums every time the hospital and drug companies raise their prices. Insurance companies must say, "We aren't going to pay for the lavish spending habits of the medical community". Don't deny the patient, force the health care community to get more efficient.

BTW, TruthSeeker, non-profit companies does not equal efficient or inexpensive. Look at the Red Cross that spends 90% of its money on fund raising and executive salaries - with only 10% going to helping people. But it is non-profit.

In truth, going after hospital profits would only tap a small part of the problem. If I were a doctor, I could start a non-profit hospital and take all the profit as my salary! CEO of a non-profit hospital can make big bucks.

I don't deny anybody a fair profit. The problem is the whole system allows for the hospitals, doctors, and drug companies to collectively over-treat the patients. Instead of a simple blood test, let's do a detailed blood work-up for someone who only is getting an annual check-up! That's where the money is wasted. Over-treatment using gold-plated techniques... and examples abound.

 

[Rick]

Plus, don't forget the private insurance companies. They should have an incentive to force medical care to be efficient. They can't go along for the free ride of increasing premiums every time the hospital and drug companies raise their prices. Insurance companies must say, "We aren't going to pay for the lavish spending habits of the medical community". Don't deny the patient, force the health care community to get more efficient.

That's precisely, exactly what >>REAL<< competition does, and NOTHING ELSE will do it. The lack of competition is because (how many times do I have to say this??) state laws prevent interstate competition.

I don't deny anybody a fair profit. The problem is the whole system allows for the hospitals, doctors, and drug companies to collectively over-treat the patients. Instead of a simple blood test, let's do a detailed blood work-up for someone who only is getting an annual check-up! That's where the money is wasted. Over-treatment using gold-plated techniques... and examples abound.

The over-treatment comse from defensive medicine due to threats from lawyers because of a lack of tort reform - will you please read what I wrote??

 

[TruthSeeker]

You shocked me all right - you are absolutely, totally wrong. What is needed is to remove the problems caused by government:

- importing tens of millions of illegal aliens
- giving full rein to tort lawyer predators
- refusing to stop medicare/medicaid fraud
- allowing intrastate insurance company near-monopolies
- refusing to stop international piracy of US medical intellectual property
- allowing state mandates for coverage of medical procedures that are not for diseases or injuries
- refusing to reform the extremely long time needed for FDA drug approval

The highest level of competition needs to be facilitated (see bullet 4 above) to reduce costs further - this also requires the end of third party payers (employer insurance). And of course, the choice isn't between third party payer and single payer - both are bad, and the latter is by far the worse. The reduction in costs needs to come from >>>MARKET COMPETITION<<<, not politically-oriented bureaucrats deciding arbitrarily that this drug should cost this or this doctor should earn that .... LET THE MARKET DECIDE.

Everything you listed also needs to be remedied. But the key ingredient that you are missing here is GREED. The "free market" approach is fine, but GREED has permeated every corner of our society.

1. I don't trust health care organizations to do the right thing when it comes to patient care.
2. I don't trust physicians who do what they do because they figured out how to work "the system" and make millions of dollars.
3. I don't trust health care organizations who pay their top executives millions of dollars in salaries and bonuses.
4. I don't trust pharmaceutical companies who send out their company reps like locusts, offering freebees and other incentives to get physicians to try their latest and greatest prescription drugs, many of which have more side effects than benefits.
5. I don't trust anybody who takes advantage of Medicare loopholes and lack of oversight, and fraudulently steal billions of dollars from the Medicare system.

I don't trust people to do the right thing anymore. Obviously, there ARE people who do the right thing, but in today's "entitlement" society, more people don't play by the rules that are in place, and/or they make their own rules.

 

[Rick]

Everything you listed also needs to be remedied. But the key ingredient that you are missing here is GREED. The "free market" approach is fine, but GREED has permeated every corner of our society.

Define "greed". Who is to decide when the quest for profits becomes greed. Oh, I know - a leftwing bureaucrat who hates capitalism.

1. I don't trust health care organizations to do the right thing when it comes to patient care.

What do you mean, "the right thing"? They have a contract with their insurees - if they violate it, they can be sued - that's the beginning, the middle, and the end.

2. I don't trust physicians who do what they do because they figured out how to work "the system" and make millions of dollars.

Doctors are actually leaving the profession because they are tired of getting sued, tired of paying sky high liability insurance premiums because of the tort lawyers, tired of playing the defensive medicine game because of the same, and tired of LOSING money every time they see a medicare patient.

3. I don't trust health care organizations who pay their top executives millions of dollars in salaries and bonuses.

You'd rather they be underpaid, and not do a good job? And what is overpaid? Who decides?

4. I don't trust pharmaceutical companies who send out their company reps like locusts, offering freebees and other incentives to get physicians to try their latest and greatest prescription drugs, many of which have more side effects than benefits.

Evidence?

5. I don't trust anybody who takes advantage of Medicare loopholes and lack of oversight, and fraudulently steal billions of dollars from the Medicare system.

Get the feds off theri asses, track them down, and throw them in jail.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Define "greed". Who is to decide when the quest for profits becomes greed. Oh, I know - a leftwing bureaucrat who hates capitalism.

What do you mean, "the right thing"? They have a contract with their insurees - if they violate it, they can be sued - that's the beginning, the middle, and the end.

Doctors are actually leaving the profession because they are tired of getting sued, tired of paying sky high liability insurance premiums because of the tort lawyers, tired of playing the defensive medicine game because of the same, and tired of LOSING money every time they see a medicare patient.

You'd rather they be underpaid, and not do a good job? And what is overpaid? Who decides?

Evidence?

Get the feds off theri asses, track them down, and throw them in jail.

Hey, Rick, I understand what you're saying. Our health care system is a MESS. A lot of work needs to be done to get it back to where it needs to be.

You made many good points. And I also made many good points. I'm not going to provide links about the pharmaceutical industry and how they "operate". You know exactly what I am saying.

As for the definition of "greed", you're much too intelligent for me to have to explain to you what "greed" is, and what the difference between "greed" and "profit" is.