Well, rather then raise articles, I ask questions - like Socrates:
Why is the US the only country, without a universal health care system?
And why do independent assessments (like the World Health Organization), rank it’s quality down on the list?
Note in the articles, the ranking of Singapore. It’s in the top 10 - in both articles. I point this out, because Hermano pointed to an article earlier - in this thread. It’s regarding the efficiency and cost effectiveness, of the Singapore health care model.
Besides these sample articles, I have visited the forums at expatexchange.com/, for countries like Chile, Panama, Costa Rica and Uruguay. And the consensus of US expats posting there, is that the quality is on par - or better - then the US. And at a fraction of the cost.
I think Eaglesway’s post is excellent, and I was about to append a note about health care, but qaz beat me to it! I read an article by David Stockman, showing that the apparent contradiction of A) a growing economy/increased productivity and B) lower purchasing power is explained by astronomically rising health care costs. All that extra money in “A” is going to feed the health care beast.
And why is health care so expensive? Because there are 30 TIMES more health care administrators (who cure nobody!) now than in 1970.
What do the health care administrators do with their millions? They make real estate investments.
Health care administrators are the villains in this story. “Socialists” and “libertarians” have nothing to do with it.
Is administration costs the only variable to consider? Why or why not?
Will we get the assessments in the top ten, by organizations like the World Health Organization? Assuming we just change the administration cost model?
Why is the Oklahoma model that Geoffrey pointed out, any better or worse than the Singaporean model of Hermano?
Etc.
Perhaps the most straightforward thing a Pres. Trump administration could do is spear-head a piece of legislation that could be printed on a single page:
On Oct.1, 2017, the minimum age for Medicare becomes 50 years of age.
On Oct. 1, 2018, the minimum age for Medicare becomes 35 years of age.
On Oct. 1, 2019, the minimum age for Medicare becomes 18 years of age.
On Oct. 1, 2020, the minimum age for Medicare becomes 0 years of age.
Voila! Done.
While I do not think that would be the ideal, I think it would be a far sight better than what we have now.
Quick question, Geoffrey. Right now, Medicare only pays for 80%, of the part B expenses occurred.
Do you propose he also changes Medicare, to pay 100 percent of medical costs?
If not, then what do we do about low income folks? Especially those who go to the hospital emergency rooms, because they don’t have insurance?
How will the premiums be administered and priced, for those who are senior citizens, low income folks, and the middle class masses and rich elite?
Etc.
The fedgov negotiates Medicare prices, which are consequently far, far lower than those that hospitals typically charge.
For example, I know an older guy on Medicare who had the full treatments for prostate cancer. His total bill: about $200.
Compare the $18,000 that couple that I know (with full insurance!) had to pay for a doctor to give them two slips of paper with two prescriptions (pain-killers for a kidney stone) scribbled on them. No procedures, no hospital stay, nothing. Just a quick confirmation of what the couple already knew was wrong, and two hastily-written notes. $18,000 was “their share”. He must have charged the insurance company $100,000 or so for that.
In other words, the hospitals can (and do) regularly screw-over insurance companies and individuals, but they can’t get away with that with Medicare.
I would like to post again the link to the article that opened my eyes to the realities of the giant scam that is the health care industry, and why Medicare is actually a pretty good program (as government programs go): uta.edu/faculty/story/2311/M … dGreed.pdf
I’m **not **objecting to Medicare at all, Geoffrey. After all, I joined the program in 2016 (via a Humana, medicare advantage plan). I am just raising questions, on how Trumpenstein and the Trumpetets, should expand it to the entire US population. Especially to the low income or poverty segments. I’m very familiar with what you shared here.
As far as costs go, compare what independent labs charge for laboratory tests. And compare them to hospital charges. There is a really big difference. Let me quote from this New York Times article entitled Why We Should Know the Price of Medical Tests.
Think of independent labs and hospitals this way. Suppose you buy a new car. Do you take it to the dealer or a trusted independent mechanic - for maintenance? Well, the trusted independent mechanic, will charge less. They have less overhead and a cheaper labor rate. And they may even choose aftermarket over OEM parts. And their mechanics often have the same training and certifications.
My point is that the 20% Medicare recipients have to pay is nothing whatsoever like the 20% that a person on health insurance would have to pay. In other words, I don’t think paying $200 for complete treatment of prostate cancer is unreasonable at all. I would expect even a “poor” man to pay that. It is not a goal of mine for health care to be “free” for all. Rather, it is a goal of mine to make health care have a reasonable price tag. I think we can all agree that $200 for a cancer cure is more than reasonable, and $18,000 for a prescription for two pain-killers for a kidney stone is thoroughly unreasonable.
To avoid complexification and the derailment of the entire bill to make Medicare universal, I would make it simple and easily printed on an index card. As soon as the boys in the fedgov started to try to “fix” it, the entire process would get bogged down in a metric ton of minutiae. Just pass the bill. Put everyone on Medicare. That would be a big improvement over what we have now. Then, and only then, the debate could start on whether and/or how to improve Medicare.
While astronomically escalating health care costs may technically contribute to static wages I would like to point out that…
When health care was privatized during the Clinton administration, the “talking point” was that healthcare would become more affordable because of the “free market” forces(competition, more effective administration, etc.).
This did not occur of course because when the HMO’s became a union of Big Pharm, Mega-Corporations and Insurnce Corptions. The foxes took over the henhouse.
The real reason(imo) behind static wages, falling benefits and rising healthcare costs- is corruption at the highest levels(money in politics) and profiteering by corporations wh collude to squeeze the public because…people just gotta hav healthcare.
Independent farmers were pushed out by restrictive laws and Monsantos gene patent and Corporate leverage(banks raised interest on farm loans to 20 % during the Russian grain embargo during Carter’s administration) and food prices escalated astronomically because… people just gotta have food.
Insurance is escalting because…people just gotta hav insurance.
Profiteering is the reason wages are static and benefits are falling imho. The mega-corps are the “faces” of the oligarchs, and they are squeezing the working class like a big anaconda. In the 20s and the 30s Americans fought JP Morgan and the rest of them for rights, wages, job safety, benefits, etc.
Those guys(the JP Morgans and their kind) never quit. The war is still on, and the working class is still losing.
They are increasing productivity while they are decreasing wages and benefits.
To me, the working class is symbolized in the story of Samson, who had the strength to overcome, but was to busy diddling around with Delilah(the seduction of the Philistines, TV, Sports, love of luxury and sensuality) to see it. He gave away the secret of his power(long hair- history; the wisdom of the ancients) and was blinded and put to forced labor in his impotence. He was tied between two pillars(lust and pride) in the coliseum- put on display by his conquerors. Thats us . On display. Impotent legends(Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Ghandi) adorn our t-shirts, but as yet, we are still blinded and shackled.
I havent seen any credible numbers anywhere that support that, but hey, I don’t hav an axe to grind. I just put up what I see reflected in the statistics and analysies I read, and if anyone was to show me otherwise by a credible statistical source, I would look at it. Otherwise, just seems like wishful thinking to me. Sanders would certainly disagree with that assertion, and the retirement age is more likely to be raised than lowered, with the “critical care” status of social security as it is now.
Perhaps these sources - for statistics and analysis - are **not **clear to me, in your posts. So can you share some links - to these statistical sources
I do hope you’re **not **getting them, from The Rush Limbaugh Show, Trumpenstein and the Trumpeters, or the insurance and pharmaceutical lobbyists
I have never heard anyone describe the U. S.'s health care system as “libertarian”, nor have I ever come across a libertarian who was even remotely pleased with U. S. health care policy.
You have often mentioned libertarians in this thread, qaz, though I do not remember anyone here describing himself as a libertarian. Perhaps you have a broader definition of libertarianism than those I have heard?
Perhaps this is a good definition, Geoffrey, from the Libertarian party web site at lp.org/issues/healthcare/. Do you agree that this reflects a Libertarian health care policy - qaz ?
Yes, that’s the sort of thing I think of when I think of libertarians and health care. Note that the link is extremely critical of the U. S. health care system and wants to dismantle the whole thing.
That illustrates why I think it odd to describe the U. S. health care system as “libertarian”. The libertarians are opposed to the system and don’t think it is worth the cost of the gunpowder to blow it up.
Perhaps “libertarian” has come to mean “to the right of me”, while “socialist” has come to mean “to the left of me”.
I’m reminded of George Carlin’s quip about how everyone who drives slower than me is an idiot, and everyone who drives faster than me is a maniac.
I do know that these insurers are drastically raising prices in Illinois - in 2017. For those not under the Medicare or Medicaid plan. And they also (along with the pharmaceutical industry), have a huge Washington lobby.
But the savvy consumer will figure out, which ones are good at managing costs and services…and which are not.
After all, a Medicare Advantage plan is really the federal government…giving a private company money - to manage the program. And the carrot is they offer a cap on annual costs and some more bells and whistles as benefits.
As the Bible says, we are all guilty of sin. A beast does not get this big by itself. In some way or another I think we have all contributed to it’s growth. So we cannot point the finger and blame it on this or that. First of all, become a doctor, one must go through years of schooling. I would say that this costs a pretty penny. Then, to keep from being sued out the yin- yang for mistakes that may occur in their practice, they must purchase a huge amount insurance. Of course, the law gets involved with regulation upon regulation which adds to the cost. Insurance companies are there to save the day as costs keep rising. With insurance in hand, we can now go to the doctor for any little thing because it doesn’t come out of our own pockets except for the co-pay. These are just a few of the many, many problems that are operating behind the veil. We have all become but numbers in which no one has a face, a name or an individual identity. So, no one cares how much the bill is because the money comes from an unidentifiable source. For that matter, there are many who don’t even bother to take care of themselves such as eating properly or exercising. So, as far as universal healthcare, do we really want to go there? If one thinks there would be no rules, regulations and laws applied in such a system, then think again. We would all be put on special diet and exercise programs, be forced to wear fit bands and have mandatory weigh-ins to keep track of us. Of course, no smoking or alcohol will be permitted, and we can all say good -bye to potato chips, donuts, soda, sugar, etc.etc. Does this sound like freedom or utopia to anyone?
LLC Funny. Personally, I think EVERYONE ought to have an activity band. But hey, what works for one person fails to motivate another.
I still think Ben Carson’s approach is the best I’ve heard, and since I’ve put it forth here before, I won’t waste a lot of words (which I didn’t do before, admittedly). A healthcare savings account for everyone for expenses under X$$$. Catastrophic event insurance (which is all that Obamacare is for a huge number of its victims) to cover anything over and above the savings account. That way people have what they need AND the incentive to shop around. That needs a lot of fleshing out, but since there is precisely zero possibility that I will be asked to serve as secretary of whatever, I’m not going any further with it.
That might even encourage people to spend part of their savings account on fitness bands and gym days. My doctor recommended a fitness band last year, September 11th. I went out and bought one as soon as I left her office. By September of this year I had lost 100 pounds and I haven’t felt so energetic since I was–oh, seven or eight years old. And I’m in my late 50s. So I had to laugh about your idea and whether it sounded like freedom, because it actually kind of does sound that way to me. Even though I’m not a proponent of govt overseeing that sort of thing at all. Could you use the HSA for new clothes?
Let me just share a few quoted segments, from this disturbing trend:
This is terrible Simply awful
But it also illustrates a point - with “liberal media bias” - negativity sells. Let me share a direct response copywriting story, I came across today at:
So if I were selling you something, I would first paint a picture (via stories, etc.), of doom and gloom. Then sell you a solution (i.e. Trumpenstein or the Hilderbeast )
And this copywriter is really selling products for other copywriters. But her story is very interesting.
. On display. Impotent legends(Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Ghandi) adorn our t-shirts, but as yet, we are still blinded and shackled.
I read it in the online tabloids, so I will share it here from:
Simply awful 
