Stoats US healthcare proposal

#1
Here's a simple US healthcare solution:

The very poor have Medicaid anyway, so they already are covered. We can largely forget about them.

The over 65 have Medicare, so they are already covered. Ditto.

80% are happy with their coverage. Ditto.

A large number of the uninsured are uninsured by choice, since they earn enough to buy insurance but choose not to, or they are young and don't think they need it.

This leaves a very small number who are not covered by Medicaid or Medicare yet can't afford insurance.

So, here is my solution: instead of getting all self-righteous and "generous" with other people's money via the federal government, why don't people who want to club together on an entirely voluntary basis and contribute out of their own pockets towards buying insurance coverage (either in the form of "medigap" or complete policies) for the small number of people who genuinely are not covered through no fault of their own?

This could range from small groups of people (e.g. 3-10) buying policies for specific families, or larger scale schemes paying into a communal pot which then buys coverage for qualifying people.

It wouldn't require any legislation, it wouldn't require the federal government, it would have very low overheads, it would be entirely voluntary, and people who care can contribute their own hard earned rather than having it forcibly confiscated from others.

Even though I am incredibly opposed to a federal healthcare monstrosity, I would contribute to such a scheme.

Seems simples, no?
 
#3
mac1 said:
charity then?
that's the bugger!

I'm sure that all those Hollywood leftists who are so keen on HR3200 and with more money than sense can chuck in a fair old number of millions a year between them without exhausting their lines of credit.
 
#4
Do you one better and that is allow insurance to be bought in states other then the one you live in. You see all states regulate insurance and some plans offered in say Texas are not offered in Wisconsin, because the Texas plan doesn't include coverage for addadicktomy or redactadickfrommy.

These regulation also make it hard for insurance companies to offer ala carte plans, for example I will pay out of pocket for routine checkups, and will only carry catastrophic coverage.

When all is said and done there are truely only 6-10 million people that truely fall through the gap because they earn too much to get Medicaid/care but don't earn enough to pay for their own policy.

Your charity solution is sound, but there is nothing in it for the power hungry.
 
#5
I don't know if anyone else picked up on this, but Charles Krauthammer wrote an interesting article giving the Dems the only logical way out ( not the system he would prefer, but a way out of them). What he succeeded in doing is reinventing the Dutch 2005 healthcare reforms!

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-oped0831krauthammeraug31,0,4280906.story?track=rss

5) Promise nothing but pleasure -- for now. Make health insurance universal and permanently protected. Tear up the existing bills and write a clean one -- ObamaCare 2.0 -- promulgating draconian health-insurance regulation that prohibits (a) denying coverage for pre-existing conditions, (b) dropping coverage if the client gets sick, and (c) capping insurance company reimbursement.

What's not to like? If you have insurance, you'll never lose it. Nor will your children ever be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions.

The regulated insurance companies will get two things in return. Government will impose an individual mandate that will force the purchase of health insurance on the millions of healthy young people who today forgo it. And government will subsidize all the others who are too poor to buy health insurance. The result? Two enormous new revenue streams created by government for the insurance companies.

And here's what makes it so politically seductive: The end result is the liberal dream of universal and guaranteed coverage -- but without overt nationalization. It is all done through private insurance companies. Ostensibly private. They will, in reality, have been turned into government utilities. No longer able to control whom they can enroll, whom they can drop and how much they can limit their own liability, they will live off government largesse -- subsidized premiums from the poor; forced premiums from the young and healthy.

It's the perfect finesse -- government health care by proxy. And because it's proxy, and because it will guarantee access to (supposedly) private health insurance -- something that enjoys considerable Republican support -- it will pass with wide bipartisan backing and give Obama a resounding political victory.

Isn't there a catch? Of course, there is. This scheme is the ultimate bait-and-switch. The pleasure comes now, the pain later. Government-subsidized universal and virtually unlimited coverage will vastly compound already out-of-control government spending on health care. The financial and budgetary consequences will be catastrophic.

However, they will not appear immediately. And when they do, the only solution will be rationing. That's when the liberals will give the FCCCER regulatory power and give you end-of-life counseling.

But by then, resistance will be feeble. Why? Because at that point the only remaining option will be to give up the benefits we will have become accustomed to. Once granted, guaranteed universal health care is not relinquished. Look at Canada. Look at Britain. They got hooked; now they ration. So will we.
 
#6
ctauch said:
Do you one better and that is allow insurance to be bought in states other then the one you live in. You see all states regulate insurance and some plans offered in say Texas are not offered in Wisconsin, because the Texas plan doesn't include coverage for addadicktomy or redactadickfrommy.

These regulation also make it hard for insurance companies to offer ala carte plans, for example I will pay out of pocket for routine checkups, and will only carry catastrophic coverage.

When all is said and done there are truely only 6-10 million people that truely fall through the gap because they earn too much to get Medicaid/care but don't earn enough to pay for their own policy.

Your charity solution is sound, but there is nothing in it for the power hungry cunts.
Another thing that many people don't pick up on is that ending this prohibition (under state laws) on buying health care across state lines would be an entirely correct and constitutional use of the commerce clause (the sole authority of Congress to make any regulation whatsoever.)

I can't imagine them actually acting constitutionally on this when they can act unconstitutionally on so many other things in preference....
 
#7
stoatman said:
However, they will not appear immediately. And when they do, the only solution will be rationing. That's when the liberals will give the FCCCER regulatory power and give you end-of-life counseling.

But by then, resistance will be feeble. Why? Because at that point the only remaining option will be to give up the benefits we will have become accustomed to. Once granted, guaranteed universal health care is not relinquished. Look at Canada. Look at Britain. They got hooked; now they ration. So will we.
[/quote]

Not sure about Canada - have read that some are crossing over to the US for treatment that they would otherwise be put on a waiting list for, but Americans seem to be under some impression that healthcare is restricted to that provided by the state, seemingly unaware that we have a thriving healthcare industry which an increasing number of people are making use of. Not only that, the cost is a bargain compared to the the $12000-$21000pa that some Americans pay. Many employers offer privalte health insurance for all employees for which you pay extra tax.
 
#8
Part of the reason that US health insurance is so expensive is that a) you have to buy within state, and b) Medicare and Medicaid pay what they damn well choose with no regard to what a treatment or procedure actually costs, and I'm pretty sure that hospitals and doctors cannot refuse to take Medicare and Medicaid patients.

The difference between what Medicare and Medicaid will pay for a procedure is put on the cost for a private patient, which the insurer picks up and of course passes it on in terms of higher premiums.

So the poor private patient end up subsidising Medicare and Medicaid twice: once through general taxation, and again through the insurer being forced to subsidise the procedures and treatments that he has had.

The situation is ridiculous: can you think of any other system in which the purchaser gets to set the price without regard to the actual costs? Only government is capable of such stupidity...
 
#9
A friend of mines dad went into hospital in Texas recently and didn't have enough insurance, after a week or so in intesive care and another week in hospital a bill of $275,000 was presented.

On discharge my friends mum whips the cheque book out and signed a $100 cheque and says "you will get that amount every month until it is paid off" and walked out the hospital.
 
#10
johnboyzzz said:
A friend of mines dad went into hospital in Texas recently and didn't have enough insurance, after a week or so in intesive care and another week in hospital a bill of $275,000 was presented.

On discharge my friends mum whips the cheque book out and signed a $100 cheque and says "you will get that amount every month until it is paid off" and walked out the hospital.
A school friend of the wife's was uninsured and got into a traffic accident and was quite badly injured.

A couple of weeks in hospital and much patching up later, he was discharged -- there was no bill. Some well insured person presumably got gouged to pay for it.
 
#11
You have (in most cases in the US) medical coverage in your auto insurance. Of course the medical coverage is only for injuries incurred as part of a motor vehicle accident and not if you get a sniffle.

If he was at fault his insurance paid, if it wasn't his fault his insurance may have paid and then claimed restitution from the at fault insurance, and if they were one in the same company then they probably dropped the person at fault...:D
 
#12
mac1 said:
stoatman said:
They got hooked; now they ration. So will we.
We already do, it's called affordability. Fair enough, you can argue it is the American way but let's not bullsiht ourselves into thinking that doesn't function as a form of rationing, perhaps a more efficient form some might argue, but it still functions as a rationing of health care.

Krauthammer is far to clever a man not to know that.

Not sure about Canada - have read that some are crossing over to the US for treatment that they would otherwise be put on a waiting list for, but Americans seem to be under some impression that healthcare is restricted to that provided by the state, seemingly unaware that we have a thriving healthcare industry which an increasing number of people are making use of. Not only that, the cost is a bargain compared to the the $12000-$21000pa that some Americans pay. Many employers offer privalte health insurance for all employees for which you pay extra tax.
I live two hours drive from Victoria and Vancouver BC. There probably are some who drive down here to the U.S. for care but they pass buses of elderly going up to Canadian pharmacies for cheaper prescriptions so it's six of one, half a dozen of another.
 
#13
stoatman said:
Here's a simple US healthcare solution:

The very poor have Medicaid anyway, so they already are covered. We can largely forget about them.

The over 65 have Medicare, so they are already covered. Ditto.

80% are happy with their coverage. Ditto.

A large number of the uninsured are uninsured by choice, since they earn enough to buy insurance but choose not to, or they are young and don't think they need it.

This leaves a very small number who are not covered by Medicaid or Medicare yet can't afford insurance....
My bold.

This just is not the case now, stoat.
With over 30 million unemployed due to the economic implosion, people are not uninsured by choice! They can't afford private insurance, have some 'pre-existing' condition (as do most of us over the age of 35) and do not qualify for public insurance.
 
#14
ctauch said:
barrett said:
stoatman said:
Here's a simple US healthcare solution:

The very poor have Medicaid anyway, so they already are covered. We can largely forget about them.

The over 65 have Medicare, so they are already covered. Ditto.

80% are happy with their coverage. Ditto.

A large number of the uninsured are uninsured by choice, since they earn enough to buy insurance but choose not to, or they are young and don't think they need it.

This leaves a very small number who are not covered by Medicaid or Medicare yet can't afford insurance....
My bold.

This just is not the case now, stoat.
With over 30 million unemployed due to the economic implosion, people are not uninsured by choice! They can't afford private insurance, have some 'pre-existing' condition (as do most of us over the age of 35) and do not qualify for public insurance.
It is a fact you moron. The unemployed can use COBRA and if they can't afford that they can apply for Medicaid or Medigap. So fuck off am tired of you spouting kak and tripe about how s*** works in this country you ignorant two bit * wit.

After the math is done there are 6-10 million that fall in the area of unisured and can't afford private and earn too much to qualify for fed or state insurance.

Get stuffed!
Cobra is damned expensive especially for a family and only lasts 18 mos. As to getting Medicaid or Medigap - just try to if you have any assets - and the processing time, if you do ever qualify, is enormous.

You are the one ignorant about your own nation.
 
#15
A Texan chum of mine thought her medical insurance covered her family for pregnancy. She's a well paid computer consultant in permanent employ.

When the daughter got up the duff the insurance company pointed her to section 42 sub section 8, footnote 3 in her contract and told her to sod off. But what really got her goat was a basic set of labs on the daughter cost the insurance company $300 (an already very inflated cost) but as a private citizen she doesn't get the insurers lab "discount" and has to pay the full $800.

This isn't commerce it's pure banditry.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top