After posting the piece about Nurses traveling to Germany and reading the feedback. I would like to open up a debate on this BB about "Universal Health Care" or "Single Payor Systems"
In doing this I hope to learn more about each side of the issue. I do not want to turn this into a heated horrific debate that ends in belittling one another as some other charged topics have ended, but a genuine debate about the Pros and Cons of proposed "Universal Health Care or Single Payor systems" I believe we can all agree to debate and we can all learn things we might not otherwise have the time to research.
I am going to begin by placing an article that discusses the cons of Universal Health Care with some statistics, and if anyone is willing please come in and try to debate some of the key points this brings up. With stats not hyped up words or hot air. I am truly interested in seeing the different sides of this issue. This effects us all, and in order to make an informed decision we need to see "all" sides of the issue. Thanks in advance for participating.
Michele
I am going to have to post the article in several pieces because the bulletin board only will allow 3000 characters.So see the next posts.
Personally I am COMPLETELY against universal healthcare.
I have heard this analogy (and liked it) to explain why one might not agree with the possibility of Universal Healthcare...
"Do you remember the last time you were at the DMV? Do you want your doctor's office appointment or hospital stay to be similar? I think not."
You can also compare it with the ruins which are called the Public School system, as well.
I don't want healthcare to be similar to either of those gov't run systems!
There were plenty of times that I spent sitting in the waiting room of my doctors office for way longer than I had to wait when at the DMV, plus to add insult to injury I was a paying with private health insurance. I worked with a nurse who's husband was a doctor, she was so happy that they could start construction on a even bigger,better house, a mansion really. I asked her what changed , how is it that this is now possible, after months of complaining and whining to fellow nurses about this, she replied, " oh, my husband finally agreed to take more patients on and he assured me we can now afford it". How many have waited LONG times in waiting rooms and had a 5 minute (if they were lucky) consultation with the doc? It is well known that docs take on more patients than they can handle to make some bucks, this trickles down to quality of care issues to the payng customer with private insurance, no you do not get what you pay for, at least not in healthcare.
As far as the public school system goes, in the part of WI that I live in , in the county I live, my grandchildren go to the BEST school system in the state ,as far as scholastic achievement, out ranks even private schools. The public school systems in the large urban areas are failing due to many causes, the worst one being societal. The children that attend these schools have HUGE obsticals to overcome. This brings the overall ratings of these schools down, it is NOT that these schools are not run properly, there are MANY issues in urban areas, poverty being one that prohibits these children from success, unlike the lucky ones in suburban areas. We may say that this is the direct fault of the poor in the ghettos, they should pull themselves up by their bootstraps, but what if they have no boots?
HMOs are a concept of 'universal care' writ small. The point is to collect all avenues of care under one unbrella that could then implement cost controls, thereby 'shaping' the access of care and containing costs.
If you've ever complained about, or heard the massive complaints about the concept of HMOs, then you haven't seen anything yet if universal healthcare comes under a government model.
HMOs at least must still compete for business.
Now, imagine the concept of a single, nationwide HMO that combines the worst elements of competitive HMOs and implements them in an anti-competitive monopoly that has no motivation whatsoever to respond to the complaints of its users.
Oh sure, we can bug the politicians. That's a nice sentiment, but since they are neither directly in control, nor will healthcare be nearly the only issue on a politician's resume, slick politicians will sidestep responsibility, or worse, proclaim themselves to be the world's best healthcare advocate with promises that don't outlast their first winter in office. Money and influence means that incumbents are re-elected over 90% of the time. Think this last election was a sea-change? About 90% of politicians were returned to office.
At the local access level, where the REAL government overseers of healthcare are entrenched and not responsible to those they serve, complaints will not carry any real force of effect: where else are you gonna go? In reality, even well meaning government overseers will just be unable to address complaints as they will be bound by the very price and access controls necessary to ration the system.
Universal healthcare is HMO writ not just large, but uncompassionately, above reproach, large.
This nation is not ready to go down this road. In fact, in order to be responsive to consumers, HMOs have had to scale back on their worst 'price controls', and many consumers have completely eschewed the HMO model. The gov't of course, with a monopoly, will have no such motivation to cater to their consumers.
In fact, most likely, government providers of healthcare will likely view any complaints as ungrateful harping about their utopian free services. After all, YOU should be grateful that we are rationing care for you.
Hillary was useful for one major political reality. In her overreach, she turned this issue into another 'third rail of American politics'.
"The problem with providing universal health care, as Hillary Clinton found out more than a decade ago, is not morality but practicality.
The goals-- universal coverage, consumer choice and cost control - are to an uncomfortable degree mutually exclusive. In other words, to cover everyone, costs have to rise and/or patients' medical options must be limited, agree most who have studied the issue."
The last few times I've dealt with the DMV, it went very smoothly. I'll admit I've had poor experiences as well, but not any worse than with my health insurance company! A claim has to processed by three different offices before they reject a claim, 3 months later I get billed, and then I spend several hours on the phone figuring out why it was rejected (dr's office mistake) and how to fix it. Not particularly efficient, this here non-government health insurance. This doesn't happen every time, thank goodness! Could I choose a different health insurance? Sure, if I change jobs or buy my own, I could. But I put up with the hassle because it saves me money. Besides, from what I hear, this type of hassle is endemic across insurers, so just how much choice do I really have in that respect?
In a universal care scenario, you could choose to pay more for better, more efficient care. And yes, your taxes would be paying for a service you chose to opt out of. But if you came upon hard times and had no financial resources, you wouldn't be deciding whether or not that cough or infection was worth paying $80 out of pocket to see a doctor and whether or not you could buy the $150 prescription to treat it. You wouldn't be "penalized" for earning "too much" (eg $1000/mo) to qualify for low cost services.
As always, the question is how low is low enough in terms of affordability. For some, any price is too high. But there's also the question of what we can afford as a society. Resources are finite and not everyone will always get what they need, whether because they can't afford it personally or because the national health plan can't afford to cover everything without being too big a drain on taxpayers and on the nation as a whole.
It is so interesting to look at issues from different frameworks and ideologies... now if only life were so black and white!!
Let's see... public schools are failing... ah ha! see how bad public programs are?!
Some think the privately-run health care system is failing... well, that's only because of socialist interference of programs like Medicare. Get rid of all government-administration and it'd be just fine!
Other side... privately administered health care has worked for years, now it's failiing... Ah ha! We need a publicly administered program to make it work better
Some people think public schools are failing... well, that's because of the poor circumstances of some areas such as inner cities; if we had more social services for those people, the schools would be just fine!
Other side... privately administered health care has worked for years, now it's failiing... Ah ha! We need a publicly administered program to make it work better
Some people think public schools are failing... well, that's because of the poor circumstances of some areas such as inner cities; if we had more social services for those people, the schools would be just fine!
This may come as a surprise to the readers of my posts, but I do not advocate more social programs for the poor, I mentioned the public school system in urban areas are failing due to sociatal issues far greater than being poor, although being poor makes EVERYTHING that much harder. ,but not impossible. My own daughter is now a practising attorney, all her education was paid for with some grants and mostly student loans.There are PLENTY of good social programs in place already, but I do think that a decent minimum wage will help .I am greatful for the excellent programs our government does provide for us, some are better than others, but we are an intelligent people and can come up with a solution to the healthcare issue.
I wasn't specifically addressing anyone's comments - just giving possible examples of looking at the same problems through different ideologic lens. : )
I also have spent less time in the DMV office than I have in most doctor's offices. I waited 3 hours once because I was forgotten and the doctor was double booked. Must say I was never forgotten at the DMV.
As far as a public school eduaction, I'm proud to say that I have one. Paid for by everyone's tax dollars. I also attended college on grants, scholarships and loans also paid for by tax dollars. I know that the roads that I drive on are supported by tax dollars. Whenever I visit a National Park, Monument, or Recreationa Area, guess what, tax dollar supported. I have also been on disability also paid for by tax dollars. Sadly, I still see people who are on disability who would rather be working and paying those tax dollars. However, if they go off of disability, then they lose their healthcare. It is a very frightening choice--I know that because I made that decision. I don't regret it until it comes time to get the medical care that I need in order to keep making those tax dollars.
There's one truth for all social "entitlement" programs. You have to have more people pulling the wagon, than riding. So, who's pulling, and who's riding?
"The problem with providing universal health care, as Hillary Clinton found out more than a decade ago, is not morality but practicality.
The goals-- universal coverage, consumer choice and cost control - are to an uncomfortable degree mutually exclusive. In other words, to cover everyone, costs have to rise and/or patients' medical options must be limited, agree most who have studied the issue."
I am not a Hillary fan , nor would I think I would ever be agreeing with her but what you have described here is exactly what is happening in private insurance Companies. Health care premiums are sky rocketing. We have insurance portablility but who can afford COBRA? AND STILL THE CARE IS BEING LIMITED AND OR DENIED. Federal and state governments as well as each employed individual is throwing money at the health care industry and the ones making and keeping the money is insurance companies, hospital ceo's and doctors and still people do not get the treatment they need.
Lets face it everything has been done to save the current system DRG's was a desperate attempt but ways were made around that so that they have proven ineffective. We need to make our current system a DNR and give birth to something more viable for everyone.
Specializes in burn, geriatric, rehab, wound care, ER.
this just in..........
Walmart has joined the Universal Healthcare Movement! They have teamed up with other big businesses and union leaders with the goal of affordable, accessible, quality healthcare for all Americans by 2012. Its starting to happen ladies and gentlemen!:monkeydance:
.thumb.gif.041bac93584716f6dc9882dcd8cf500a.gif){kind=small}
RNinJune2007, RN
214 Posts
Personally I am COMPLETELY against universal healthcare.
I have heard this analogy (and liked it) to explain why one might not agree with the possibility of Universal Healthcare...
"Do you remember the last time you were at the DMV? Do you want your doctor's office appointment or hospital stay to be similar? I think not."
You can also compare it with the ruins which are called the Public School system, as well.
I don't want healthcare to be similar to either of those gov't run systems!