Posted on 08/03/2018 8:13:23 PM PDT by ckilmer
I started reading the Dilbert blog during the election cycle and it was great. I don’t really do podcasts, so I have been missing it :(
Anyway, two great ideas!!!!! I love the Github one, which would allow experts in a small area of health coverage to share ideas, as well as regular people who would have a very different point of view.
I also like what he said about using graphs and charts to explain appropriate aspects of issues. This is one (of several) things that drives me completely nuts about the Republicans—they are really bad at communicating. Perot showed us about the national debt with his charts, and I had never even heard about the national debt (being much younger then). I really think his ability to communicate was what got him 19% despite that bit of weirdness at the end of the campaign.
Thanks for sharing this with us :)
The only way to fix health insurance in the United States is to get the government totally out of Insurance and out of Medicine, including pharmaceuticals. The market will settle out at far lower costs and prices than are necessary now to pay for all the paperwork and regulation and pay for the salaries of the hordes of government and insurance bureaucracies. The only government entanglement with medicine that is legitimate is military medicine.
Problem with “healthcare” in the US is that everybody wants someone else to pay for it.
And everyone can come up with the heartaching story about a person who can’t afford needed care, so “we” should all contribute to universal coverage.
Horse Hockey!
Pay your own way or die.
Don’t knock on my door because I don’t give a Shiite.
That said, there are many ways folks can receive care of if the Goobermint
Would just get out of the way,
Cadillac care for all? No.
Basic care for idigents, sure. Charity Hospitals, or Teaching Hospitals.
Smoke? Obese? Drug addict? Too effin bad. Not my problem.
Sorry to all the do-gooders out there but my compassion circuits are blown.
Funny, it seemed to be fine until that AH Obama started farting around with it.
The stated GOP goal for reform: “Reduce costs, reduce taxes, take away the individual mandate, but still ensure people that want healthcare have the ability to purchase it”
The whole problem, succinctly stated, in one clever, incoherent sentence.
The reason the Republicans can’t crack this nut, in fact, the reason their party won’t exist as a single party by 2024, is that they are divided and unable to be reconciled over the contradiction so ably stated above.
“Ensure people that want healthcare have the ability to purchase it”
Let’s break it down.
Nobody “wants” “healthcare” (whatever that is). I suppose the author of the sentence means “health insurance”.
People either need health care (meaning, hospitalization, surgery, medications, and nursing services), or they don’t. WHEN they need it, they want it (or are too sick to know they do), but when they don’t need it, they most certainly don’t WANT it.
When people NEED hospitalization, surgery, medications, and nursing services (and notice how much people don’t want to think about that - they invented the euphemism “healthcare” to describe it) - when they need it, “having the ability to purchase it” is absolutely, totally, 100% completely the last thing on their minds. So is organizing society so that it will be available. What is on patient’s minds at the point of need is death, or life - disability and disfigurement, or recovery. They do not know, or care, who pays, or how.
So, the Democrats have resolved the philosophical question that comes before the practical problem. They want to ensure that “healthcare” (by which they mean services) is given to all by the government without regard for ability to purchase (pay for) it. Whether this is right or wrong, smart or stupid, practical or akin to skittles from unicorns is not my point. My point is that they have resolved the contradiction embedded in “lower costs, lower taxes, no mandate, ensure ability to purchase (pay for it) for 100% of the population”. The Democrats know what they want, and they are united and determined to have it.
The poor, stupid Republicans, OTOH, are divided about the underlying premise. They really do want health insurance to be cheaper without the lost revenue being made up by taxes, and they want no requirement to have it, BUT they also want “people that want healthcare” (again, whatever that means) to “have the ability to purchase it”.
This is incoherent. If hospitals, surgeons, drug manufacturers and nurses do not get paid for their services, they will no longer be available. Many, many people who NEED (and therefore “want”) those services cannot pay 1% of what they cost.
“Ensuring that people that want healthcare have the ability to purchase it” either means cheap insurance that doesn’t cover anything OR nationalization of the resources to deliver care to those who cannot, or will not, pay.
There is no middle ground. The Democrats know what they want. The Republicans don’t.
As Sun Tzu said, “It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.”
The Republicans do not have a plan because they do not have a philosophy that can support their opposed goals of more freedom for the well and perfect security for the sick.
No. The problem with health care in the US is it’s ridiculously expensive. There is no way for 80% of the people in this country to afford out of pocket even a short stay in the hospital. Costs are 5 or 6 times what they should be.
Well-stated BUMP!
Stay healthy FRiends.
And what should they be?
Or, more exactly, what services should hospitals provide that are not directly attributable to the cost (properly accounted for) of what you receive as an inpatient?
Right now, the "indirect" portion of reimbursement for a day in a hospital bed is well in excess of 100%. The funds, in addition to waste and administrative bloat, cover an enormous reserve army of highly skilled people waiting for something to happen to you.
Take them away, the whole thing goes down the drain.
Our “Health Care” problem could be fixed overnight.
1. NO Taxpayer funds shall be spent on Insurance of any kind for any Public Employee.
2. ENFORCE OUR 100 Yr Old ANTI TRUST LAWS!!!
https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws
The Sherman Act outlaws “every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade,” and any “monopolization, attempted monopolization, or conspiracy or combination to monopolize.” Long ago, the Supreme Court decided that the Sherman Act does not prohibit every restraint of trade, only those that are unreasonable. For instance, in some sense, an agreement between two individuals to form a partnership restrains trade, but may not do so unreasonably, and thus may be lawful under the antitrust laws. On the other hand, certain acts are considered so harmful to competition that they are almost always illegal. These include plain arrangements among competing individuals or businesses to fix prices, divide markets, or rig bids. These acts are “per se” violations of the Sherman Act; in other words, no defense or justification is allowed.
The penalties for violating the Sherman Act can be severe. Although most enforcement actions are civil, the Sherman Act is also a criminal law, and individuals and businesses that violate it may be prosecuted by the Department of Justice. Criminal prosecutions are typically limited to intentional and clear violations such as when competitors fix prices or rig bids. The Sherman Act imposes criminal penalties of up to $100 million for a corporation and $1 million for an individual, along with up to 10 years in prison. Under federal law, the maximum fine may be increased to twice the amount the conspirators gained from the illegal acts or twice the money lost by the victims of the crime, if either of those amounts is over $100 million.
SEPARATION OF STATE AND DOCTOR
The Federal Government shall make no law related to medicine or healthcare.
DONE! 12 words!
This would create the most successful, advanced medical care in the world.
Well said. Back in the ‘90’s when the Clintons were initiating the universal healthcare, there were groups of health professionals who brainstormed healthcare fixes. The culmination and conclusions were very good. Hillary butchered these ideas and came up with Hillarycare.
So, the fixes/solutions are out there, have been. As to the Republicans, I hope DJT comes up with a plan and finally neutralize this item of the Democrat party.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.