Impeding changes to our Health Care system

[classicman]

Obama: It's OK to borrow to pay for health care
Obama-proposed budget rules allow deficits to swell to pay for health care plan

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama on Tuesday proposed budget rules that would allow Congress to borrow tens of billions of dollars and put the nation deeper in debt to jump-start the administration's emerging health care overhaul.

The "pay-as-you-go" budget formula plan is significantly weaker than a proposal Obama issued with little fanfare last month.

It would carve out about $2.5 trillion worth of exemptions for Obama's priorities over the next decade. His health care reform plan also would get a green light to run big deficits in its early years.

But over a decade, Congress would have to come up with money to cover those early year deficits.

From where? I think thats something we should know beforehand.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by classicman

Yes I do. Do you equate the two somehow?

I do think there are parallels. If you cause a wreck, it would be unjust for the other guy's car to go unrepaired. The car has to get repaired, it's just a question of who is going to pay for it. If you come down with a severe disease or injury, it would be unjust to simply let you die when we have the knowledge to save you. Again, the doctors are going to treat you, it's just a question of who is going to pay for it.

Now, I'd be all for limitations on that sort of thing--like, if you were only required to carry very-high-deductible catastrophic medical coverage. Cover the big things, save your life, but that's about it. That would seem to me to be pretty similar to the idea that you are only required to carry a minimum of liability coverage on your car, even though more insurance coverage is certainly available.

[classicman]

I see your point.

[TheMercenary]

All I can say is that you all are about to be butt fucked and you have no idea it is coming. Some will win, some will lose. But in the end you will get what you asked for and only time will tell exactly what that will be.

[classicman]

Very inspirational merc. Thanks.

[DanaC]

If some will win and some will lose, then how are all about to be buttfucked? Surely those who are going to 'win' won't be?

Also... some are doing fine under the current system and some are left behind. So surely some are currently being buttfucked by the system who may be a little less buttsore under the new?

[TheMercenary]

Dana, IMHO when it comes to HC in the US the Americans want their choices, I suspect we will be losing a lot of personal control over what we currently get out of the system. In some cases that can be good, in some cases it could be bad. I see the potential to do some really good stuff. The question is will they do it. And more importantly, can they do it. The various factions who have a finger in the economic pie are large and wide, and in most cases very rich and powerful with deep pockets. Given our history of reform in this country it will take nothing short of a governmental take over of the whole system to enact real change. And that is where the chips will begin to fall. Because I have seen very few examples of where the gov dove in with both feet and the system did not come out being further bloated, inefficient, and less user friendly to those it set out to help. There are so many variables. And currently we have nothing more than Obama admins "floating" ideas to the press and gauging the reactions. There have not been any concrete plans that people can sink their teeth into. That leaves all the real experts, and talking heads on TV, to speculate. And then don't forget all of this will have to make it through congress, who may or may not rubberstamp what ever they come up with. It's is just a big mess. I could go on but....

[DanaC]

*nods* fair points.

[TheMercenary]

IMHO it will take nothing short of a complete take over of the system to start with a new clean slate. Without that, and I suspect, the political darlings of the Demoncratic party will come out smelling like a rose, and that is the Insurance Industry. Everyone else, including patients, will be taking it in the shorts.

[classicman]

Major changes are coming to the health care industry in the US - Fact.
Governmental intervention is inevitable - Fact.
Inefficiency, cost INCREASES and rationing of care/supplies is sure to follow. That is what happens with every gov't controlled ... anything. Name one thing the Gov't "controls" that isn't.

I would be much more in favor of the administration rectifying the problems with Medicare and medicaid FIRST.
Who Does Medicare Cover?

Medicare is a Federal health insurance program for people 65 years or older, certain people with disabilities, and people with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Medicare has two parts -- Part A, which is hospital insurance, and Part B, which is medical insurance.
Source: www.qualityplusmedical.com
Medicare is Australia’s equivalent of the National Health Service. Australia operates a reciprocal health agreement with the UK where you must enroll in Medicare to get free public hospital treatment. New Zealand operates a similar scheme. If you require medical treatment in Australia or New Zealand, you must register for treatment with Medicare or the equivalent scheme in New Zealand. If you do not, we may reject your claim or reduce the amount we pay to you.
Source: 65plus.acetravelinsurance.com
Medicare is Australia's public health system. It covers all Australian citizens and permanent residents.
Source: www.hba.com.au

Who Does Medicaid Cover?

To qualify for Medicaid, individuals must meet financial criteria and also belong to one of the groups that are “categorically eligible” for the program: children, parents of dependent children, pregnant women, people with disabilities, and the elderly. Federal law guarantees eligibility for individuals in these groups who fall below specified income levels. States also have broad authority to expand Medicaid income eligibility beyond federal minimum standards. However, unless they have a federal waiver, states cannot receive federal matching funds to cover childless adults, no matter how poor they are. Many states have expanded Medicaid, but eligibility varies widely by state.
Source: www.kff.org/medicaid/upload/7235-02.pdf

Given the current situation, wouldn't it make more sense to revise/overhaul/modify the programs that we already put in place. Instead of creating an entirely new program? It would seem more prudent to fix what is wrong instead.

[glatt]

Can anyone agree on what is wrong?

[classicman]

I dunno, seems like the option of fixing the programs that are already in place isn't even on the table. Seems like the D's just want to create some new shiny healthcare program.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by glatt

Can anyone agree on what is wrong?

It really depends on whom you talk with.

The among the few things that is agreed on by healthcare providers is that we have to figure out a way to cover the uninsured, we have to figure out a way to cover the costs of catastrophic care that does not place the burden on the insured, and we have to find a way to stem the tide of ever decreasing reimbursements for care that does not cover costs. Actually the providers list is much different than one that the end user or hospital administrator would make.

We don't have enough preventative care.
Insurance companies have gotten between providers and patients.
Trauma care is breaking some hospitals.
Insurance companies will not let the system provide cheaper care to patients.

God the list is just to long.

[classicman]

I guess the short answer is "no" then.

[glatt]

I tend to look at the insurance companies when I'm looking at the problems with healthcare. They provide a service of redistributing money, but they skim a hell of a lot of that money off for themselves. I don't think they are worth what we pay to have them as part of the system.

In other words, if I look at what my employer and I have paid into the system compared to what I've received in return, it's orders of magnitude off. Granted, I'm young, and haven't needed a lot of medical attention, but we did have two births in my household, and those costs were high.

I'd love to see a simple pie chart of what the total costs of health care in this country are, and where that money goes. How much of each dollar spent on health care goes to the running of the insurance companies, how much goes to cover the ER visits of the uninsured, how much goes to the administration of the hospital or dr. office, how much goes to supplies, how much goes to doctors, lab work, medication? Then I'd like to see another pie chart that shows how much of that funding comes from insurance premiums, how much from out of pocket, how much from the government?

I do know that this country pays a lot for its health care, and I don't think it gets its money's worth.