Personally I’d rather see a system more like Singapore has. It wouldn’t make me popular in conservative circles but I’d like everyone (and I do mean everyone) to have a basic government run catastrophic health insurance policy. Everyone would have a health savings account. People who want better coverage could buy it in the open market and from any company that chose ot offer it. Private companies could offer the basic plan also but at the same cost and benefit level as the govt. plan. The basic system would have copays that would be subsidized for people or families below a certain income level. Hospitals and doctors would be required to publish prices. Healthcare providers would be protected by clamping down on frivolous lawsuits. Obviously since everyone is covered there are no issues with pre-existing conditions.
Did I miss anything (besides cost and how to pay)? I’d like some constructive criticism.
and…. If Congress wrote a plan like this, how many pages would it take? 1000? 1500? 2000?
James, that’s truly funny!
O baa maa, if private companies figured they could administer the plans more efficiently and make money on the they should be allowed to.
This would mean that the govt. plan would have to pay for itself and not be subsidized by the general fund. I tried not to get too much more involved in the initial question for fear of making it waay too long. It’s already long enough that people’s eyes probably glaze over halfway through.
jehen, try to rise above the stupid ideological rhetoric. If you claim that conservatives want people to die and go bankrupt, you’ll be countered by people who rightfully say that the current proposals will ration healthcare, reduce medicare benefits and cause even more deaths. Getting into this argument is pointless. It doesn’t get us anywhere so unless you have something constructive to add, please move on to the next question.
rotorhead, I think you might be confusing Singapore with Thailand but I’m no expert.
Patriot, thanks for the response but laying blame on the insurance companies for blaming hospitals doesn’t really address the issue. Your cut and paste job is impressive too but I don’t see where it’s at all related to my question. I’m actually advocating a universal plan. What’s the point of trying to sell me on a plan when I’m already sold?
I will check out your links later when I have time.
Here’s a question for you. Why does the US have a higher death rate for younger children? Reading and regurgitating statistics doesn’t necessarily prove anything if you don’t know the details behind the stats.
O baa maa, paying would be the sticking point but when I read how economical the Singaporean plan is, I can’t help but think that we could cover everyone and save money. This is what we are being pitched now but I don’t think what’s being proposed it going to achieve that. The govt. is legislating mandatory care, not making people be directly responsible for costs and leaving out tort reform to save costs and allow more doctors to afford their insurance.
I have a basic plan that costs about $200.00 and month. I’m healthy and 48y.o. Younger people would be cheaper but jus like S.S. the system would be dependent on people paying all through their life not just to spread costs to all citizens but to spread the costx vs. benefits across ones whole life.
I haven’t put a great amount of though into it but people who can pay the minimum would pay. People who cannot would be subsidized. People who can afford better plans would pay for the basic plan and the premium plans would be taxed.
OB, I agree with your points but lately I’ve been swayed by logical arguments that show other countries have done this effectively.
It once seemed that we were going to have this shoved down out throats but now that seems doubtful.
I think that if this was tweaked and pitched properly it could pass and be a benefit. I suppose we will eventually have something like this forced upon us so my intent was to find something more palatable. My plan should satisfy public option proponents but they’d have to accept tort reform. Covering everyone would take away concern about pre-existing conditions, etc.
What I lack is hard number. How much do we spend yearly on insurance, care and drugs. How much on Medicare, medicaid and the VA. Lump that together, calculate savings from efficiency and tort reform and divide by the number of citizens.
If someone could put numbers to the proposals it would show how feasible these plans are.
Thanks for all you input.
jehen, thanks for the response. I agree with most of what you say but in one breath you say the current proposals are not adequate and in the next you say they won’t pass because people oppose them. Well if they’re not sufficient, we should all oppose them until something better is proposed. If you’re going to condemn Republicans and healthcare lobbyists don’t forget to include some Democrats and the legal lobby. If it’s only Republicans voting no to preserve healthcare lobby dollars, the measures would have passed long ago. If you’re going to ask to ***** the healthcare lobby the attorneys have to get it also.
If we had the right compromise I believe that it could be passed.
Tags: Bu, Holes, Maa, Medicare Benefits, Private Companies
And in the end it wouldn’t look anything like what you describe
Can’t force the irresponsible to save , if they were responsible , they’d already have insurance.
Why would private companies offer it if they know there’s a government safety net and everyone will be covered anyways?
This is what happened in Tennessee, and this is a concern for our Universal care.
EDIT:
I also believe that insurance should be catostrophic health insurance.
So the tax payers pay for the basic, government run plan?
EDIT:
The Patriot. I like how you think opponents just listen to Fox. Educate yourself.
If other countries don’t like it, why do they still have it? you ask? Because once you start a government program, you can’t get rid of it.
In an article about the British defending their system was this paragraph:
British officials acknowledge that their system has been struggling to cope and faces a 15 billion pound ($24 billion) deficit. Hospitals are often overcrowded, dirty and understaffed, which means some patients do not get the care they are promised.
…
Sounds great, huh Patriot?
EDIT: Overall, I’m not opposed to your plan overall. But I think the costs can be reduced without bringing in the government. I’ve posted this in others:
1) Lose the monopolies and allow health insurance to cross state boundaries like almost everything else. This competition will drive prices down.
2) Do not have health insurance tied in with employment. You should be able to shop for your own insurance and keep it whether you switch jobs or not. This would cause companies to post their prices and not cut people with problems, because it would be bad business.
3) Stop making health insurance cover everything. We used to pay for office visits. Insurance should be for things we can’t afford, like hospitalization. Could you imagine how expensive car insurance would be if we used it to cover every oil change or swapping of the wipers?
4) Some type of tort reform.
They’re basically the same ideas as you’re presenting, but without government involvement.
Don’t you think this could be accomplished without the government, therefore not putting a heavy burden on the tax payers?
Conservatives wont like it because there is still a level of public option, Liberals wont like it because you can buy into better coverage and that simply isn’t fair and socialized
It’s a good plan. But the Conservatives will have none of it. They would rather see people dying and going into bankruptcy than have any problem at all addressed by government.
There opposition is so fierce that all we have in congress right now that poses as health care reform is rearranging the deck chairs of the Titanic. 60% of Americans want a public insurance option but congress is beholden to the insurance lobbyist, not the American people. Failure is the only option. because success means government works and they can’t have that.
Edit: I am telling it like it is. Reform is doomed, even the workable reform you advocate because the Conservatives, Obama haters, and insurance lobby have align against any meaningful reform in direct opposition to the wishes of the majority of Americans.
The status quo is a moral outrage – the most expensive medical care in the world covering the fewest people, enriching the insurance providers, and sure to bankrupt the treasury just for the portion of the nations health bill that is paid by the government today. Every American, except the very Wealthy is at risk of bankruptcy, and loss of everything from illness or accident – even if they have insurance.
Health care is rationed – by the insurance companies for their profit, not your health.
And none of the current proposals address these core issues save broadening coverage and insuring continuation of insurance if jobs are lost or changed. Something like what you advocate would go a long way, but it does not even stand a chance because of the coalition of Conservatives who **** government, Crazies that **** Obama, and the insurance lobby who loves their profits.
Edit 2: People do not oppose reform. 90% of Americans want this fixed. 60% support a public option as part of the solution. It is not people in opposition, it is powerful interests and ideologues that are working at insuring either failure or at best incremental reform that does little, costs more and makes insurance companies richer.
It’s a good plan and covers all bases, and I’m a liberal.
lol at James. He’s right.
I cannot form a serious proposition. I think you missed that point.
Singapore?
Can we cane vandals, execute drug traffickers and have *** with 12 year old girls as well?
No, it sounds pretty good and apparently works quite well in Singapore. As you pointed out, however, conservatives would have a fit. Conservatives would be displeased with any effective proposals for universal health care.
Every other developed country has universal health care with a variety of different systems. Not one of those systems appeals to conservatives because they are not interested in providing health care coverage to all Americans.
I can. Sorry. You forget how (un)insurance companies are puching up prices, blaming hospitals instead [5].
I am always amazed how many Americans seem not to be aware about the real healthcare issues relying instead on FOX and other sources to spread lies about the healthcare system of the USA and those abroad. I mean, if healthcare in nations with universal coverage is so bad, why do they keep it?
Obama wants to make insurance more available to all and change the system so that it gives the American people value for money [1]. He also wants change so that the insurance companies find it harder to get out of paying for treatment. The system he is proposing looks similar to that which works in Taiwan where private companies are involved in providing healthcare [2].
Obama campaigned on reforming the healthcare system. He said he wanted to make insurance more available and he was elected by the American people to do this [3].
FACT – the US has higher death rates for kids both for kids aged under one and those under five than western European countries with universal health coverage [4].
FACT – American insurance companies push up prices and work to stop paying out claims on those they cover [5].
FACT – the USA spends more on healthcare PER PERSON than any other nation on the planet [6].
That means that a dead American four year old would have had a better chance of life if they were born in any western nation with universal health coverage.
If you do not like the policies that Obama was elected to bring in, he can always be voted out of office in 2012. But if you disagree with the facts, please let me know. I am always willing to learn, but please provide proof. None of those who disagree with me have been able to do that so far.
Where, in the Constitution of the United States, do you find the authority for the federal government to interfere in health care?
Why should I, as a taxpayer, be forced to pay for health care for fat people, drunks, junkies, smokers, tramps or baby factories? They choose their actions. They can pay the consequences.
Get the government out of the doctor’s office and watch costs drop.