[HM2Viking]

A letter from a patient:

As a Type 1 diabetic I have had first-hand experience with health care in America, Canada and most recently, Japan.
In America when I became diabetic I lost my job (it was a medical disqualification) which meant that I also lost my employer -provided health care. With what was now a pre-existing condition and no income I was unable to afford health insurance. I paid cash for my medical care and I paid full price, not the reduced rate that insurance companies negotiate with doctors and hospitals. Major diabetic complications (which I have so far been spared) could mean bankruptcy.
By contrast, in Canada I went to any doctor I chose, received excellent care paid for through the single-payer system there, and never had to worry about filing claims or denial of a claim by an insurer. I met no Canadians who were interested in converting to an American-style system. Ms. Trautwein would have us believe that Canada has “substandard care, long waiting lists, loss of physicians, forced outsourcing and healthcare rationing.” Surely there would be hordes of Canadians clamoring to do away with the “inferior” single-payer system.
In Japan I get prompt, competent care without worry about bankruptcy. The citizens seem satisfied with the system.
Ms. Trautwein tells us that black is white and night is day while she benefits from a system that causes pain and misery to those around her. Why should she have any credibility?
Thanks for telling the truth, Don.
Best regards,
Jeff Aaron

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2007/novemb...to_benefit.php

[nicurn001]

In the Free Market Model (FMM) advocated by ZASHAGALKA ,as I understand it Consumers would purchase catastrophic care insurance , then pay for any other care they receive themselves . I would be grateful if somebody could tell me how a consumer with a chronic condition such as Diabetes Melitus , or a Cancer requiring complex treatment be managed in the FMM and be able to pay for their care .

My fear of the FMM is how will the avarice of the Healthcare corporations be kept in check .They will fight to maintain their market share ie.small provider opens up , charges less , Big corporation will reduce its costs in that market , by using profits from rest of chain ,once small provider put out of business , Corporation will recoup its loses .

Whilst I believe that we as RN may have the ability to research our healthcare and possibly be able to finance it, there are many consumers of health care who would not be able to do so , how is this group to be cared for ?

[HM2Viking]

Originally Posted by nicurn001

In the Free Market Model (FMM) advocated by ZASHAGALKA ,as I understand it Consumers would purchase catastrophic care insurance , then pay for any other care they receive themselves . I would be grateful if somebody could tell me how a consumer with a chronic condition such as Diabetes Melitus , or a Cancer requiring complex treatment be managed in the FMM and be able to pay for their care .

My fear of the FMM is how will the avarice of the Healthcare corporations be kept in check .They will fight to maintain their market share ie.small provider opens up , charges less , Big corporation will reduce its costs in that market , by using profits from rest of chain ,once small provider put out of business , Corporation will recoup its loses .

Whilst I believe that we as RN may have the ability to research our healthcare and possibly be able to finance it, there are many consumers of health care who would not be able to do so , how is this group to be cared for ?

Our system does not perform very well:

[ZASHAGALKA]

Originally Posted by nicurn001

In the Free Market Model (FMM) advocated by ZASHAGALKA ,as I understand it Consumers would purchase catastrophic care insurance , then pay for any other care they receive themselves . I would be grateful if somebody could tell me how a consumer with a chronic condition such as Diabetes Melitus , or a Cancer requiring complex treatment be managed in the FMM and be able to pay for their care .

My fear of the FMM is how will the avarice of the Healthcare corporations be kept in check .They will fight to maintain their market share ie.small provider opens up , charges less , Big corporation will reduce its costs in that market , by using profits from rest of chain ,once small provider put out of business , Corporation will recoup its loses .

Whilst I believe that we as RN may have the ability to research our healthcare and possibly be able to finance it, there are many consumers of health care who would not be able to do so , how is this group to be cared for ?

Catastrophic care would kick in both with a single major illness, OR, with a high amount of deductibles (chronic care). It would STILL be far cheaper than what we have today, which isn't insurance, but rather, pre-paid care.

The savings from moving away from the now higher pre-paid plan, PLUS the transfer of the tax breaks for healthcare from business to individuals, would be more than enough to fund a healthcare savings account that would cover the gap to the catastrophic plan.

In that way, chronically ill patients would not be left out of the loop. In fact, bringing the price of healthcare down to affordable levels will allow them to have more options at better pricing than they do now. Those that must use the system more benefit the MOST from bringing market competition to available care. It is the current system that does the most harm to chronically ill individuals. The gov't has conspired with employers to make coverage unattainable by yourself. THAT is dastardly.

THAT is what a socialist system will just entrench. When cost controls must be implemented in a socialist system, it is those that use the service the MOST that will feel the pinch the worst. If you want to get rid of crime, you lock up the 10% of people that commit 90% of crimes. What do you do when you want to get rid of cost over-runs for healthcare? Simple. Deny access to the 10% of people that use 90% of care. Makes good sense if you are the average, healthy American tired of paying ever more taxation to fund a socialized boondoggle. But, what if you are one of those 10 percenters? It is gov't restricted care that you should justly fear if you are chronically ill. Who will feel the burden of high wait times and lack of providers and over-crowded EDs the most? The average healthy American, or the chronically ill?

The avarice of big healthcare inc., is already rampant because they use the gov't as a shield to prevent from having to be directly accountable to you. When you make that gov't shield absolute, with single-payor, your opinons - and choices - will cease to matter at all. The ONLY thing that WILL matter is which lobbyists convince which politicians in which backrooms for which loophole for their clients.

You lose. You lose in such a system because it's not designed, with you in mind. The gov't is for sale. Unless you are rich enough to buy your fair share, you can't afford it.

You can't afford the gov't taking over any more of your healthcare than it already has. It has done enough damage. It's time for a change. It's time to actually empower the healthcare USER. What a unique idea: power to the people.

~faith,
Timothy.

[HM2Viking]

The data shows that most Americans believe that paying for healh insurance should be a shared responsibility. A tax based system spreads the responsibility across the widest spectrum of players with the greatest efficiency.

[pickledpepperRN]

When and where has the free market profit based healthcare provided safe, effective, therapeutic healthcare for all who need it?


I am NOT asking about elective procedures such as Lasic eye surgery and liposuction.

[ZASHAGALKA]

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” C.S. Lewis.

This is EXACTLY how our framers saw the busy-body meddling in the lives of others envisioned here: tyranny. After all, the King had our best interests at heart. He was, a 'beneficial patrician'.

~faith,
Timothy.

[ZASHAGALKA]

Originally Posted by spacenurse

When and where has the free market profit based healthcare provided safe, effective, therapeutic healthcare for all who need it?


I am NOT asking about elective procedures such as Lasic eye surgery and liposuction.

No of course you're not asking about the areas of healthcare where the free market has been left to work. You don't want to hear about the REAL success stories of combining the best of quality and cost.

What you want to hear is that Uncle Daddy will save us all. Sure. It'll only cost you your freedom to choose.

No. Wait. My bad. It'll also cost you 2/3rds of your salary in taxation.

~faith,
Timothy.

[pickledpepperRN]

Originally Posted by ZASHAGALKA

No of course you're not asking about the areas of healthcare where the free market has been left to work. You don't want to hear about the REAL success stories of combining the best of quality and cost.

What you want to hear is that Uncle Daddy will save us all. Sure. It'll only cost you your freedom to choose.

No. Wait. My bad. It'll also cost you 2/3rds of your salary in taxation.

~faith,
Timothy.

I am asking about needs rather than wants.

When and where has or is profit driven free market working?

[ZASHAGALKA]

Originally Posted by spacenurse

I am asking about needs rather than wants.

When and where has or is profit driven free market working?

The free market provides you with pencils for a dime. Do you know how many materials go into making a pencil? Do you know how many hands are at work? And yet. Fine quality, excellent pricing.

It provides you with a dozen different components that went into making your dinner tonight - all for probably less than an hour of your wage. Do you know how much effort and energy and TIME went into providing such a meal, even a generation ago?

It has provided you this internet, the computer that accesses it, and the software that runs it SO affordable that it is just a routine household appliance.

And that cell phone? WOW. What technology! In your hands - for less than a good old gov't regulated MA Bell landline cost a generation ago. And then, you had no choice: black phone, rotary dial. And wait a minute - now that you have those cell phones, how many of worry anymore about the cost of long distance phone calls? Wow. What freedom.

The free market provides you a hundred different forms of transportation options. Wanna drive a Hummer? A Prius? Something in between? YOUR CHOICE.

The free market IS CHOICE. Free as in - free from government interference. (Only the gov't STILL interferes, with almost every mentioned product in this post. EVEN with such interference, because it is only relative, the free market still excels. Imagine! Imagine if you had unfettered access to the freedom to choose. Wow, I'm giddy, just thinking about the wonders of a world without gov't interference. Imagine . . . a world with no gov't coercion of its citizens - I'm getting all John Lennon here.) Gov't interference is the taking of choice. It makes things free - not free. That is what gov't has always been. It is the nature of gov't to take your rights 'for your own best good'.

When Milton Friedman made a TV show for PBS on the advantage of capitalism, he summed it up in his one phrase title for what the free market is: Freedom to Choose.

Gov't stifles that freedom. You are proposing a trade: gov't takes care of your needs, you get only what the gov't provides. You are proposing an exchange of freedom for a measure of safety.

Only, it's an illusion. The gov't will not make you more safe. It cannot. It is not designed to have your best interests at heart. It never was. Gov't only excels at tyranny. From the gov't's point of view, restricted care isn't about taking care of you; it's about a dangled carrot to control you. THAT is what gov't is about.

Our framers knew that. THAT is why they placed our gov't in the box of enumerated powers. Gov't equals tyranny.

Freedom has choices. Choices come from the freedom to make such choices. You can't give that freedom to the gov't in exchange for safety and still expect to have freedom or choice. Oh, I know that is promised - anything to get you to gladly trade your freedom. Bread and Circuses.

Uncle Daddy will take care of you. Sure, he will. Uncle Daddy always has my best interest at heart. Socializing medicine has NOTHING to do with the gov't taking, for the elected class, the ability to dole out 1/7th of the economy to the highest lobbying bidder. The King and his Courtisans only want to control healthcare FOR YOU, so it will benefit you BETTER.

All the gov't wants to do is have a bunch of friendly, professional healthcare planners make better decisions for you than you could. They will be expert, and efficient at it. It will save you tons of money and provide you with better care. As a token of trust, all you need do is cede over more of your paycheck, as a down payment on this grand utopion system.

Really? Really!

Does anybody REALLY believe that the gov't of DMV waits and Social Security Administration disdain will step up to the plate and be spiffy, on the spot healthcare providers? Does anybody really believe that the monopoly of gov't can be on time and on budget with such a goal? What I would like for you to show me is a consistent example of that.

Medicare is more than 10 times overbudget from it's original cost estimate. This new system will save me 37% on administration costs? Wow. But. . . Is that before OR AFTER it runs 300% overbudget? That could never happen, right? The gov't never spends 900 bucks on a hammer? They don't just give powerchairs away to anybody, at no cost to you? Never happen . . .

Oh yes, I know the argument. The free market is FULL of people with schemes on how to get rich off the backs of you. Well, maybe so. At least they have to compete in the marketplace and offer me a deal that I am willing to take. At least, I have the GOD GIVEN RIGHT to say no. The FREEdom to say no.

Will you be free to say no, under gov't restricted national care? Yeah, that's much, much better than that evil 'free' market.

Gov't? It's full of people with schemes on how to get rich off the backs of you. Only, they don't really want to have to compete for your part of the bargain. They'd rather you sell it to them, in advance. It's much easier - for THEM - that way. Come hither Esau, a meal is ready for you. It'll only cost you your birthright.

Uncle Daddy is looking out for you.

~faith,
Timothy.