Universal health care peaking round the corner again

[Melbourne MICA]

Take a deep breath

I started this thread mainly because last years, pre Obama one was exhilarating and insightful. There were many many valid and excellent posts. I thought now he was in power many of you would be reflecting on the situation. It is also very topical - Obamas health care reforms are the topic in the media this week.

As ambos I thought you all might provide the most insightful comments and debate because we work in the middle of the system and right in the middle of peoples lives in their homes.

There is far too much anger out there.

Please don't get personal, vilify others or set your ideas in stone. Nobody is perfect and nobody is totally right on all the issues. None of us are economists either.

Please take a deep breath and treat each other decently and with respect.

MM

 

[Shishkabob]

Some of you need to go back and re-read what I have stated in the past;

There is a HUGE difference between not being able to do something and CHOOSING not to do something. Disabled = not being able to. Laziness = choosing not to.

If someone is in a position outside of their control, such as lost a job, then yes, by all means I'll be the first to help them. But if someone is in a position by their own conscious choices, such as a homeless man due to illicit drug use, I feel no pity.


The old maxim holds true, no matter how you spin it; help those who help themselves.


I'll phrase it a couple more ways just to be sure you're catching on.

If a gambling addict needs help paying his rent because all his money went to gambling, how would it be smart to give him money? What's to say he wont gamble it?


If you're in school, would it be fair to take 10% off of your grade to pad another kids grade who didn't study for a test because he felt like playing on his PC instead?



Is this making ANY sense to you yet? I'm not against helping people, I'm against helping those who don't deserve it and take advantage of the system.

I'll help the kid whos parents are drug addicts. I'll help the spouse of said drug addict. I will not help the drug addict until he makes an effort to quit that detrimental action.

 

[Veneficus]

As I said, I am not comfortable with the government telling everyone (myself included) what doctor they have to see, what kind of care they can get, when they can get it and all that. ?

Are you comfortable with an insurance company telling you?

 

[EMTmom1218]

Let someone else pay for it

My sister has not had healthcare probably since she was in her 20s and she's 56 now. Her reason: Why pay for it when I know I won't be refused.

 

[JonTullos]

Are you comfortable with an insurance company telling you?

If I really want to, I can choose another insurance carrier. With some versions of universal healthcare that have been floated, we wouldn't have the right. We would basically be handed an "insurance" plan and told that it's this or nothing. Personally I like the right to choose. I think that's a lot better than some government drone doling it out to me.

 

[bstone]

My sister has not had healthcare probably since she was in her 20s and she's 56 now. Her reason: Why pay for it when I know I won't be refused.

For emergency services she won't be refused. However for non-emergency services she might be refused or subject to long delays.

 

[Melbourne MICA]

If I really want to, I can choose another insurance carrier. With some versions of universal healthcare that have been floated, we wouldn't have the right. We would basically be handed an "insurance" plan and told that it's this or nothing. Personally I like the right to choose. I think that's a lot better than some government drone doling it out to me.

Sorry to butt into your conversation with Venny but are we talking about a government subsidised health scheme? A universal health scheme? Our Medicare system has nothing to do with being forced to take a package like normal insurnace. There are simply services and goods that are covered (listed) under the medicare insurance scheme - you simply use them, give your medicare details (a card typically that has all your family on it as well) and you get a certain percentage (often all) of the cost of those services rebated to you.

And you can make a claim on the cost in many ways of course, via the net at an Mecdicare office, by post etc. The good thing is, if you are poor or on various tax benefits categories you get full cover via your pension or health care card so the net cost is practically zero. If you are a little better off you can still get a healthy portion of the cost as a rebate. For guys like me this means paying up front for basic services like a GP visit or X ray and then claiming back - this is the fastest way.

Contrary to what many here think universal health care does not mean freebies across the board. It is a graduated rebate scheme that covers much but not all. It very much depends on what you use. If you go outside the public system (Like public hospital A&E depts) you pay some. If you use the public system its free - and open to everyone. So you do have a choice.

If you want the full free public services, called "bulk billing services" , it may entail waiting be it ED (pts are triaged), for elective surgeries etc. Naturally this is the most criticised aspect of the system.

However if you are caught off guard, have a big emergency, private system can't handle it you go to a public A&E or other public health service. You can also elect to go private from the outset and still get some off (that is covered by medicare) but you choose where you want to go etc.

For emergencies the public system is far and away superior in all respects. The big public teaching hospitals have everything you may need. You can even start there then transfer to the private system later on if you want fluffy pillows, better tucker, and paintings on the walls of your ward.

The private surgeons and specialists all (have to) contribute a certain portion of their hours in the public system. So the care is of high standard.

Too much info, confusing? I'm not sure if many of the posters really follow how a universal health system works - at least the Aussie version which differs of course in some respects to the British and Canadian versions eg.

Happy to expand if others interested.

MM

 

[Melbourne MICA]

Who pays and how?

Sorry one more thing. Our universal scheme is funded through a levy payable through your tax return. It's a percentage - 1.5%. Make lots of money you pay more - make less pay less.

I know, I know - there you go just taxpayers forking out you all say.

Using the tax system has the advantage of casting the widest net across the population. It is also proportional according to means and more reliable in terms of collection of the levy because it goes through tax. The people who are working (contributing some here would say) but not earning much don't pay it because there is a tax threshold so the battlers on the minimum wage don't get slugged the levy nor apy at the GP's clinic.

Thats leaves, the unemployed, welfare recipients etc. Most of these people are people of character fallen on hard times. What's left is the true bludgers we all love to hate but these are few as a part of the whole.

The big drawback of such systems is they are large, expensive, complex and if not well run open to abuse.

As I said last year - you guys in the US need to show us all how to get such schemes really running sweetly with minimal loss or abuse - and you can do it. All you need is the will and to tell those who love to imply such schemes are one step towards some utopian socialist nirvana to stop ranting and listen for a while. Have a look, come up with a plan, trial it and see what you think.

If private insurance is best for the US so be it - But it sure don't look like its working so hot at the moment. Happy to stand corrected of course.

MM

 

[Veneficus]

I still like the british system better.

The private US system doesn't work at all. It increases the labor costs of businesses that provide it, increasing overall product and service costs. Which makes such totally incompetative. This causes a loss of jobs and then a loss of insured people. Insurance coverage goes down, rates go up so that profit margins of insurance companies are maintained. Which will eventually price itself out of market. Well on its way already. People are then forced into our extremely inefficent safetynet. The most costly in all the world like over 16%.

Most insurance tell you where you can go, what they will cover, and even how much of it. So even if you have insurance, one major illness and you are ruined. Most policies have a lifetime maximum of $1 million, which at our prices is easily reached.

They also dictate prices to hospitals and physicians,which causes providers and agencies to mark up the non insured to cover the difference or take on so many patients nobody gets decent care. You also have to run as many procedures and diagnostics as possible, even if not really needed in order to bill for enough to make any money.

Universal healthcare is not a panacea, it is simply better than what we have now. Most of the drawbacks I hear people argue are biased propaganda or completely brainless.

 

[Melbourne MICA]

Universal healthcare is not a panacea, it is simply better than what we have now. Most of the drawbacks I hear people argue are biased propaganda or completely brainless.

And I think your last couple of sentences summed it up. What I am really excited about is there has never been a trully universal health system in the US. And you are the only western country that hasn't tried it. (I am aware of the Vets systems, armed services system and medicare/medicaid programmes)

For me what this means is the US will start from scratch - not always a bad thing. A clean slate. You will need to overcome some seriously entrenched political baggage to really give it a go. So when you do it will mean all sides will have embraced at least the idea of trialling it in a big way. A lot of political capital will be invested. So everybody has something to gain and lose.

Also there is untapped potential in the US to make a brand new universal system which incorporates the best elements of other systems and incorporates inputs from all the stakeholders even the private system.

Not only that, but the idea of a kind of "non capitalist" system on such a large scale - if I can put it that way - will be a revolution and evolution in thought in the US. You will start down a whole new path - no not to ruin. But to change for the better just from the exercise alone. A kind of synchronicity will be there.

The butterflys wings flap in Washington and........

A renaissance for America. Lets hope so.

MM

 

[yogakat]

check out this website...it's a link to 'Fresh Air' with Terry Gross on npr

this week they had an interesting set of interviews regarding the healthcare system in America...one is about a person with kidney disease and his sister, a healthcare correspondent, who helped him navigate the system...the other is about the bureaucracy of health care in America

enjoy...


http://www.npr.org/templates/rundowns/rundown.php?prgId=13&prgDate=3-11-2009

 

[Melbourne MICA]

Gotta love private health

check out this website...it's a link to 'Fresh Air' with Terry Gross on npr

this week they had an interesting set of interviews regarding the healthcare system in America...one is about a person with kidney disease and his sister, a healthcare correspondent, who helped him navigate the system...the other is about the bureaucracy of health care in America

enjoy...


http://www.npr.org/templates/rundowns/rundown.php?prgId=13&prgDate=3-11-2009

You just gotta love the bit about the short term policy renewals and his "pre-exiting condition".

And you can bet this guys "short term policies" were marketed as a "flexible service........" or some other spin when in reality the insurers had just found another clever means to limit (deny) claims and add to profits and at the same time sell it as a competitive and affordable option for clients - until you used it of course.

MM

MM