Posted on 09/04/2009 6:56:22 PM PDT by rhema
When was the last time you asked your doctor how much it would cost for a necessary test or procedure? In all likelihood, you can't remember. That's because your employer-provided health plan or the government "paid for it." In fact, you paid. We all pay for health care.
There's no denying that our health-care system is complex. However, we can trace most of the problems in the current system to the lack of control individuals and families have over their care. If there's one lesson we've taken away from the thousands of citizens at town-hall meetings, it's that one massive health-care bill isn't the solution. Americans nationwide have voiced their desire for greater control over their care and for reform in digestible pieces.
Here's how the debate over health-care reform breaks down, and what we believe Congress can do to solve these crucial issues.
•Costs and Control. The health-care reform debate centers on how to lower the cost of care, and who should ultimately control health-care decisions. Under the current system, nobody is focused on controlling costs.
Roughly 60% of all health care in America is employer-provided. This third-party payment structure has divorced the consumer—the patient—from the real cost of services. It encourages excess spending, runaway lawsuits, defensive medicine (doctors ordering unnecessary tests and procedures out of fear of being sued), and huge malpractice premiums.
President Obama and Democrats in Congress say that a new federal health-care bureaucracy and a so-called public plan is the answer. They are wrong.
Government has caused the problems we face in health care. Our tax code incentivizes employer-provided health care, rewards health insurance companies by insulating them from accountability, and punishes those who lack employer-provided care.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Bump!
First, defund and cancel Medicare.
After carefully following this issue on the Net, I've formed the opinion that most people are utterly clueless about the actual cost of healthcare and employer-provided insurance is the culprit in this.
While I agree with the points in this article, it doesn't address the issue that many people simply won't buy insurance. How much responsibility are we supposed to assume for these individuals?
There is one problem with this approach: insurance is largely regulated by the individual states. If the power to regulate insurance is taken away from individual states, it will likely be given over to the Federal Government.
And I don't trust the Federal Government.
The additional cost of their care is subsidized by the government.
...which is simply a stripped-down of socialized medical care.
Those who cannot presently afford coverage would be able to select and purchase their own plan using a health-care voucher provided by the federal government.
Again, all these Republicans have is more "solutions" that require using the federal apparatus.
When will they learn that folks simply want the Federal Government out of their lives?
Can someone please tell me, the $1 trillion estimate for ObamaCare, which the CBO says is way too conservative, that is supposed to be over what period of time? Annual? Ten years?
The last time I asked the doctor about fees, he said that he had no idea. That’s one reason that health care costs so much.
ping 4 later
During World War II our parents and grandparents learned to say “is this trip necessary”?
We need to learn to say “is this test (or imaging) MEDICALLY necessary?”
Or is it just on the punch list dictated by the malpractice insurance agency?
Why is it then than you can buy life insurance from just about any company in the country, but are highly restricted as to your choices on health insurance?
The reason is, I would submit, that state insurance commissions are largely in bed with the local health insurance providers. Any state regulatory agency -- insurance, utilities, etc. -- is prone to being taken over by the companies it is charged with regulating.
.............Can someone please tell me, the $1 trillion estimate for ObamaCare, which the CBO says is way too conservative, that is supposed to be over what period of time? Annual? Ten years?..................
Great question - And I’m not sure of the total answer!
The time frame is supposed to be 10 years - $1 trillion in ten years!
However, gov’t health coverage will be kicking in over the next five years, so the total costs will not be experienced until year five or later.
So, as I understand it the One trillion is for the next ten years, but only includes coverage for the outer five to six years.
I’ve read that year eleven expenses will escalate to the next decade of at least 1.6 trillion - and that’s gov’t estimates! Probably, in reality more like three trillion in decade two!
And that is with the planned cost-shifting to the states. Even PA's governor is riled that this may be passed under the radar.
We need to learn to say “is this test (or imaging) MEDICALLY necessary?”
Exactly, the health care problem started when businesses started providing insurance for their employees. The patients stopped caring what their bill was and the medical industry started seeing the patients as cows to be milked.
It’s not my job to insure every American!
There are folks out there who make $100,000 a year who choose not to buy insurance. Why should I insure them?
There are millions of NON-Americans out there who get free health care and I end up paying for it. Why should I insure them?
1. Get rid of Medicare. In fact, get the Federal government out of Medicare, Social Security, and every other program that can be handled by the States (like the Constitution says, interestingly enough).
2. Create an annual State fund (let’s say $1,000,000 for argument’s sake) that would be used for helping people (quadraplegics, mentally disable, and so forth) who can truly not help themselves. These people could draw from the money until it is gone. When it is gone, that’s it. No insurance. No bottomless pit of money. No mandates.
“How much responsibility are we supposed to assume for these individuals?”
None - unless they are truly able to not take care of themselves.
You can buy life insurance from any insurer that is licensed to do business in your state. The same goes for health insurance, auto insurance, property insurance, etc. What Republicans have proposed is a fundamental shift in the way insurance is regulated in the United States...and, at its core, a shift towards increased concentration of power in the Federal Government.
August, from my internist. Had an irritated bladder from eating to much spicy and acidic foods.
They told me the cost and immediately discounted it as I do not carry insurance and would pay cash.
I did not think the procedure was all that expensive, $250(can't remember) plus drugs, etc.
Not bad and I don't owe anyone.
Now if I could just cut back on the foods they said I should avoid for a month, so I can start feeling better.
Exactly. But why are so many more life insurers licensed in a given state than health insurers?
Especially since many of them are the same companies. My Part B, e.g., is with Banker's Life.
I'm not arguing with your point -- about federal vs state regulation. But it's obvious that, for some reason that isn't entirely clear, most states regulate health insurance more tightly than life insurance.
We need to be aware of that issue, as well.
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.