I don't have your confidence. It will always be "too expensive" in the minds of conservatives.
No it wouldn't. I posted a plan multiple times that I believe would address all the major issues, wouldn't cost that much and put the power back in the hands of the individual instead of the gov't or an insurance company. For some strange reason I can never get any comment on it though..
me said:
1. Remove the employer tax break for health insurance and change it to a individual tax credit that people can use to get their own insurance. This shifts the customer from being the employer to the patient. Insurance companies are more likely to be responsive if their customer is the actual patient.
2. Culturally shift to catastraphic health insurance rather than insulation. $5k+ deductible. Use #3 to cover everything up to that point.
3. Insititute a medical savings account similar to a 401(k) that people can pay into pre-tax and only draw out without penalty for health expenses. This allows people to build up a buffer of cash for health care that can grow year to year. People pay in when they're young and healthy and they've got a lot of money when they're old and sick. Options can range from an FDIC insured savings account on up.
4. Scrap medicare and medicaid and replace it with a single, effective, means tested subsidy program for anyone regardless of age. This should also have a provision to cover pre-existing conditions that would make insurance cost prohibitive but it would ONLY cover the pre-existing for the person. They would still have to buy their own insurance for other issues.
5. Use the damn commerce clause of the US Constitution for what it was actually intended for once in a blue moon. Use it to over-ride the myriad of state regulations that prevent nationwide competition of insurance plans. That
Those 5 steps could cover everyone, even the indigent, keep medical decisions to between the dr and patient, cover everything from routine care to the catastrophic, drive down overall health care costs and not require us to dump extra billions into another gov't program thats bound to get FUBARed in short order.
You think so? We have groups in the country who benefit from government regulated health care- Medicare, the Military, Government employees that include our representatives in Congress. Why not fix the root problems and open it up these kinds of coverage to the majority of Americans? Private companies can compete if they want to but I don't see them making as much money. It's that simple and I don't see the Republicans buying it because it "costs to much".
First, private companies can never compete with systems that receive gov't subsidies and don't even have to break even. Put it this way
1. If there are no taxpayer subsidies and the public plans have to at least break even, then there's no point to opening them up because the cost will be just as much as a private plan.
2. If there are taxpayer subsidies and the public plans don't have to break even, then its just a stacked deck designed to drive the private companies out of business.
Fundamentally there is no way to derive a level playing field between a gov't sponsored anything and a private company.
This is something that I've heard conservatives say for years, oh no, we don't pay too much, the rest of the world pays too little, it's their fault! No matter what is alleged, pharmaceuticals make a killing in the current system. Maybe the rest of the world could stand to pay more, but we can certainly stand to pay one heck of a lot less.
PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY PROFITS INCREASE BY OVER $8 BILLION AFTER MEDICARE DRUG PLAN. -warn, this will load/download a pdf.
[/quote]
Making a killing? $8 billion out of an industry that has nearly $400 billion in sales in just the 15 biggest companies. Sure sounds like their bottom line was pumped up to me.
The only reason they make so much is that they're selling so much. Take the Pfizer example again. Their profit margin is only 16%. They only make 16 cents on every dollar of sales. Thats right in line with many many other industries. Even if you eliminated ALL the profit margin, in terms of total costs its not going to be that significant of an impact. It gets even less significant once you trickle that down to the individual. Oh your $100 prescription only costs $84 now, don't you feel better?
I won't repeat myself so see the following for pharma sales info...
http://www.offtopicz.net/50406-obama-healthcare-debate-over-7.html#post1272581
That is part of the root problem, when a dr. charges $18000 to Blue Cross for a 50 min gall bladder operation. That is completely over the top. I saw the bill.
Operating room, surgical staff, equipment, anesthesia, anesthesiologist, post-op care, post-op room...
I find the insinuation that doctors are only in it for the money and purposefully overcharge for procedures because they're greedy to be incredibly offensive, misleading, and inflammatory. Obama did it, and got absolutely blasted by the AMA and ACS because what he claimed was patently false. Aside from the actual expenses of a surgery, they also have to make up for their malpractice insurance, since people love to sue doctors, and surgeons have some of the highest malpractice insurance rates. None of that is even addressing the fact, that has been stated multiple times previously in this thread, that doctors come out of medical school with an average of ~$150k in debt related to college and medical school.
Seriously. Are people so jacked up that they think that nurses, equipment, supplies, etc etc etc are free? Nobody in the chain does anything they do for free and a significant portion of the people in the chain are highly educated and skilled people who expect to be compensated for their time.
Everything retro said about debt and insurance is the truth. My wife is sitting on about $150,000 in student loans right now. I've been investigating malpractice insurance rates as well. She's looking at anywhere from $60,000-$80,000 year in malpractice insurance.
Do people think Drs should eat that debt and insurance and make minimum wage after all the time they spent in education and training?
As far as setting up a practice, my rough estimates of what it takes to set up a Drs practice is obscene. My numbers say you need a minimum of $500,000 in capital just for a bare bones office and it goes up exponentially as you add in office capabilities.
There's no such thing as a free lunch so somebody has to pay for these things....
btw has anybody noticed how sometimes he just stops speaking and looks left toward the cameras, then resumes speaking? Seriously! Next time you watch him on tv, watch his head motion! :willy_nilly::24:
I notice the uhhs. He would have failed my freshman year public speaking course in college because of those uhhs....
Secondly I'm curious, do you think the Republican Party if they were the majority would accept your proposal?
