The American people are fortunate that our country leads the world in medical and pharmaceutical progress, offering more expertise to a large population than any other nation offers.
But while we "cure" many ills, the high cost is threatening to "kill" us.
Virtually every rational person agrees about that. But many differ on what to do about it.
Among the severest threats to our health is one that is not a customary "disease." We now face an "ill" called "Obamacare."
It would be a major step into socialized medicine (a term that the powers that be want to avoid).
It would be an unpredictable cost disaster than could bankrupt our country.
It inevitably would lead to patients flooding our doctors, hospitals and other medical facilities, which would lead to limits, delays, rationing and lower quality care.
And if we embark upon that course, it will kill many of our quality voluntary and independent insurance plans so we will never recover -- either medically or economically.
These are warnings of terrible things, aren't they? But there is probability that the predictions could be correct, or even "half" correct. That should give us pause.
If medical catastrophe results, how could there be any "turning back"?
There are some "bad" things about our medical system today, even though it is the "best." Improvements to assure good service and reduce exorbitant costs surely could and should be devised and practiced.
But while we have shortcomings and problems in our present system, that is no reason for us to jump off a cliff into an unknown abyss that would destroy what we do best in medical care, and result in something much worse.
We need medical care progress: service for all in real need, improvements in quality and access, reductions in costs.
But "government medicine," under any name or form, is not a desirable answer.
What does "government" do really well, efficiently, pleasantly and economically now? Name the program you think government does best -- then ask yourself if you want your health care and that of your family to be handled in that fashion. Are you willing and ready to pay the bill for it?
Text Size:
The typical right-wing scare tactic is to throw in the word "social" every now and then to try and scare people, but after eight years of "lies" most folks see right through them. Of course we will not have socialized medicine- the rich will have the option to continue their purchase of the finest health options money can buy. They will just have to share more of it with those folks who have had virtually no health care.
We could have national healthcare, or follow the Blue Cross and other private insurance models... cut benefits and raise the rates!
Isn't it comforting to know when BCBS, has a bad year they're still $59 million in the black?
Not bad for a not for profit.
How about using some of that money to make insurance more affordable?
Oh wait, that wouldn't be the American way.
You guys crack me up. All emotion, ideology, and squawking about "right wing scare tactics". How about dissecting the traditional left wing scare tactic "48 million of our citizens without insurance" or whatever number they choose to use today. Absolutely the health care system needs changes. If you think handing it over to the government is the answer, well I suggest you educate yourself as to what the government already contributes to the current fiasco.
Handing it over to the govt is not half as scary as handing it over to Wall St's Insurance Companies. But don't worry, the big boy's at the Insurance Companies will continue to get a share of the pie, just the pieces will now be regular size instead of super size. And the average Joe will be able to afford a piece of the pie instead of the crumbs that fall in the floor.
"Handing it over to the govt is not half as scary as handing it over to Wall St's Insurance Companies."
Just can't help yourself can you? Let me get you started on your educational journey. This is nearly as bad as the discussions about guns. Lots of arguments rooted in ignorance of the facts, ideological positions, and emotion. One of my favorites - "The people should have the same plan congress has". No problem but do you think runs the 11 insurance plans available for congress? Those greedy insurance companies. It has nothing to do with insurance companies. It has everything to do with the sweetheart deal congress has given itself at our expense.
http://www.opm.gov/insure/health/
Then take a good look at Medicare. Those vaunted "very low administrative costs" are bogus and a classic example of cooking the numbers to portray a desired result.
http://www.cahi.org/cahi_contents/res...
If you want to get really into it, google "rvu" or "relative value units" and see how Medicare already controls the charges for medical procedures and jiggers with the "rvu dollar value" to continually shrink reimbursements. Then find out why, for example, BCBS typically pays the doctor more for a procedure than Medicare and Medicaid pays even less than Medicare. Want more? Than try to figure out why all the minuses of HIPAA were achieved without gaining any of the cost savings measures that were the justification for passing it.
It's heavy going but if you survive (and it barely scratches the surface) you'll have a better idea of what's really going on. The drug fiasco is just as bad. Try to figure out why drugs are cheaper in Canada. One hint - who foots the bill for R & D? And what govt is responsible for that?
Insurance companies are by no means innocent but most of what they do is with at least the tacit approval, if not at the direction, of congress, the real elephant in the room. The same congress you think is going to fix the mess they've created.
Just trying to help you out EaTn. If this piques your interest and you want to look at other ways govt "helps" today's healthcare, let me know. I've got a million of 'em and I'm happy to share. Have a nice, and studious, evening. :)
Good post, Sailorman.
I've been asked to serve on a health care panel by a Republican Congressman who wants to have a rational response to Obama's healthcare plan.
I'd be curious to know your solution? For example, what system would you devise so that we don't have to cause people to become destitute before they are eligible to reliably receive government sponsored healthcare?
I'm open minded. I don't want to do away with Chattanooga's blue giant. I just want them to have some competition. Give me some good ideas.
Sailorman, let me make it real simple for you. Under the direction of the insurance companies and health care businesses, costs are rising double digit each year resulting in 17% gdp and quickly rising to 20%. Unless someone steps in to cut this trend, the medical business will soon swallow the economy. Do you have a solution besides complaining about the govt?
EaTn - Let me make it real simple for you instead. Describing how the system operates is not a complaint. It's an attempt to educate so people who care won't be reduced to throwing out simplistic statements like we have to cut the cost. Well duh no kidding. Where? If you don't understand where the costs come from, how would you go about cutting them? It's a target rich environment so tell you what - I'll match up any solutions I have to those you have. I'll even go first. Here's a couple easy ones. How about standardizing physician credentialing at a nationwide instead of state level. How about revising the certificate of need process? Your turn.
moonpie - a rational response to Obama's healthcare proposal requires that it too be rational. What little I've seen of it so far leads me to believe it won't necessarily be so. A quick fix rammed through congress is the last thing we need. If your panel truly wants to develop solid recommendations, I would suggest you do what any good consultant would do - go to the people who actually do the work. I can suggest a few groups you might want to talk with. One is the Medical Group Management Association. Practice managers are the people on the front lines who deal with the nitty gritty everyday. They can tell you exactly what the cost drivers are and why. Another group would be the patient advocates that work for the insurance companies (yes believe it or not, they actually exist).