What a convoluted bunch of crap. Non of this addresses the real problem which can not be solved which is the cost and amount of health care that we as americans demand.
Let’s see now…..if you’re an insurance carrier (a ‘for profit entity’)you can’t make money, you can’t underwrite, you’ll pay for what we say you must and if you CAN’T do those things and hold the line on costs we’ll compete against you with a ‘public plan’ (that we PRINT MONEY TO FUND)! Oh, by the way, we’re going to tax the hell out of you also!
What a jumbled, cumbersome nightmare!
LEAVE US ALONE!
Don’t you just love democrats!
You are not alone in that you can spell out what you don’t like or want but don’t offer any alternative to SOLVE the problem of the unfranchised UNINSURED. Each time one of these uninsured folks reaches a critical health problem, they go to the EMERGENCY room, the cost of which is passed along to…(drum roll please)…all the rest of us who actually HAVE our own insurance. So this is my problem….how to hold down the cost? by developing a market based alternative, like for personal auto…but what type of mechanism can we use? Let’s see, how about copying the reinsurance facility model, like North Carolina, which is still in business, where the costs of insurance is shared by all the other insurance consumers in the state. Now everyone in NC likes their plan but let’s not hold our breath to mention that this type of program is… A SOCIALISTIC model. Where are all the gasps and gaping jaws? All I want is to pay LESS than we do now. EMERGENCY ROOM medical care is costly; it would be cheaper to put all those folks into some kind of plan. The real difference between Democrats and Republicans is how to present the cost structure, regardless of the fact that we have to pay for someone else’s medical expenses. Maybe we can use one of those Republican faith based programs, and have some churches operate it, huh? I can’t understand why everyone can agree that something needs to be done but we have to MAKE MONEY on it? Why do health insurance companies need to have SURPLUSES anyway? do they expect to have long tail “losses” which cannot be actuarially projected? It is the “for profit” model that should be junked, because that is why the insurance lobby is against any real reform….there’s no money in it, FOR THEM!
Problems I see with the existing health care structure and how to mitigate or solve them:
P1) Medicare underpays for services, forcing medical providers to shift their costs to private-market payers.
S1) Increase medicare payment schedule by 10% across the board. Increase the current Medicare tax from 2% to 2.5% to pay for it, and stave off insolvency of the program.
P2) Unnecessary tests and treatments drive up costs. As I see it, this is a two-part problem. Fee-for-service presents an incentive to order extra tests. The possibility of med-mal claims also provides an incentive in the form of fear of a lawsuit.
S2) Fee-for-service is a tough nut to crack, especially for private practice doctors. Hospitals etc. could shift to a salary-type payment scheme for doctors.
In addition tort reform including a hard cap on non-economic damages should reduce the frequency of lawsuits, driving down the cost of malpractice insurance and reducing the incentive to order extra procedures.
He conveniently omits the impact a “public option” WILL have on private insurers, the absense of a level playing field, and the TOTAL absence of any meaningful tort reform and simply demonizes both the insurance and pharmacuetical industries.
I don’t agree that there is a NEED for everyone to have health insurance coverage. The uninsured need clinics to go to, that would charge on a scale base. Here in Northeast Massachusetts there are no clinics, that people could use. Sometimes the simplest suggestion is the best. The clinics could be funded by the government using doctors that use government funds for medical school. If people had an option they would use it. But we citizens have to understand that money talks, and if you have a job that provides fabulous health insurance then good for you, and if you have a job that does not, then look for a job that does. We citizens have to learn to WAIT in line for what we want. That is the reason I think government health care will not work, because Americans do not believe they should have to wait. Mandated insurance has not really worked in MA, it is too expensive for the taxpayers. As a mother it worries me to see the taxing for the health care industries, as they are one of the few growing job markets for our kids. Make no mistake, the industries listed above are the industries that have jobs. We need politicians that make actual choices, not just pander to what they “think” the public would like. Projections are all well and good, but they are no different than guestimates and as prices go up, so will the projections. I heard this morning that MA projected mandated insurance would only cost 7-10million per year in 3 years it is now 700 million. a bit of a difference.
You are kidding me, right?
I don’t know where to begin, drum roll please:
1) IT’S SOCIALISM
2) SOCIALISM only works when you have other people’s money. Current fed receipts are down 36% the last two quarters.
I do appreciate you calling a spade a spade and socialism, well.. socialism.
Thanks, Debbie! Just wish more folks from MA would speak out like you did!
Those of us on the “outside” are being fed the propaganda that MA Health Care is a model of what a Government-run system “should” be.
Even though it’s leaked out that it’s exponentially more costly than projected but it sounds like it’s missing the mark by just about every other measure as well….
Reich shows why liberals are not taken seriously by America these days. 1) He could simply support a free market approach by letting companies offer THEIR policies across state lines! That will improve consumer choices. We don’t need a socialist public program for health insurance.
Since 100% of Americans have health care, lets just focus on the 15-18 million people that don’t have health INSURANCE because they don’t qualify for Medicaid, and can’t afford the present options out there.
2) Get rid of mandates. Allow policies that are streamlined and CHEAP!
In other words — GET GOV’T OUT OF THE WAY!!
3) Because almost 100% of doctors do extra tests to avoid being sued by DEMOCRAT special interest group personal injury lawyers, let’s FINALLY get tort reform on the table.
These are ideas that are easy to implement and would be extremely effective in helping all comsumers!
You got my point: there are already other socialistic programs operating in our states as well as at the federal level. All I am saying is that people grab a label, call it bad, and then nothing further can be done. so what if it is socialism? Ever think that it may just be that the problem is too big for the “hidden hand of the market” to solve? Or do you want our position to be that of Cain….”am I my brother’s keeper?” I pay my taxes and I make donations to the United Way; if government and philanthropic organizations squander the money, then shame on them but I did my part. Same with the public option, DO something and if it fails, at least we tried but the current “system” does nothing for those who have no coverage and have to rely on hidden subsidies in order to make it work. I am paying either way, I just want it more transparent so I can have a voice in how to fix it when it needs fixing. But for now, I have no say in how health care is delivered but I am sure that I could get better treatment if my doctor didn’t order unnecessary tests to cover his fear of lawsuits or generate revenue in order to sustain his practice. There just has to be a better way and I am NOT too cheap to pay for it; hell, it can’t come to much more than a few hundred bucks a year and while I don’t make that much money, I never looked back to the taxes I pay now. I say so what? I am just tired of it all, let’s do something and get on with it.
You’ve got to be kidding right? that all “special interest group personal injury lawyers” are DEMOCRATS? Wonder how many Republicans in Congress are NOT lawyers? How many Republicans do not represent special interests during their tenure or end up working as lobbyists for special interest group-personal injury lawyers? This ain’t a DEMOCRAT vs. REPUBLICAN issue. It’s a “I’m not paying for someone else’s problems” issue.
I disagree that there isn’t a need for everyone to have health insurance, even for preventative medicine. One fortunate by-product of everyone having health insurance is that it will include the young and healthy, which will reduce the amount of adverse selection that currently exists in the market. What does reducing adverse selection mean? Reduction in rates for everyone.
TAX, TAX, TAX, That’s all these democrats understand!!
Throw the BUMS out!!!
What a convoluted bunch of crap. Non of this addresses the real problem which can not be solved which is the cost and amount of health care that we as americans demand.
Let’s see now…..if you’re an insurance carrier (a ‘for profit entity’)you can’t make money, you can’t underwrite, you’ll pay for what we say you must and if you CAN’T do those things and hold the line on costs we’ll compete against you with a ‘public plan’ (that we PRINT MONEY TO FUND)! Oh, by the way, we’re going to tax the hell out of you also!
What a jumbled, cumbersome nightmare!
LEAVE US ALONE!
Don’t you just love democrats!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBi8A_HutII
You are not alone in that you can spell out what you don’t like or want but don’t offer any alternative to SOLVE the problem of the unfranchised UNINSURED. Each time one of these uninsured folks reaches a critical health problem, they go to the EMERGENCY room, the cost of which is passed along to…(drum roll please)…all the rest of us who actually HAVE our own insurance. So this is my problem….how to hold down the cost? by developing a market based alternative, like for personal auto…but what type of mechanism can we use? Let’s see, how about copying the reinsurance facility model, like North Carolina, which is still in business, where the costs of insurance is shared by all the other insurance consumers in the state. Now everyone in NC likes their plan but let’s not hold our breath to mention that this type of program is… A SOCIALISTIC model. Where are all the gasps and gaping jaws? All I want is to pay LESS than we do now. EMERGENCY ROOM medical care is costly; it would be cheaper to put all those folks into some kind of plan. The real difference between Democrats and Republicans is how to present the cost structure, regardless of the fact that we have to pay for someone else’s medical expenses. Maybe we can use one of those Republican faith based programs, and have some churches operate it, huh? I can’t understand why everyone can agree that something needs to be done but we have to MAKE MONEY on it? Why do health insurance companies need to have SURPLUSES anyway? do they expect to have long tail “losses” which cannot be actuarially projected? It is the “for profit” model that should be junked, because that is why the insurance lobby is against any real reform….there’s no money in it, FOR THEM!
Problems I see with the existing health care structure and how to mitigate or solve them:
P1) Medicare underpays for services, forcing medical providers to shift their costs to private-market payers.
S1) Increase medicare payment schedule by 10% across the board. Increase the current Medicare tax from 2% to 2.5% to pay for it, and stave off insolvency of the program.
P2) Unnecessary tests and treatments drive up costs. As I see it, this is a two-part problem. Fee-for-service presents an incentive to order extra tests. The possibility of med-mal claims also provides an incentive in the form of fear of a lawsuit.
S2) Fee-for-service is a tough nut to crack, especially for private practice doctors. Hospitals etc. could shift to a salary-type payment scheme for doctors.
In addition tort reform including a hard cap on non-economic damages should reduce the frequency of lawsuits, driving down the cost of malpractice insurance and reducing the incentive to order extra procedures.
Reich’s video is a pantload.
He conveniently omits the impact a “public option” WILL have on private insurers, the absense of a level playing field, and the TOTAL absence of any meaningful tort reform and simply demonizes both the insurance and pharmacuetical industries.
Who’s trying to scare whom, Robert?
I don’t agree that there is a NEED for everyone to have health insurance coverage. The uninsured need clinics to go to, that would charge on a scale base. Here in Northeast Massachusetts there are no clinics, that people could use. Sometimes the simplest suggestion is the best. The clinics could be funded by the government using doctors that use government funds for medical school. If people had an option they would use it. But we citizens have to understand that money talks, and if you have a job that provides fabulous health insurance then good for you, and if you have a job that does not, then look for a job that does. We citizens have to learn to WAIT in line for what we want. That is the reason I think government health care will not work, because Americans do not believe they should have to wait. Mandated insurance has not really worked in MA, it is too expensive for the taxpayers. As a mother it worries me to see the taxing for the health care industries, as they are one of the few growing job markets for our kids. Make no mistake, the industries listed above are the industries that have jobs. We need politicians that make actual choices, not just pander to what they “think” the public would like. Projections are all well and good, but they are no different than guestimates and as prices go up, so will the projections. I heard this morning that MA projected mandated insurance would only cost 7-10million per year in 3 years it is now 700 million. a bit of a difference.
You are kidding me, right?
I don’t know where to begin, drum roll please:
1) IT’S SOCIALISM
2) SOCIALISM only works when you have other people’s money. Current fed receipts are down 36% the last two quarters.
I do appreciate you calling a spade a spade and socialism, well.. socialism.
Thanks, Debbie! Just wish more folks from MA would speak out like you did!
Those of us on the “outside” are being fed the propaganda that MA Health Care is a model of what a Government-run system “should” be.
Even though it’s leaked out that it’s exponentially more costly than projected but it sounds like it’s missing the mark by just about every other measure as well….
Reich shows why liberals are not taken seriously by America these days. 1) He could simply support a free market approach by letting companies offer THEIR policies across state lines! That will improve consumer choices. We don’t need a socialist public program for health insurance.
Since 100% of Americans have health care, lets just focus on the 15-18 million people that don’t have health INSURANCE because they don’t qualify for Medicaid, and can’t afford the present options out there.
2) Get rid of mandates. Allow policies that are streamlined and CHEAP!
In other words — GET GOV’T OUT OF THE WAY!!
3) Because almost 100% of doctors do extra tests to avoid being sued by DEMOCRAT special interest group personal injury lawyers, let’s FINALLY get tort reform on the table.
These are ideas that are easy to implement and would be extremely effective in helping all comsumers!
You got my point: there are already other socialistic programs operating in our states as well as at the federal level. All I am saying is that people grab a label, call it bad, and then nothing further can be done. so what if it is socialism? Ever think that it may just be that the problem is too big for the “hidden hand of the market” to solve? Or do you want our position to be that of Cain….”am I my brother’s keeper?” I pay my taxes and I make donations to the United Way; if government and philanthropic organizations squander the money, then shame on them but I did my part. Same with the public option, DO something and if it fails, at least we tried but the current “system” does nothing for those who have no coverage and have to rely on hidden subsidies in order to make it work. I am paying either way, I just want it more transparent so I can have a voice in how to fix it when it needs fixing. But for now, I have no say in how health care is delivered but I am sure that I could get better treatment if my doctor didn’t order unnecessary tests to cover his fear of lawsuits or generate revenue in order to sustain his practice. There just has to be a better way and I am NOT too cheap to pay for it; hell, it can’t come to much more than a few hundred bucks a year and while I don’t make that much money, I never looked back to the taxes I pay now. I say so what? I am just tired of it all, let’s do something and get on with it.
You’ve got to be kidding right? that all “special interest group personal injury lawyers” are DEMOCRATS? Wonder how many Republicans in Congress are NOT lawyers? How many Republicans do not represent special interests during their tenure or end up working as lobbyists for special interest group-personal injury lawyers? This ain’t a DEMOCRAT vs. REPUBLICAN issue. It’s a “I’m not paying for someone else’s problems” issue.
I disagree that there isn’t a need for everyone to have health insurance, even for preventative medicine. One fortunate by-product of everyone having health insurance is that it will include the young and healthy, which will reduce the amount of adverse selection that currently exists in the market. What does reducing adverse selection mean? Reduction in rates for everyone.