A comparison of health care systems

[m657]

...geez....I "need" MORE GOVERNMENT.....how can those heartless minions of mediocrity charge so much for such an essential????

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

I smoke and my lung capacity and physical endurance exceeds that of most of my younger nonsmoking coworkers who seem to take a lot more sick leave than I do. It was the same when I was in the Air Force, so that generalization doesn't fly.

Generalizations are usually not trumped by an anecdote (your personal performance).

Now, if you have some data that showed obese alchoholic chain smoking drug addicts with the crabs are more reliable than their phyisically fit and drug-free counterparts, that would be a much more convincing argument.

 

[ohiobuckeye]

Now, if you have some data that showed obese alchoholic chain smoking drug addicts with the crabs are more reliable than their phyisically fit and drug-free counterparts, that would be a much more convincing argument.

Well said...

 

[DrewW]

I have a friend from England that was unfortunate enough to suffer an appendicitis attack while part of England's wonderful healthcare system, the Doctor who saw him informed him that the government was no long treating appendicitis and that my friend should stay close to the hospital so when it finally burst he would be close enough that he might not die. I am sorry but I would prefer to have the choice to have my appendicitis treated instead of waiting for it to burst possibly ending my life.

I agree that something needs to be done to our healthcare system but this government has already having a heyday with rights, this is not the answer, the government can't handle what the constitution allows them control of why do people continually insist we give them more things to screw up.

 

[CJofWolfcreek]

Actually my point was that generalizations suck, especially since we in the firearms community suffer from that very same thing. All data can and will be skewed to put the prefered spin on it. Is smoking healthy? No it's not the healthiest thing to be doing, nor is firing a 500S&W. While I don't want to punish my wrists, I dont begruge those that do or say they are going to be leeches on the health care system with hearing loss and nerve and bone damage.

 

[BarbC]

We have insurance. I have to pay for my office visits, plus an annual deductible and a co-pay for all else. I take care of myself and only go to the doctor if absolutely necessary because the last and only time I went for a cortisone shot, I paid over $200. We do have major medical for emergencies.

My daughter has no insurance. She stays away from the doctor unless absolutely necessary too because she has to pay out of pocket. If she has an emergency, which she has had, she goes to Robert Wood Johnson Hospital, which takes charity cases. She has no deductible and no copay.

My sister has multiple sclerosis. She and her husband own their own business and pay their own insurance. She can't afford to be sick but she is. Yet she has had every treatment she needs and simply makes low payments on the balance to the hospital and doctors. It is cheaper to make low payments than to try to afford routine medical insurance. They still have their house and business. Times are tight, but they are not out on the street, nor will they ever be. "Bankruptcy" is a protection, not a stigma, for those forced to file due to medical expenses.

I have yet to see someone turned away from necessary procedures. However, if you make routine medical free, the system will be so clogged and expensive, truly necessary procedures will suffer for all as well.

Go look at Dick Burg's thread. He was able to have an emergency bypass on the same day as admission. Even if he was a charity case, there still would be resources for the same procedure at the same speedy delivery.

Make it all free, and they will all come for every ache and pain. And absolutely there will be less for all as well.

 

[m657]

None of the official legislative change in provision of health care I've seen, limits the wages of the secretary, the rent or the utilities of the office, the liability insurance, the lawyers, bookkeepers, or those other supportive services to the provider. Overhead continues to rise, while payment for health care to the PROVIDER decreases.

The days of some faceless nameless cog in the cadre of the insurance apperatchik making the decision whether a procedure will be paid under the terms of the contract, or how many circles of paperwork hell must be navigated before authorization, is viewed by most patients as a type of control whether they can or will take a certain treatment.

It amount to practicing without a license, yet the carriers do it routinely, regardless of state/federal laws.

Certainly the carrier has the right to determine whether or IF it makes payment.

All too often, the delay and convolutions of securing payment for health care services becomes more expensive that providing the service in the first place.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Actually my point was that generalizations suck, especially since we in the firearms community suffer from that very same thing. All data can and will be skewed to put the prefered spin on it. Is smoking healthy? No it's not the healthiest thing to be doing, nor is firing a 500S&W. While I don't want to punish my wrists, I dont begruge those that do or say they are going to be leeches on the health care system with hearing loss and nerve and bone damage.

My post was just a tad tongue-in-cheek...


On a more sober note... I consider generalizations quite useful in my life. Without them, it would be more difficult to make informed personal decisions.

I completely agree with you about freedom of choice. To adults I say... Smoke 'em if you've got 'em. Life is short, and many people enjoy smoking. Who among us lives a life free of unnecessary risk? Not me... and I would not want to.

I disagree with government subsidies to tobacco farmers and special 'sin taxes' on the final product. Government should not dictate to private business whether or not smoking is allowed on their property. Let the free market discriminate against or embrace smoking, smokers and non-smokers as it sees fit.

Firearms are a bit different than cigs due to the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms. One of the pet peeves I have with some pro-gun rights advocates and legislators is that they allow themselves to get sucked into debates over gun related/involved crime statistics and such. It does not matter if crime goes up or down or sideways or anything.... as it has no bearing on my Consitutional rights. However, I believe a health insurance company should be free to discriminate against or embrace gun owners as they see fit.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

None of the official legislative change in provision of health care I've seen, limits the wages of the secretary, the rent or the utilities of the office, the liability insurance, the lawyers, bookkeepers, or those other supportive services to the provider. Overhead continues to rise, while payment for health care to the PROVIDER decreases.

The days of some faceless nameless cog in the cadre of the insurance apperatchik making the decision whether a procedure will be paid under the terms of the contract, or how many circles of paperwork hell must be navigated before authorization, is viewed by most patients as a type of control whether they can or will take a certain treatment.

It amount to practicing without a license, yet the carriers do it routinely, regardless of state/federal laws.

Certainly the carrier has the right to determine whether or IF it makes payment.

All too often, the delay and convolutions of securing payment for health care services becomes more expensive that providing the service in the first place.

Few things appear more convoluted, confusing and inefficient as capitalism and free markets. Socialism and communisim typically appear far more streamlined and efficient on paper. When Krushchev visited in 1959, he probably thought we were freaking nuts. History is rife with examples of failed government engineered efficiencies.

Breach of contract (automatic claim denials) should be vigoursly enforced and prosecuted by authorities.