[MBANurse]

Yes... I know the bleeding hearts are going to start tugging the heart strings and say "Oh the children... Oh the elderly... Oh Humanity."

But why should we change our system from one of a private market and capitalism to one where the government grows; taxes increase and red tape abounds?

I've seen the stats and charts that viking posts over and over and over. I have seen that the UK and Canada... and "every other first world nation" provides universal healthcare. "And they spend less on healthcare..."

Did you know that the UK has a 10% income tax on income as low as $5 K a year? and a 40% tax on income of 66K a year? That doesn't include sales tax; property taxes; excise taxes and everything else that is taxed to hell and back.
What are the things that are different with their healthcare system? How do they do it so cheaply for everyone?
I have to actually research that; and I will; and then get back to you.


I keep hearing and reading that the actual costs of medical care are going to drop. I fail to understand this; really.


Oh, I understand that is cheaper to prevent a disease with a visit to a doctor's office than to treat one in the emergency room.

I understand that if we ACTUALLY work on prevention then healthcare costs may go down.

But I wonder... who accesses care now? Generally; only the folks that really need it.

What happens when no one has to "pay" to see a doctor. Every runny nose; cough and sniffle will be seeking treatment. You think that is difficult to get in to see a doctor now?... Holy cow.

the Emergency Room will still be utilized as a Primary Care clinic because of the inabiltiy of individuals to get appointments...so there goes those "savings."


And if you think that there will be an improvement in the number of drugs and treatments that are available as opposed to those under private insurance companies... you are sadly mistaken.

Big Brother willl appear to alturistic and people will smile and laugh and make merry... until they realize all the things that will not be covered.

Only one way to ensure that 350 million people get health care all the time... control costs. How do you control costs? Pay for as little as possible.

Diabetic? Having problems managing... doctor wants a HgBA1C a couple or three of months in a row... and then one in 3 and 6 month intervals to see how your NPH coverage is working for you.. sorry only 2 per year.

Chemo... costs to much. Radiation? Why you may get radiation poisoning?

Surgery... sure we will cover that; just not the anethesia.


Then; on top of that; how many providers of care are going to stick around and take 10-15 bucks for the same visit that they were previously getting 85-100 bucks for?

And I keep hearing that the providers will not be government employees; that means that there will still be medical groups and such. They will still want to make a profit or they will leave the business...
They will save money as well by cutting costs... how do you cut costs?
first and biggest costs savings is getting rid of labor... by and large. Don't believe me? Ask all the Ford, GM, IBM, and Mortgage employees that were let go when companies failed to meet the bottom line?
or They can refuse to accept the government contracts and accept private insurance only... happens all the time already.

I personally need knee surgery; not to keep my leg from falling off; not to make it so I can walk; because I can; Hell; not even to let me run... because I can do that too. I need knee surgery to alleviate pain from all my years in the Army. How far down the waiting list do you think that my surgery will be? As it is now; all I need to do is schedule an appointment with the ortho/sports med guy.. pay my 150 hospital co-pay and voila... I ll have my knee fixed within 2 weeks from when I make the appointment.
I would estimate that I would be lucky under government healthcare to get it done in less than 3 years.

Indefinate life support... nope... commitees will have to be formed to decide how soon.. (not if) to pull the plug. Prostate Cancer... why try chemo and wait and see... when its really cheaper in the long run and just do a radical prostatectomy... get that tumor quick and no more cancer for you!...

I am sorry Uncle Sam may in fact be our "rich uncle" but when he has to spread it around 350 million or so of our cousins... we aren't going to get much; at all.


So, no thanks. No government healthcare for me please. I'd rather have more take home pay for me and my family. I'd rather have the choice of all the doctors out there... not just the ones that will work cheaply enough to accept medicare.
I'd rather not have to wait for the medical treatments that I need or want.

And to be quite honest... I am sick to death of my tax dollars paying for well; anyone else. Yes, I am a selfish jerk. And no, I really don't care. I provide for my family with my work; I juggled work and family and school to get myself in my position. I enlisted in the Army to get a trade and the GI Bill; and then used those to get college and my MBA. I give to charity. The charities of my choice. If I want to give money or food to the homeless on the street; should be my choice. I tell you I know I do not want to give money to women and men who have 10 kids from 6 different people cause they don't know how to keep it in their pants or what a condom is. Government should not be the biggest charity that there is. We no longer teach accountability and responsibilty in this country. Nope.. we teach entitlement. And that sucks. This would be just one more in the line of handouts and entitlements.

Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness.

Pursuit does not mean you will neccesarily get it. People need to keep that in mind. And, btw, life is never fair, and it never will be.

[HM2Viking]

Have you used Tricare for you and your family? When I was AGR I used it. I thought it was a fine program.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a large group system for health care. 25% of our health care dollars are going to profit and not patient care. I am just pragmatic. I want a health care system that is efficient and provides high quality care for all people not just those fortunate enough to have jobs with benefits.

Poor access to care is inexcusable in the US. We have greater access problems than our peers in the English speaking countries.



We have problems with waiting that are in general worse than our peers:




We rank 6/6 on efficiency and overall quality:



Spend far more for worse outcomes:



Most of us view health insurance and access to health care as a shared responsibility:



We need to flatten the curve of health care inflation.



The real proposals are not true single payer systems rather they are a combination of approaches to assure that everyone is "in the system."



We can do health care better and cheaper:

My challenge has been and remains for anyone to demonstrate with research driven and academically supported data that a consumer driven health care system for the US could deliver equal health outcomes to those achieved by the UK, France, Canada, NZ or AUS. The evidence says that the single payer systems do a better job.

Paul Krugman (in writing about the subprime mess) makes a point that I think applies equally to this discussion:


Quote:
At a deep level, I believe that the problem was ideological: Policy makers, committed to the view that the market is always right, simply ignored the warning signs.
source: http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/12/.../edkrugman.php

Source: http://allnurses.com/forums/f287/che...ml#post2537646

We already pay the highest health care taxes in the world see:

Taxes already pay for more than 60 percent of US health spending

Americans pay the highest health care taxes in the world. We pay for national health insurance, but don’t get it.
(Woolhandler, et al. “Paying for National Health Insurance — And Not Getting It,” Health Affairs 21(4); July / Aug. 2002)

[MBANurse]

So the fact that a profit is made is what bothers you then?

What about the profits made by landlords, banks, grocery stores, farmers, car manufacturers, etc?

Should the government provide for that as well to eliminate profit and reduce the costs to Americans?

[Freedom42]

[quote=MBANurse;2567654]Yes... I know the bleeding hearts are going to start tugging the heart strings and say "Oh the children... Oh the elderly... Oh Humanity."

But why should we change our system from one of a private market and capitalism to one where the government grows; taxes increase and red tape abounds?]

I’ll spare you the bleeding heart chorus in favor of the bottom line: Oh, the cash, the cash we would save if we simply expanded the socialized medicine that has already been in place in this country since 1965.

Yes, since 1965. You do include Medicare when you refer to socialized medicine, don’t you? Because that’s what it is. Of course, it doesn’t immediately come to mind when the subject of single-payer health care comes up. That’s probably because Medicare’s got a relatively low profile compared to the big insurance companies that spend millions – millions from our premiums – to market themselves. Just think: health care money actually spent on health care. Is Medicare perfect? No. But it works well, and I don’t hear any rallying cries to dismantle that socialized medicine program.

You say that you fail to understand that medical costs would drop under an expanded government health care system. As noted, private insurers shovel millions into marketing. Then there are the administrative costs – the thousands of people employed simply to process the individual forms of hundreds of individual insurance companies. Can you imagine the money that would be saved if we didn’t have to pay for all that marketing and paperwork? And how much money would we save if, as the Times has reported, 20 cents of every health care dollar wasn’t going to pay for lobbyists?

We’d also save money if the system shifted its emphasis from prevention instead of high-tech interventions. Who accesses care now? Generally, according to you, only the people who “really need it.” The 47 million Americans who lacked health coverage in 2005 – among them some 8 million children – might beg to differ. Would it take longer to see a doctor? Probably. What’s your contention? That 47 million people shouldn’t get health care because it would mean a longer wait for you? Life, liberty and pursuit of happiness – as long as you can afford it?

This isn’t about government being, as you put it, “the biggest charity there is.” This is about overturning a system that is supposed to meet our most basic needs but fails to do so because it’s not profitable. You’re sick of paying for other people? I’m sick of paying for lobbyists, CEOs, and dividends.

That brings us back to the bottom line: “How do you cut costs? First and biggest costs savings is getting rid of labor,” you write. “Don't believe me? Ask all the Ford, GM, IBM, and Mortgage employees that were let go when companies failed to meet the bottom line.” Indeed, just two years ago GM said that health care alone added $1,500 to the cost of each and every one of its cars. That’s why GM’s CEO had a White House meeting to press for single-payer health care. Toyota played it differently: It opted to build a plant in Ontario instead of Alabama, which offered tens of millions in incentives to lure those lucrative jobs there. Why? Because Ontario already provided government health care for all of its citizens. The United States is behind all other major nations on this issue. Don’t you think it’s time to level the playing field for American businesses?

Princeton economist Paul Krugman has estimated that shifting to a single-payer system in the United States would save more than $300 million per year – and that’s if Medicare were expanded to cover all of those who currently go without. Frankly, I like the idea of paying less, and that’s as good an argument as any for supporting single-payer for all, not just those who are already covered by Medicare.

[MBANurse]

I think I caught some of your points in there.

you stated the 8 million children without insurance....

tou talked about those that could afford it....

bottom line for me?

I provide for me and mine why can't the rest of the country do the same for themselves.

[BBFRN]

Originally Posted by MBANurse

I provide for me and mine why can't the rest of the country do the same for themselves.

If you truly, truly feel this way, then why have insurance at all? Someone who has higher health care costs in your insurance pool is benefiting from your good health, because you may be paying more into your insurance than you're costing. You are already providing funding for someone whose cost is higher than yours by having insurance in the first place.

For someone who has MBA in their moniker, you do seem to come from a mostly emotional place when this topic is discussed.

[MBANurse]

Originally Posted by Baptized_By_Fire

If you truly, truly feel this way, then why have insurance at all? Someone who has higher health care costs in your insurance pool is benefiting from your good health, because you may be paying more into your insurance than you're costing. You are already providing funding for someone whose cost is higher than yours by having insurance in the first place.

For someone who has MBA in their moniker, you do seem to come from a mostly emotional place when this topic is discussed.

Be honest with yourself...

I could posts stats and links that would project costs and provide analysis and it would not matter one iota. There are individuals here merely think that there should not be haves and have nots. They want to redistribute the wealth of others so that we all "carry our fair share" of the burden.

To me; this is just one more thing that will foster the mentality that "I am entitlted" to all the needs and wants. That is simply not the case.

This is one more thing that will burden the middle class; take money away from me and my kids and allow someone who has not worked their tail off the way that I have to reap the same benefits.

Alot smarter people than I think this is a horrible idea. I agree with them.

[Freedom42]

[quote=MBANurse;2569327]Be honest with yourself...

I could posts stats and links that would project costs and provide analysis and it would not matter one iota. There are individuals here merely think that there should not be haves and have nots. They want to redistribute the wealth of others so that we all "carry our fair share" of the burden.]

MBANurse, why don't you take your own challenge? Post some stats and links -- attributed to sources -- to bolster your argument. Give us something to think about.

This isn't necessarily about haves and have nots. Some of us would like to pay less for insurance coverage. That other people would gain coverage as our own costs go down is icing on the cake for many.

I am eager to hear your defense of the current system. But your contention that you don't want to be burdened with extra costs is a non sequitur. So is your contention that this would burden the middle class, since it's the middle class that's being priced out of the insurance markets.

Surely the folks you rely on to shape your opinion of single payer have come up with some arguments that you find compelling. What are they? Why should we continue to rely on for-profit businesses for health care?

[HM2Viking]

My challenge has been and remains for anyone to demonstrate with research driven and academically supported data that a consumer driven health care system for the US could deliver equal health outcomes to those achieved by the UK, France, Canada, NZ or AUS. The evidence says that the single payer systems do a better job.

This question continus to remain unanswered......

[ingelein]

I found a website run by businessmen advocating for a single payer healthcare system, very interesting.
Business Coalition for Single Payer Healthcare
http://www.businesscoalition.net/index.htm