Please explain something to me...

[mattpegher]

Ideal universal healthcare:

1. Cover every citizen, ( what about illegals)
2. Incentive to seek preventative care yet discourage overuse. (beleive it or not some women on medicaid come in to ED claiming abdomenal pain only to get a pregnancy test, a $10 OTC)
3. Decrease administrative costs. (an industry that employs tens of thousands of people)
4. Still encourages the brightest minds to seek a career in medicine. (I love my plumber but I wouldn't give him a scalpel.)
5. Allows for tiers of coverage, if I can afford the better drug/test/proceedure, I want it.
6. Encourages research by pharmaceutical/medtech firms
7. Eliminates the inflated prices caused by unreembursed care.
8. Places all medical decision in the hands of medical professionals who have no incentive to deny care.
9. Decreases the increase cost of care created by a malpractice system that is out of control.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Rain, as a country we spend $2 trillion a year on healthcare.

Today our national budget is $2.9 trillion.

Now the government already pays a little less than %50 of all healthcare costs in this country, or about $1 trillion a year.
Now if we turn the whole system over to Washington we will have to come up with another $1 trillion a year in revenue to cover additional expenses.

So our national budget goes from $2.9 trillion to $3.9 trillion. A 33% increase, which would require a 33% increase in taxes to cover this additional cost.

Now we could see a reduction in overall spending in healthcare long term. But I am highly skeptical that this will happen. More likely we will see people who don?t see the doctor now for minor illnesses flooding the system every time they have a bad cold.

How much money goes to HMO's?

I'm not sure about Universal Health Care but I do know we have to fix the system that puts profits ahead of their patients/clients which is exactly what HMO's do!

 

[mattpegher]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Rain, as a country we spend $2 trillion a year on healthcare.

Today our national budget is $2.9 trillion.

Now the government already pays a little less than %50 of all healthcare costs in this country, or about $1 trillion a year.
Now if we turn the whole system over to Washington we will have to come up with another $1 trillion a year in revenue to cover additional expenses.

So our national budget goes from $2.9 trillion to $3.9 trillion. A 33% increase, which would require a 33% increase in taxes to cover this additional cost.

Now we could see a reduction in overall spending in healthcare long term. But I am highly skeptical that this will happen. More likely we will see people who don?t see the doctor now for minor illnesses flooding the system every time they have a bad cold.

How much money goes to HMO's?

I'm not sure about Universal Health Care but I do know we have to fix the system that puts profits ahead of their patients/clients which is exactly what HMO's do!

I thoroughly agree. Insurance company profits need to be capped, and that includes CEO salaries. But how do we do this and still keep companies offering insurance products. New Jersey had some rules in place but it drove a great deal of providers out of state.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: mattpegher

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Rain, as a country we spend $2 trillion a year on healthcare.

Today our national budget is $2.9 trillion.

Now the government already pays a little less than %50 of all healthcare costs in this country, or about $1 trillion a year.
Now if we turn the whole system over to Washington we will have to come up with another $1 trillion a year in revenue to cover additional expenses.

So our national budget goes from $2.9 trillion to $3.9 trillion. A 33% increase, which would require a 33% increase in taxes to cover this additional cost.

Now we could see a reduction in overall spending in healthcare long term. But I am highly skeptical that this will happen. More likely we will see people who don?t see the doctor now for minor illnesses flooding the system every time they have a bad cold.

How much money goes to HMO's?

I'm not sure about Universal Health Care but I do know we have to fix the system that puts profits ahead of their patients/clients which is exactly what HMO's do!

I thoroughly agree. Insurance company profits need to be capped, and that includes CEO salaries. But how do we do this and still keep companies offering insurance products. New Jersey had some rules in place but it drove a great deal of providers out of state.

That is because they had the opportunity to move elsewhere. I don't think they will leave the US.

What we could use is a frank analysis of what a given standard of health care costs to provide before we commit to one. Then we could have an intelligent debate instead of being hampered by lack of data.

 

[mattpegher]

Unfortunately, getting accurate profit margin data out of insurance carriers has always been difficult. These companies are now some of the most powerfull corporations the US has ever seen, and these giants own politicians left and right.

 

[Sinsear]

So in effect, while "healthcare for everyone" is a great humanitarian idea, there is really no streamlined plan to put it in place is there? I havn't seen our lead candidates plans for implementation either, just them spouting off "universal healthcare" at every opportune moment. This is not something that can happen overnight. And I can't imagine doctors wanting to take pay cuts or standard of living reductions.

 

[mattpegher]

Although some may think that doctors make huge amounts, I assure you that the vast majority of health care dollars do not go into physicians pockets. The average physician visit last about 15 minutes and cost about $88. The insurance company plus the patients copays usually are discounted to about $60. That is about $200-$300 per hour. Now to pay a nurse, a receptionist , an office manager and a biller/coder usually uses up about $80-100 per hour. Add to this the per hour cost of utilities and rent. Then the equipment usage. Now were between 100-200 per hour. Malpractice insurance run between $10-50 per hour depending on the specialty. Considering that the average doctor comes out of medical school $200,000 in debt and needs to pay about $1000 per month over 30 years to pay that back.

Now that is for primary care, and some specialist make more. And remember that if you go to the ER you have to pay for the care that others recieve.

Oh an by the way medicaid (our current subsidized health care) pays $6 for that $80 visit.

Alternately, a urine culture can cost between $200-400, Routine bloodwork in the ER is about $100-200, and a chest xray cost $350. A strong antibiotic cost about $120. And a month of relatively new blood pressure meds about $150.

In my area plumbers usually charge $100-150/hour plus materials.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Rain, as a country we spend $2 trillion a year on healthcare.

Today our national budget is $2.9 trillion.

Now the government already pays a little less than %50 of all healthcare costs in this country, or about $1 trillion a year.
Now if we turn the whole system over to Washington we will have to come up with another $1 trillion a year in revenue to cover additional expenses.

So our national budget goes from $2.9 trillion to $3.9 trillion. A 33% increase, which would require a 33% increase in taxes to cover this additional cost.

Now we could see a reduction in overall spending in healthcare long term. But I am highly skeptical that this will happen. More likely we will see people who don?t see the doctor now for minor illnesses flooding the system every time they have a bad cold.

Yes, I understand what you're saying, but you seem to have this conservative idea that paying money to taxes is somehow much worse than paying it some other way. Taxes would go up if the government covered everything, but what we pay RIGHT NOW for medical care would go down by a similar amount. The net effect is zero from our point of view, it's just who we give that big pile of "medical" money to. The only increased cost would be to pay for the folks who DON'T have coverage now, but that's actually still a cost of current health care since a lot of the uninsured wait until they get so sick they have to visit the emergency room.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Rain, as a country we spend $2 trillion a year on healthcare.

Today our national budget is $2.9 trillion.

Now the government already pays a little less than %50 of all healthcare costs in this country, or about $1 trillion a year.
Now if we turn the whole system over to Washington we will have to come up with another $1 trillion a year in revenue to cover additional expenses.

So our national budget goes from $2.9 trillion to $3.9 trillion. A 33% increase, which would require a 33% increase in taxes to cover this additional cost.

Now we could see a reduction in overall spending in healthcare long term. But I am highly skeptical that this will happen. More likely we will see people who don?t see the doctor now for minor illnesses flooding the system every time they have a bad cold.

You completely ignore the costs relating to elimination of duplication of Management and the Profit now taken from Private providers.

And you ignore the costs of 300 million people running to the doctors every time they have a runny nose.
The truth is that we don't know if costs will go down. We believe they will because every country with universal healthcare spends less per person than we do. But none of them are any where near as large as us.

BTW if we did see a drop in healthcare spending from 15% of GDP to 10% of GDP it would still require about $300 billion a year in additionally federal spending, or about a 10% increase over what we spend now. I am guessing that it would take 5-10 years before we saw these savings, which means we would either blow a hole in the budget, or increase taxes to cover the increased government spending during this time.

I thought we wanted people to go to the doctor more. That way, serious illnesses will be caught early, and people won't go to the emergency room and waste even more taxpayer money.

 

[AnitaPeterson]

WTF? some of you people have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

In Canada, for instance, each citizen has a health card. You go to the doctor, they ask for your health card. You don't have it, you pay for the visit.

How does this encourage illegal immigration?

And instead of spending trillions on the war in Iraq, why not invest in universal healthcare?

 

[Pliablemoose]

It's a mess, I agree with Haybusarider & PJ, it just won't work with the current mindset of the US health care consumer.

I paid $718.98 in Fed income tax out of my last paycheck with 6 deductions, my private health insurance cost $63.47.

After working for the VA health system & seeing how our taxes are spent I would be reluctant to jump on board a national system.

Frankly, I'd get everything I want because I have friends in the industry and after the decades of experience with the VA I know how to push buttons & raise hell to get what I feel is appropriate health care.

If we were to go to a national system, my costs would be a minimum of 3X what I currently pay I suspect.

I'd like to see the opposite happen, I'd like to see something like the VA system shut down, and the vets issued insurance cards to be used in private sector hospitals, and the "research" funds the VA currently gets go directly to medical schools.

I recently saw some stats from my hospital system's financial data that said for every dollar we bill we get:

60 cents from insured patients
30 cents from Medicare & Medicaid patients
less than 1 cent from uninsured patients.

They also mentioned if the % of uninsured patients rose by 1% it would seriously screw with our bottom line.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
WTF? some of you people have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

In Canada, for instance, each citizen has a health card. You go to the doctor, they ask for your health card. You don't have it, you pay for the visit.

How does this encourage illegal immigration?

And instead of spending trillions on the war in Iraq, why not invest in universal healthcare?

Anita, we're already mortgaged to the hilt over the war, it's a spilled milk argument now...

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson

How does this encourage illegal immigration?

Look at the public schools. The same thing will happen to health care.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson

How does this encourage illegal immigration?

Look at the public schools. The same thing will happen to health care.

Canada has universal health care, I bet millions of people are rushing there now.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
And in case you are unaware the US government already spends more per person on healthcare than Canada does with its national healthcare system. Even more amazing is that our government spends a larger portion of its budget on healthcare that most of the countries that have ?universal healthcare.?

So, what you're saying is, we are already paying for universal health care through our taxes on top of our own private insurance coverage and/or medical costs.

 

[IronWing]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

I paid $718.98 in Fed income tax out of my last paycheck with 6 deductions, my private health insurance cost $63.47.

How much did your employer contribute to your health plan?

For 2006, between my contributions and my employer's contributions, the annual premium for my family's health insurance was $11,104.74. My employer belongs to a very large insured group so the premiums are probably at or below market average.

 

[ProfJohn]

Every time the government comes up with some grand plan to solve a problem all we end up with is different problems.

Can anyone name a government social program that worked exactly like it was suppose too?

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: ironwing

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

I paid $718.98 in Fed income tax out of my last paycheck with 6 deductions, my private health insurance cost $63.47.

How much did your employer contribute to your health plan?

For 2006, between my contributions and my employer's contributions, the annual premium for my family's health insurance was $11,104.74. My employer belongs to a very large insured group so the premiums are probably at or below market average.

I don't know, they don't share that with us.

Am hoping for universal health care right about the time I retire actually

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Every time the government comes up with some grand plan to solve a problem all we end up with is different problems.

Can anyone name a government social program that worked exactly like it was suppose too?

Food Stamps? I'm sure that you'll try to poke holes into whatever we say, so it doesn't really matter.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Every time the government comes up with some grand plan to solve a problem all we end up with is different problems.

Can anyone name a government social program that worked exactly like it was suppose too?

Food Stamps? I'm sure that you'll try to poke holes into whatever we say, so it doesn't really matter.

What problem did food stamps solve? Are people still going hungry? etc etc

 

[IronWing]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Every time the government comes up with some grand plan to solve a problem all we end up with is different problems.

Can anyone name a government social program that worked exactly like it was suppose too?

Social Security for the most part. The only failure there is the govt falsely understating the rate of inflation thus eroding the purchasing power of benefits.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Every time the government comes up with some grand plan to solve a problem all we end up with is different problems.

Can anyone name a government social program that worked exactly like it was suppose too?

Food Stamps? I'm sure that you'll try to poke holes into whatever we say, so it doesn't really matter.

What problem did food stamps solve? Are people still going hungry? etc etc

Good question. People are going hungry, but with food stamps, less people are going hungry. Hopefully, we can make sure that no one will go hungry in this day and age. The gap between the super rich and the poor is steadily increasing. Its been 90 years since the rich/poor divide was so wide.

 

[operaman1]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Every time the government comes up with some grand plan to solve a problem all we end up with is different problems.

Can anyone name a government social program that worked exactly like it was suppose too?

Food Stamps? I'm sure that you'll try to poke holes into whatever we say, so it doesn't really matter.

What problem did food stamps solve? Are people still going hungry? etc etc

Good question. People are going hungry, but with food stamps, less people are going hungry. Hopefully, we can make sure that no one will go hungry in this day and age. The gap between the super rich and the poor is steadily increasing. Its been 90 years since the rich/poor divide was so wide.

Bingo. The rich have no worries so why bother? And health care costs so much because of the number of people who WAIT when they have normal ailments that are treatable, and then end up in the emergency room where costs skyrocket. Notice also that the lovely Republicans made sure that when a poor person claims bankruptcy that medical bills are NOT exempt. Wonder why? Wouldn't be to protect that big $$$ lobby because a vast majority of bankruptcies are due to medical bills. Notice ProfJ threw out a TOTAL. He never said how it was spent.

 

[IEC]

Originally posted by: Sinsear
Have a question for those of you who endorse a universal health care. We've had many discussions in here about the need for reform, the need to implement universal health care, regulation, etc. etc. However, I don't ever recall a discussion on how to implement this system. How do we as a country, intelligently implement a system where everyone receives coverage without destroying the economy? Doctors, pharmaceutical companies, and of course the insurance companies will obviously not be able to profit as they do. Are we going to put these companies out of business and all the people who work for them (esp the insurance companies)? Will doctors be willing to take pay cuts or will they only offer services for exclusive clients?

A little OT, but I strongly oppose a taxpayer-funded "universal" health-care system. If anything, we need to get rid of insurance companies and HMOs as well in order to have a "free-market" of hospitals and doctors which "compete" for your money by providing health care at a competitive cost. We're all familiar with the insurance and HMO practices of billing as much as possible for a procedure or medicine, driving up costs for everybody. Don't even get me started about medical malpractice suits...

Gone are the days when a doctor just worried about treating his/her patients and didn't have to worry about paperwork up the arse.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: Spartan Niner

Originally posted by: Sinsear
Have a question for those of you who endorse a universal health care. We've had many discussions in here about the need for reform, the need to implement universal health care, regulation, etc. etc. However, I don't ever recall a discussion on how to implement this system. How do we as a country, intelligently implement a system where everyone receives coverage without destroying the economy? Doctors, pharmaceutical companies, and of course the insurance companies will obviously not be able to profit as they do. Are we going to put these companies out of business and all the people who work for them (esp the insurance companies)? Will doctors be willing to take pay cuts or will they only offer services for exclusive clients?

A little OT, but I strongly oppose a taxpayer-funded "universal" health-care system. If anything, we need to get rid of insurance companies and HMOs as well in order to have a "free-market" of hospitals and doctors which "compete" for your money by providing health care at a competitive cost. We're all familiar with the insurance and HMO practices of billing as much as possible for a procedure or medicine, driving up costs for everybody. Don't even get me started about medical malpractice suits...

Gone are the days when a doctor just worried about treating his/her patients and didn't have to worry about paperwork up the arse.

Getting rid of insurance companies is a good start.