The U.S healthcare fiasco

Obamacare was a funding fiasco hijacked by Republicans. Get the whole story, learn, and stop letting your own ignorance rule your world; http://newcenturytimes.com/2016/11/...n-by-keeping-billions-from-obamacare-details/

"ACA is terrible". Lol! What a (*)(*)(*)(*) of an argument you got going on right there.

 

If we were down to twelve million, there wouldn't be 20 million already covered.

 

No! It was hijacked by Republicans, as to the funding to make it look bad;http://newcenturytimes.com/2016/11/...n-by-keeping-billions-from-obamacare-details/

 

Stop bleeding it dry stealing funding through military spending and stop blackmailing it to make it look as if it doesn't work. ACA works fine; http://newcenturytimes.com/2016/11/...n-by-keeping-billions-from-obamacare-details/

 

IMO, the reason we have higher cost per capita is due to our over insured all inclusive style system. We are far too heavy on insurance as apposed to out of pocket. This would exasperate the overhead of insurance companies. As with tv's, I'd rather market forces work than the government model.

 

They always say that to scare the public, its just a scare tactic.

 

In my opinion, the insurance companies have priced themselves out of the market by raising premiums with high deductibles making them worthless.

 

Sure it works if you are the insurance company who is profiting big time with their increase in Medicaid and Medicare enrollment. It also works for them is these high deductibles where any other medical services except the physician is applied to the consumer's deductible. It works for the government with the new lines of revenue created by the ACA.

It works for the population that now have Medicaid, but it sucks for everyone else since they have shifted the cost for medical care to the consumer.

 

There you folks go again. Putting in half the argument only to leave out the other half. You didn't read what I said or my link. If medicaid expansion had been implemented like it was supposed to, all these high deductibles and premiums would have never happened. The argument is easy. Owning up to a manufactured problem instigated by Republicans is another. ACA was designed to work with everyone's involvement. The problem was, the Right never wanted it to work, so they made sure it didn't. And that is really the only argument that exists, as it applies to the ACA.

 

you have a strange way of thinking. So are you saying that too many people being insured is the problem? Well, imagine if every healthy person didn't have insurance. We know that the sick will have it so then how will insurance companies make any money? if millions and millions of healthy people aren't paying premiums, then the insurance companies will charge the sick like 25k a month on premiums and even then, they may lose money as the sick are expensive.

The reason single payer works is that everyone pays a premium - payroll tax so everyone is contributing. It would essentially be a medicare for all. This system also eliminates profits and executive pay, which is factored in premiums we pay. In addition to this, the hospital administrative paperwork and overhead is greatly reduced.

I just don't think a privatized system will EVER be as cost effective as a single payer system, no matter what ideas are hurled around.

 

So, how are you going to eliminate those you think do not deserve health care? Leave them dying on the street? Do a DNA analysis to ensure they are "fit" for your system?

And are you sure that all those you will be eliminating are not "worthy"?

 

No, I'm saying that individually, we are over insured. Americans primarily use insurance to pay for healthcare. This defeats the market forces. An example would be like having 100 people share a dinner bill. It would disincentive frugality and incentive over use. Who cares what a doctors visit costs when you are paying the same copay?

 

The problem with this is simple. Its far cheaper to pay for preventative health care up front than it is to pay for catastrophic illness's later.

 

I've been listening to the news and the popular number of THIRTY MILLION NOW HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE THAT DIDN'T HAVE IT BEFORE is being revised down to more truthful levels of 13 million all of a sudden. Strange how close that is to my number.

 

Read post #12 on this thread.

 

We need to focus on the high prices charged for medical products and services. America is rather unique in charging these exorbitant rates, which I feel is the primary reason we struggle to make health care affordable to everyone where other nations are able to manage it successfully.

Why is an ER visit ~$1,000? Why do cancer treatments costs six figures or more?

 

Exactly. This kind of insurance has broken the free market where medical prices are concerned.

 

Wow! Straight out of the Lib handbook of lies and insults. You should Google HEAVEN'S GATE CULT. Those people were just like you; someone told them a lie that was totally beyond any common standard of belief and they ate it up.

In fact, Trump supporters - the half of America with functioning brains - know that Obamacare has some good points that should be kept. It's the majority of it that is financially unworkable that has to be changed without sinking the whole ship. Get your head out of the ground and quit looking like a fool with those programmed comebacks.

 

So essentially all your saying is they "Democrats" should have thought things through before they gave birth to Frankenstein! What's the difference if the American taxpayers were footing the bill before the ACA then or now with subsidizing the poor and the gubment in the form of fines? All this program did was prove that the GOP called it like it was, a formula for fail! Lets get right to the meat of and save me from having to explain how this crap law was introduced:

Lets let our buddy Jonathan Gruber "the man behind Obamacare"

 

Why does it cost more than a thousand dollars to get a transmission fixed? Why are plumbers so expensive? Why does it cost 100 dollars to go to a nice restaurant?

With an ER visit, you've got to understand that even if you didn't need medical care, you're taking up time from people who not only have a lot of money invested in their education, but also a lot of time invested in their careers. That means you're going to have to pay them a lot more than what you pay your plumber. There is also a lot of very specialized equipment that, even if you don't have to use it, you have to help pay for just in case you might need it. Then there are the legal fees which your roofer doesn't need to consider. If a roofer puts a new roof on your house and it leaks afterwards, he has to go back and fix the roof. If a doctor messes up, he could be sued for malpractice. So you also have to factor in that added expense when you go to an ER.

My brother fixes those big front loading washing machines they have at laundromats. He charges 100 dollars an hour, and he is on the clock as soon as he starts his truck to the time he gets back home. Furthermore, if one of those machines needs a part that costs 100 dollars, he charges 200 dollars. 100 for the part, and 100 for his time buying the part. That actually works out about right because if it requires a part and he doesn't have that part, he needs to order the part, pick it up, and go back to the laundromat, all of which would normally be charged at his base fee of 100 an hour. He usually makes money by keeping some of those parts in his truck or his workshop, and saves time so that the machine is working sooner, rather than later. That helps the laundromat bring in more money.

Now realize that we're talking about a guy who didn't spend a decade in a medical school. Nor are we talking about various college educated assistants or a big building like a hospital. We're also not talking about a guy who has to fix anybody's washing machine, even if they can't pay him. He's got a garage, a truck, a phone, and a bunch of hand tools. He's pulling in six figures a year, and has plenty of free time. Doctors, nurses, technicians etc. do not have a lot of free time.

Sorry, but a grand ain't all that much when you're talking about work that requires a specialized skill set and an investment in the business.

 

And yet these services are way cheaper in other countries. It doesn't add up.

 

You're arguing numbers without providing links??? . . . . STRANGE way to elicit credibility. (BTW, HIS quoted number was 20 million, not 30 million.)

 

Yes, we killed the best system in the world for just 5% of the population.

We are the most generous and dumbest people on the planet.

 

Do you know what happens to fiduciary trustees that propagandize or fudge their reports?

 

I do have a reform package for the disaster that is the ACA. Unfortunately, I won't be elected until 2018. So we're just going to have to deal with an internet post formulating what must be done for the path forward. The ACA is the worst piece of legislation ever passed in the history of the USA.

Furthermore, the assertion that Health Care "is a right", is a blind assumption. To provide for this right, doctors must take long hours out of the day. To provide for this right, nurses must look after their patients. To provide for this right, drug companies must create effective medicines, go through testing and regulations(that I largely support, BTW.)

In short, the cost of health care is very real and to deny these people the right to their financial rewards due to their service in their various sectors is borderline cruel. So, we have to figure out how to afford the cost of health care. There is no 'right' to someone else's property or service.

So, what drives the cost of health care? Quite a few things: Administrative costs, health care usage. Scarcity is the main driver of health care. Not enough drugs, aforementioned usage creates a lack and the demand can't keep up. If you look at the other nations around the world, it's not so much that their health care is cheaper, but that they have less people per capita to actually cover. And thus, their health care is cheaper.

But look at the EU as a whole, and the need for the VAT tax among others, becomes clearly a necessity to the nations of Europe. But high taxation takes dollars out of circulation(guess what also does, mandatory programs like the ACA). Said dollars out of circulation prolongs the recession/decline, whatever you want to call it.

To put it bluntly: The ACA promotes class warfare. From having to force people to buy a product(Insurance), that they may or may not need. At rates they
may or may not be able to afford. The withdrawal from the marketplace now restricting doctor access. The 40 hr work week that forces small businesses to cut hours or outright cut workers. And that's not even the worst offense of the bill. Let's talk about those subsidies.

First off, because the subsidies cover damn near everyone under the sun, you have to have more of them than you do. Thus talk of the subsidies possibly running out in 2017. But this isn't the worst part of it. The worst part of it, is that you only qualify for said subsidies if you're in a certain income bracket(like most government programs). Once you actually raise your income level, you'll be essentially buying health insurance at the expensive prices.

The said expensive prices(along with the taxes for the subsidies) that middle/upper class Americans pay. No one wins, regardless of which sector you're on. Even if you "get insurance" on the lower rungs, that's only as long as you STAY there. This law is absolutely terrible. There's no way around it.

**Throws the ACA in the trash bin**. Let's start reforming the garbage.

Administrative Costs:
One of the ways I suggested to reform this, is to actually give the patient control over his insurance plan. The irony is calling it a "market" and having the insurers themselves dictate the cost of the plan lol. Yeah, no. We're going to give patients/doctors the ability to control the plan, they will be the ones who craft the plan. And all Insurers are, are basically middlemen who approve of the plans. There are those who'd go "Wouldn't the plans be more expensive?" Nope. No more men plans covering tampons, they don't need them. Women plans don't need to cover Viagara.

Already, we addressed a huge reason for costs. But I'll go further. One of the reasons for rising costs were the damn doctor visits for prescriptions.
Create a government-protected server accessed by the patient/doctor, and have your prescriptions loaded on the account in REAL TIME.

There, problem solved. You could just load the prescriptions on the account, the pharmacist would get the prescriptions and you'd get your medicines.
All you'd have to do is attend your daily checkups really, to get the prescription the first time(and/or whenever you need a different prescription.)

And I'm still not done. Another major cost is the lack of access to drugs over the counter. If we make more drugs over the counter, you'll have less need of a prescription. Which additionally leads to less appointments and thus more time for the doctors.

Drug Costs:
In a nugget to the Left, I concur with Senator Bernie Sanders. It's time for the US to negotiate directly with drug companies. However, this will not be the "US Government"(or a faction thereof). They can't even negotiate a proper budget. My confidence is nil in Washington's negotiating ability. Instead, I would author a "Drug Marketplace Organization"(or DMO. Crappy name, but you guys can help me with a better one.) I'd have pharmaceuticals, insurers and doctors on one big panel with the expressed interest of negotiating with current players in the industry.

With the regulation stipulating that drug prices may not exceed twice their worth(IE: The cancer drug incident isn't happening again.) With those stipulations in mind, and with the vast US market, buyers will eventually cede to a strong US position. It's the one thing Sanders has that I majorly approve of, I just want to give the function to capable players.

Insurance Regulations:
Okay, we're getting rid of the mandate. A: It's Anti-American, B: It's not necessary. The reason "the young" had to be brought in, was to de-facto cover the costs for ensuring the Elderly/Terminally Ill. There's much better ways of doing this, such as isolating the Elderly/Terminally Ill from the rest of the pool.

What I want to do is I want to segregate and shorten the pool. You have de-facto three groups: The Youth(0-12), Teenage/young adult(13-40). Adult/terminally Ill(40-). Each group is its own group, and eventually with insurance companies that will only cover that particular group. This will expand the insurer market as they can now selectively choose who they're going to insure.

Now that each group is its own group, the costs of insurance have gone down tremendously. It's the one-size fits all, that's increasing prices. Oh, and I'd have a one-time signup. No more of this annual sign-up crap, or the stupid and I mean absolutely STUPID "sign-up periods". Someone might not have the income to pay for it, in that window. But may have that income at a later date. Get rid of the sign-up periods. No other business does business that way. And I suspect it's in the bill.

Instead, you transfer accounts as you age. Through the transfer system, guess what I did? That's right, everyone has insurance! Without the mandate, I have a much better way of getting people insurance. And through different insurer providers for different age groups, I've even made family plans cheaper.

When you consider that companies already ensure their workers, we have just utterly fixed health care. But there's one problem remaining: The "keep it until your 26" stupidity. This is putting a bandaid on a serious problem: Adults who have yet to stand on their feet. How do we solve it? Make basic health care a collegiate necessity.

And if it sounds far-left, it's actually quite innoative: For these people to get a benefit(health care), they actually have to attend college. In fact, let's extend it to a "Productive Citizen Credit". And the PCC can in effect be insurance for those who are productive in any capacity, but don't necessarily want to pay for it in the form of a costly insurance plan. We'll deduct it from their tax earnings instead.

Oh and finally: Go from Single-Payer, to a Double-tier model like Singapore and other highly developed countries. Thus enabling both choice and expanding coverage capabilities.

Your welcome America.