English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I think a major issue in the upcoming election(why the hell are we talking about it yet, anyways!) will be whether the government should provide universal health care to all Americans. My question is, isn't it more important that we concentrate on lowering healthcare costs rather than giving everyone health insurance? Regardless of whether the government or a private company is giving you insurance, the hospital bill will be the same. Much of the reason people cannot afford health insurance is because the high cost of medical procedures cause insurance to cost too much. Why doesn't the government treat the cause(health care costs) rather than the symptom(health care insurance)?

By the way, I am not advocating either party's position.

2007-03-08 07:50:13 · 20 answers · asked by aDWsd 1 in Politics & Government Politics

20 answers

Yes, and one way to reduce health care costs is to remove some or most of the useless rules that gov't puts on it.

Why does a 60 year old woman have to have child/pregnancy coverage? Because Big Gov't says so.

2007-03-08 07:53:51 · answer #1 · answered by az 4 · 1 0

You are on to something. I was talking to a man who sells health insurance. He and I are in a community group together. He was saying that health care costs need to come down through a variety of things. Drugs are too high, and there are way too many law suits against doctors. Premiums should be affordable and all things determined by a doctor should be covered with few exceptions and those covered after second opinion is made or arbitration. Cost for the poor and fixed income seniors can be subsedized by the government much like medicare is now. The ridiculous profit margin the insurace companies enjoy is too high. They need to be given incentives to lower the margin or become non-profit. Other things are a general insurance program for the poor and elderly where no one insurance company pays for everything. Each time the person goes to the doctor a different insurance company may have to pay for it. There would always be some sort of copay regardless. Even if only a few dollars both for doctor visits and medication. Totally free won't work in America and obviously private insurance is not working to the benefit of a majority of our citizens. Compromise is the answer.

2007-03-08 16:02:11 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The government is the cause, so it can't cure the cause, since that would mean eliminating itself.

There are 2 things the government does that drastically increase the cost of health care.

First, the stupid law that forces hospitals to treat anyone, regardless of their ability to pay. No other business is forced to provide service for free. If you go to McDonald's for food but can't afford it, McDonald's isn't forced to feed you. It is a horrible, stupid, and unfair law that drives up the cost of health care for everyone. Not to mention the whole host of other laws it spawned. For example: seat belt laws. Legislators don't actually care about your safety. But because they force a hospital to fix your dumb *** if you don't wear a seat belt, they have to make a law to force you to weat your seat belt, because it costs hospitals too much if you don't. Instead of repealing the forced service law, they create a million other laws to deal with all of the horrible side effects. Further proving my point that no politician or legislator has an IQ over 3, but that's a rant for another time.

The second thing that the government does to increase health care costs is bad tort law. The whole concept of punitive damages is ignorant and counter-productive. We hear every day about some person getting $50 million dollars because a doctor left a piece of gauze in them. I can garuntee you that not 1 single doctor or hosptial ever paid $1 of a punitive damages assessment. Their insurance paid it. So where is the punishment of the "punitive" damages?? They pay higher insurance, which they just pass on to us as higher bills for care. So the doctors and hospitals are not punished, the average Joe is. Conpensatory damages obvious and logical, punitive damages are retarded.

Again, the government can not fix the problem because it is the problem. If you think health care is expensive now, just imagine how insane it will be when the people that pay $600 for a hammer are in charge of it. Universal (nationalized) health care is quite possibly the worst idea ever.

2007-03-08 16:11:13 · answer #3 · answered by Aegis of Freedom 7 · 0 0

Well, don't forget that it is the state governments which determine what will be covered by medical insurance.

Thus when they decide that all medical insurance shall include rehab and psychiatric care and fertilization treatments and erectile dysfunction treatments etc, etc, THAT is what helps make health insurance unaffordable.

Litigation is another reason for high costs. Everybody gets sued anytime an outcome is less than optimal, it seems. Then you have lawyers like John Edwards, with their fake science show, which has caused raised malpractice insurance rates for doctors without actually making things safer.

The litigation, in turn, means that many, many unnecessary tests will be conducted, in order to prevent a lawsuit rather than for medical necessity.

There are many reasons for the high cost. But does anybody doubt that the cost will increase the service will decrease if the government gets its grubby paws on it?

2007-03-08 16:01:24 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

It is easier to treat the symptom than fix the cause. I would like to point out the recent VA hospital problems and problems with Medicare as examples of the future of US healthcare if Universal Health Care becomes the law.

So, the government has lost millions of veterans Social Security numbers, royally screwed up the Katrina effort, failed to provide accurate intelligence on Iraq, spends millions upon millions on a bridge in Alaska to make sure five hundred people don't have to use a ferry, failed to provide adequate medical care to veterans returning from service, has a retirement program that will inevitably go bankrupt, spends billions on education with no results, and then gives them self a raise every year and we think they should control health care as well.

2007-03-08 16:04:48 · answer #5 · answered by msi_cord 7 · 0 0

The problem is that the government absolutely
cannot afford to provide everyone's health insurance.
Besides, they have trouble running other government
programs, so we sure don't want them running our
health insurance. I like your idea best, work on health
care costs which are elevated by doctors who set the
price when they start their practices and want to make
the big bucks now that they're out of school and are in
debt (because of the high cost of college).

2007-03-08 15:59:57 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

State governments and the federal government are the problem. The health care industry and the insurance industry are the most regulated industries in the country. All of the "jumping through hoops" that the government forces on them drives up the costs of doing business.
Governments are unwilling to deal with the costliest problem. Plaintiffs' attorneys (like the fabulously wealthy John Edwards) bring in enormous awards for their clients. Someone has to pay for all of those rewards. Doctors have to pay as much as $100,000 just for medical practice insurance or they are forced out of business. States won't let doctors practice without mal practice insurance.

2007-03-08 16:00:17 · answer #7 · answered by regerugged 7 · 1 0

Universal Health Care seems to be coming to the forefront. It would be run much as the Veterans health care system is which is very simplistic, streamlined and drug costs are nominal. All major costs would be picked up by the Government who would be saving the money they are paying to the insurance companies in a great effort to privatize all medical care with the burden falling totally on the individual.

I hope more information is released regarding the qualities of this plan. Any plan at this point will be better then the path we are going down.

2007-03-08 15:58:26 · answer #8 · answered by madisonian51 4 · 1 2

Everybody must have healthcare! America has good doctors and great hospitals and they want to offer their services to patients. If America got business (insurance) and greed (money) out of our healthcare we would all be able to afford healthcare. Because business makes a huge amount of money on the business of healthcare they are NOT going to leave unless the government offers universal healthcare services to everybody and they do it for free. We pay a lot of taxes for a lot of government waste and fat. Why not use the fat and government waste on universal healthcare?
Think about this ... we are the most educated people in the world, yet we are the only people in the civilized world that can't go to a drug store and buy what makes us well. Instead we are forced to go to a doctor that does the following: Mr. Smith has been coughing and sneezing and has a fever for two days. He goes to the doctor and the doctor asks him what his problem is. Mr. Smith tells the doctor, "I have a cold." The doctor listens to his lungs and looks at his throat and the doctor tells Mr. Smith that "he has a cold", and he writes a couple of Rx's for Mr. Smith. The doctor spent less than 5 minutes with Mr. Smith. WHO diagnosed who here?
The AMA and the FDA have made it impossible for a person to go to the drug store and buy what makes us well. I guess it is "I'll scratch your back if you'll scratch mine" philosophy. Come on now, our country must provide healthcare coverage for everybody and they ought to use the Canadian healthcare services for a prototype.

2007-03-08 17:24:43 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I ama Democrat and Universal Health Care is a bad idea. Look at Medicare Part D, it is going to go bankrupt and is only a drop in the bucket compared to the cost of Universal Health Care.

2007-03-08 15:58:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

fedest.com, questions and answers