Failed us? We are living longer and healthier all the time.
2007-07-17 14:19:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by Corruptfile34 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
No, honey, the invisible hand has not had a chance to work.
The problem is what we have now is the worst of both the marketplace and socialized medicine. I will give you a single example.
When I was a legal secretary working for liability defense attorneys, I had many occasions to review hospital bills and determine not only how much was billed, but how much was paid and how much the hospital "wrote off." Normally, the term "written off" refers to a bad debt, but not if you work for a hospital. For example, they bill $50,000 for a certain procedure. (Not exaggerated: probably a conservative figure, actually.) But anyone who has insurance pays a co-pay of maybe $500, and their insurance company pays maybe $25,000. This is because the insurance company has a contract with the hospital due to "volume discounts." Say a wealthy person does not have insurance, but pays the bill as they are leaving the hospital. They will get a cash discount, quite a big one, which may mean they pay roughly the same as the insurance company. So who pays the full $50,000? The person who is middle-class and does not have insurance and must finance the bill over time, and government agency that pays for the indigent.
You get the picture? The whole idea of fairness is totally out the window this way. The accounting department would not need this deceptive practice if they were paid the same amount no matter who it was that was doing the paying. So "single payer" sounds good. One problem: that "single payer" being the government means that we would ALL be charged for everyone's illnesses.
The socialist model is "to each according to his needs; from each according to his abilities." This means it pays to have needs, and does not pay to have abilities. Nowhere is this easier to distort than in medical care, where poor health can be simulated or even intentionally invoked. Frankly, if we had socialized medicine, hypochondria and Munchausen's Syndrome would become national epidemics.
What we need is medical care which is paid for by those who can afford it, and by non-profit foundations for those who cannot. Those foundations would be far more efficient and far less likely to tolerate the bizarre accounting practices of modern medicine than government is today.
We also need to stop paying for drugs and tests that we don't want just because a doctor is protecting himself from a malpractice suit. His malpractice insurance should pay for those things.
2007-07-18 02:57:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by auntb93 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Actually the market is working pretty well. Things started going downhill when the government got involved, just like the medical systems in socialized countrys are, despite what Michael Moore would like you to believe, in the toilet.
The market doesn't promise to make everyone's life perfect, just the lives of more people than any other system. Non-market based systems make everyone equal - in misery.
Read this article:
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=269211519188387
By the way, I cut my pills in half all the time - when my dosage goes down. I've been suffering and recovering from a neurological disorder for ten months. In any country other than the U.S. I would have been dead last January.
2007-07-17 21:25:39
·
answer #3
·
answered by lpa53 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
What the drug companies do is not capitalism.It is more like unarmed robbery.
No, I'm not a lib,i just tell it like it is.
All people can do is complain about the oil companies making 10 cents per gallon profit,while the real crooks(pharmaceutical companies)get by with robbing us and insurance companies.
It costs 7 cents to make a pill that retails for $7 and claim that they need to charge that much to continue research.I say BULLSHIT.
2007-07-17 21:24:45
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree; I do not worship capitalism or money; the market is a good thing, but it's not the answer to every problem we face.
2007-07-17 21:19:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by Gemini 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Indeed!
That "free global market" that so many cons fantasize about obviously doesn't apply to seniors wanting to purchase lower priced pharmaceuticals from Canada.
Why is that?
2007-07-17 21:41:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
How long can the system really exist when the actual monthly retail cost of medications exceed the monthly premiums paid? Not long.
2007-07-17 21:23:03
·
answer #7
·
answered by Whoa_Phat 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
thanks to the gov't that has changed standards that require more and more people to be pharm dependent..
changing the plateau on high blood pressure alone..making what wasn't considered high
7 years ago..was a boom to the pharm industry..
teachers insisting their students be medicated..when all they have is Liberal Arts degrees..but work for the Gov't..
it's all a joke..unless you really need something..
2007-07-17 21:22:45
·
answer #8
·
answered by UMD Terps 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
well I heard some people have to split their toilet paper too
is that a birthright ?
free toilet paper ?
2007-07-17 21:22:49
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Don't fix it if it isn't broken!
2007-07-17 21:20:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by American Man 3
·
1⤊
0⤋