Since I am but a neophyte in the world of political thinking, I was hoping the someone out there who may have better insight into this world could answer me a question I have: Hillary states that the prevention programs that are included in her universal healthcare package will help drive down costs. And that this will in turn lead to better and cheaper healthcare for all Americans. So here's my question: most diseases are preventable in one way or another, so how will she ensure compliance with prevention programs??

As a registered nurse, I work within a very specialized disease pathology (end stage renal disease) and have observed that my patients are most likely to have been non-compliant with their treatment regimes before getting to the end stage portion of the program.

So, how will Hillary's prevention programs tackle the problem of non-compliance??

Considering this is a socialist system, imagine how health care was in the Soviet Union. I'm sure a little threat of deportation to the gulag, would "persuade" the comrades to keep up with their meds.

But this is the same person who believes that women have ownership of their bodies. Isn't that walking an awfully tight sociopolitical balance?

Personally I think the fundamental problem is that Hillary thinks all Americans are dumb and that we are going to fall for her generous "the government cares about you" rhetoric. The problem is: most people will.

Hillary already sold out on health care.
This thing she proposes now is a gift to the insurance companies, pretty much the opposite of a single-payer system. It will do nothing to change the efficiency of the system, nothing to change the ways insurance companies deal with patients by the time all is said and done. And Obama's is the same thing.
Kucinich was the only one with guts on this issue.

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

If anything, all Hillary's system will do is stick a big governmental thumb on top of everything, which just creates another huge layer of bureaucracy and cost.

Another quick thought. Everyone is talking about 47 million uninsured Americans. Funny thing is...go to http://www.census.gov/prod/2007pubs/p60-233.pdf and look at the demographic breakdown of the uninsured. Of the 47 million "uninsured Americans" over 10 million are not even citizens!

I lean to the right, and I also work in healthcare. I do believe we need some sort of universal heathcare, but Hillary's plan will force people to who don't have it to pay for it; even if it means garnishing their wages. Healthcare in this country is just too expensive for this to be practical. She also has not been clear on how she is going to pay for her plan. Obama's plan is better mainly because he is more aggressive about taking steps to lower the cost of healthcare and is not as influenced by healthcare and insurance lobbyists.

Why do you say that "Obama's is the same thing"?

It's not, as near as I can tell.

In fact, it's quite different.

Calling it the same is certainly exaggeratory.
I think my main point is that they were both lousy plans.

If I had to pick, it's Obama's plan.
And even Hillary's is better than the current system to a very small extent.

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

To actually answer your question,

Last time I checked anyones healthcare proposal, the two solutions that are supposed to decrease costs by catching things early are:

1) Mandatory Dr. checkups. (you keep your insurance if you maintain checkups)

Not sure how I feel about this one. I don't like mandatory, but I also don't like paying medicare because some jerk refused to check out the "pain in his abdomen".

2) Offsetting the costs of checkups for various diseases, by having it included in your insurance or paid for by the gov.


I think it is indisputable, that if people were getting tested for more things more frequently, healthcare costs would go down for everyone including the government.

I am not presently sure how the Hillary plan addresses your question.

But I have read about the two proposals in the past.


The Republican solutions is... "universal healthcare is for commies"

Except for Romney who is going with the: Not getting healthcare is a crime.

Ixtellor

__________________
_______________________________________
George W. Bush "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building"

Blasphemy is a victimless crime.