Some changes for america's health care, my opinion

[Nbadan]

Does this plan sound like Medicade/Medicare and the CDC to anyone else?

[MiamiHeat]

I haven't said anything about a medicare type plan, Nbadan, did you post in the wrong topic lol


What I said up there was only about changing the health care industry into a special field that cannot be vultured for corporate greed and profits.

It should be a holy industry, dedicated only to the well-being of patients and almost non-profit (almost, but not quite), and streamlined to fund itself with LOW COST of care.

When someone charges you money for a procedure, you know for a fact you are only paying what it costs the hospital to run on you.

Completely devoid of any corporate politics.

[ElNono]

I think you can make room for both, like a lot of countries do... and you do that by having the profit-neutral government option handle most of basic care...
Things like a fracture, a cold, annual checkup, general vaccination, etc. which are incredibly common but very expensive right now, even though they're super low tech.

You still leave open the option of a private insurance for those that want to pay for better/different service and rare/specialty treatments.

What it's been always very difficult with mixed schemes like this is to know where you draw the line on what's offered on the public option. It needs to be a dynamic thing that gets updated periodically based on both advances in the field and any contemporary situations (ie: swine flu, avian flu, etc)...

[Wild Cobra]

Individual plans are the worst ones. See Anthem Blue Cross in California.

They are owned by Wellpoint Inc. For 2009, Wellpoint had $61,235.8 million in revenue and paid out $46,571.1 million in coverage, or 76.05%. After expenses, they had $7,403 million taxable, paid 35.9% in taxes, or $2,657.1 million in taxes, which left $4,745.9 million net income for the stock holders, or $6.09 per share.

I cannot speak as to their service quality, but I see nothing unreasonable about their profits. If the service is bad, maybe it's because they are having a difficult time making a profit. To get their share holders that $6.09 per share profit, they sold $3,792.3 million in assets.

Maybe if the government wants to reduce the price of health care, they should stop taxing it. The stock holders could have made the same earnings per share if Wellpoint didn't pay taxes, and reduced their premiums by 4.34%.

[DMX7]

Maybe if the government wants to reduce the price of health care, they should stop taxing it.

Have you ever owned a business? The goal is to make as much profit as possible and expand the business. If my business is successful, like Wellpoint which IS successful, then lower or no taxes isn't going to make me lower the prices on anything, it's just going to give me more profit from where I would have had to pay taxes.

Introduce meaningful compe ion, like a public option, and now you have to lower the prices because you lose customers if you don't. That reduces profits and reduces the size of the business if it refuses to compete.

[boutons_deux]

"they should stop taxing it"

HFS, you're nuts. What are the taxes on health care, that drive up health care costs?

All the big profiteering health insurance companies get most of the revenues from employer group plans, which are paid from from the employee's gross before tax. Employee health insurance is govt subsidized, not govt taxed.

One way to get costs down is run a hard-core public option, Medicare-for-all, including employees who would be able to opt out of their employer plan for the public option. One item in the health reform bill was that insured employees would be forbidden from getting their insurance from exchanges.

Then, have employees pay for all of their (optional)(group) employer's insurance with after-tax salary.

Then there should should be serious discounts on the public option price for clients who meet, every year, measurable health criteria.

The govt should annul the Repug gift to BigPharma that forbid govt from negotiating drug prices. Then the govt as "single buyer" could really drive down drug prices and speed up generics, as is done in intelligent countries that BigPharma sells drugs to a lot cheaper than the suckered USA (the USA drug users subsidize cheap drug sales to other countries).

Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs should be made illegal. BigPharma spends $30B on research vs $60B on marketing, per year.

[ElNono]

Maybe if the government wants to reduce the price of health care, they should stop taxing it. The stock holders could have made the same earnings per share if Wellpoint didn't pay taxes, and reduced their premiums by 4.34%.

Wellpoint is in the business of returning the best value possible to their shareholders, not reducing the price of premiums. IOW, those 4.34% would go as extra profits, period.

[MiamiHeat]

This is why USA should declare the Health Industry as a special, holy industry that is not a place to make profits, to practice otherwise 'normal' business methods.

You can live without a shiny new TV and buy a ty TV, you can buy cheap 15$ shoes and avoid new shoes, but we can't play with american LIVES that way. Capitalism has ZERO place in the business of people's health and lives.

It's not debatable, profits and health care are at odds with each other. It should be abolished.

This will drive down cost of care dramatically.

Companies who want to complain and about it? Go out of business then.

Someone else, some new american enterpreneur will GLADLY open his own company and take your business. I for one, would love to see american business in the health industry run near-non profit businesses. They would be seen as true, ethical human beings with a clear goal - to help save lives, to improve the well-being of american patients.

It is a CONSTANT tug of war between doctors and insurance companies, doctors who swore the hippocratic oath and the insurance companies telling the doctors to OFF and they will not pay for the patient's MRI test because it's too expensive, and spending money on patients = too expensive, which means less profits for them and their shareholders.

[Wild Cobra]

Have you ever owned a business? The goal is to make as much profit as possible and expand the business. If my business is successful, like Wellpoint which IS successful, then lower or no taxes isn't going to make me lower the prices on anything, it's just going to give me more profit from where I would have had to pay taxes.

Introduce meaningful compe ion, like a public option, and now you have to lower the prices because you lose customers if you don't. That reduces profits and reduces the size of the business if it refuses to compete.

You forget compe ion.

If these industries stopped having to pay taxes, they would start lowering as they can to increase market share. Those not lowering their prices would lose market share to those who do.

The private system works. Government just needs to stop ing with it.

Tell me. Do you think that $6.09 profit per share is too much for a stock trading around $62 is too much profit?

[Wild Cobra]

Wellpoint is in the business of returning the best value possible to their shareholders, not reducing the price of premiums. IOW, those 4.34% would go as extra profits, period.

Bull .

You have no business sense.

If you did, you would acknowledge that some, at a minimum, would become costs saving to the costumers. But to ignore the compe ive forces...

You are either intentionally misleading people, or ignorant to how business operates.

[ElNono]

Bull .

You have no business sense.

If you did, you would acknowledge that some, at a minimum, would become costs saving to the costumers. But to ignore the compe ive forces...

You are either intentionally misleading people, or ignorant to how business operates.

All of a sudden only you know how a capitalist business operates?

Corporations have a fiduciary duty with their shareholders. Anything they do, including reducing prices to compe ive levels if they're too high, is tied to the duty they have to increase profits to satisfy their shareholders.

The only exception are profit-neutral endeavors, but that's not what we're talking about here. These are all for-profit corporations.

[Duff McCartney]

Here's a telling sign..

Percent of GDP spent on health care..

Japan 8%
UK 8.3%
Germany 10.7%
Switzerland 11.6%
U.S. 15.3%

Life Expectancy

Japan 82 YO
UK 79 YO
Germany 79 YO
Switzerland 81 YO
U.S. 77 YO

Infant Mortality per 1000

Japan 2.8
UK 5.1
Germany 3.9
Switzerland 4.2
U.S. 6.8

All these countries have universal health coverage. I think the two things we need to have is preventative care, and the government sets the price on basic care and prescription drugs.

[Blake]

Questions are too hard for you huh?

He went Godwin's Law on the 1st page of a health care thread.....

and based on his past posting history, I'm going to go with yes.

[Wild Cobra]

Here's a telling sign..

Percent of GDP spent on health care..

Japan 8%
UK 8.3%
Germany 10.7%
Switzerland 11.6%
U.S. 15.3%

Life Expectancy

Japan 82 YO
UK 79 YO
Germany 79 YO
Switzerland 81 YO
U.S. 77 YO

Infant Mortality per 1000

Japan 2.8
UK 5.1
Germany 3.9
Switzerland 4.2
U.S. 6.8

All these countries have universal health coverage. I think the two things we need to have is preventative care, and the government sets the price on basic care and prescription drugs.

What do those figures look like when you take out the cost of litigation, and protection from litigation for each country? Without seeing these costs per country, your numbers are meaningless.

As for mortality rates, that has more to do with the diets and personal exercise habits of the people. Drug users too. How many of these births in the US are from crank-head or meth-head mothers vs. other nations? Don't forget, we have the highest automobile death rates which are also most likely factored into the numbers. Then GDP is also not a proper way to look at it either. It should be equivalent dollars per capita.

[Wild Cobra]

Anything they do, including reducing prices to compe ive levels if they're too high, is tied to the duty they have to increase profits to satisfy their shareholders.

OK, I'm wrong. You do understand. That was my point. Compe ion.

Now tell me. Do you think that they won't reduce prices to compete with their compe ion?

[MiamiHeat]

What do those figures look like when you take out the cost of litigation, and protection from litigation for each country? Without seeing these costs per country, your numbers are meaningless.

As for mortality rates, that has more to do with the diets and personal exercise habits of the people. Drug users too. How many of these births in the US are from crank-head or meth-head mothers vs. other nations? Don't forget, we have the highest automobile death rates which are also most likely factored into the numbers. Then GDP is also not a proper way to look at it either. It should be equivalent dollars per capita.

Litigation costs and 'defensive medicine' only costs less than 5 billion in the US. That's less than half of one percent of the industry costs, which is in the trillions.

Stop using republican talking points. Litigation is not as important as you make it out to be

[MiamiHeat]

OK, I'm wrong. You do understand. That was my point. Compe ion.

Now tell me. Do you think that they won't reduce prices to compete with their compe ion?

WHAT compe ion?

This is NOT the same as a fast food business, making leather jackets, selling wal-mart some blue jeans.

To start a legitimate health insurance company, you are mandated to have a huge company treasury, in the hundreds of millions.

It is too big an endeavor to expect compe ion because only select few exist

[ElNono]

OK, I'm wrong. You do understand. That was my point. Compe ion.

Now tell me. Do you think that they won't reduce prices to compete with their compe ion?

Sure they will. But the compe ion has the exact same for-profit overhead and fiduciary duty to their shareholders. All competing companies have to show year after year that their profits incease and that they give better returns to their shareholders. That's what Wall Street analysts push for. If they're keeping compe ive prices, the cuts have to come somewhere else, like poor service, claim denial, etc.

[MiamiHeat]

Sure they will. But the compe ion has the exact same for-profit overhead and fiduciary duty to their shareholders. All competing companies have to show year after year that their profits incease and that they give better returns to their shareholders. That's what Wall Street analysts push for. If they're keeping compe ive prices, the cuts have to come somewhere else, like poor service, claim denial, etc.

exactly. it's a huge conflict of interest to have private, for profit corporations running the country's health care system.

[spursncowboys]

Here's a telling sign..

Percent of GDP spent on health care..

Japan 8%
UK 8.3%
Germany 10.7%
Switzerland 11.6%
U.S. 15.3%

Life Expectancy

Japan 82 YO
UK 79 YO
Germany 79 YO
Switzerland 81 YO
U.S. 77 YO

Infant Mortality per 1000

Japan 2.8
UK 5.1
Germany 3.9
Switzerland 4.2
U.S. 6.8

All these countries have universal health coverage. I think the two things we need to have is preventative care, and the government sets the price on basic care and prescription drugs.

1. None of these countries have 350 mil + with porious borders.

2. These countries benefit from all the innovative medicine and medical equipment that are usually funded, and designed in America or by American firms.

3. The best hospitals and doctors are in America.

4. UK's healthcare system is a nightmare.

[MiamiHeat]

3. The best hospitals and doctors are in America.

For those who can afford it.

[Duff McCartney]

1. None of these countries have 350 mil + with porious borders.

2. These countries benefit from all the innovative medicine and medical equipment that are usually funded, and designed in America or by American firms.

3. The best hospitals and doctors are in America.

4. UK's healthcare system is a nightmare.

Many drug companies are based in Europe. The U.S. 350 mil means absolutely nothing..and the countries in Europe do have porous borders. The EU has ensured that any European citizen can easily travel within countries in Europe.

The best hospitals and doctors are in America? What are you basing that off of? Pulling it out of your ass? If they did have the best doctors and hospitals, we wouldn't be ranked 37th in the WHO rankings behind Costa Rica and ahead of Slovenia.

UK healthcare system a nightmare? Yeah right...and ours isn't? Again what are you basing it off of? When Blair was in office he introduced a few privatization mechanisms to the NHS and people protested against it. They don't want a health care like the United states..nobody does. Not even the United States.

[Duff McCartney]

Then GDP is also not a proper way to look at it either. It should be equivalent dollars per capita.

Again...the U.S. ranks first in per capita spending for healthcare. And again it doesn't have universal coverage.

The Commonwealth Fund, in its annual survey, "Mirror, Mirror on the Wall", compares the performance of the health care systems in Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Germany, Canada and the U.S. Its 2007 study found that, although the U.S. system is the most expensive, it consistently underperforms compared to the other countries. A major difference between the U.S. and the other countries in the study is that the U.S. is the only country without universal health care.

[MiamiHeat]

It's a ing disgrace that the USA is being used to suck americans dry.

All across the board, in every ing field, americans are taking it up the ass.

Financial areas, banking, credit = americans take it up the ass, used to reap $$$

Health care = americans take it up the ass, used to reap $$$

Job benefits, frozen wages since 1963, higher cost of living = take it up the ass, reap $$

national debt, taxes = american taxpayer takes it up the ass

CEO's receiving bonuses and salaries in the hundreds of millions while workers get laid off and make pennies by comparison = take it up the ass, you are used to make $$$$


it's ing sad how this country has been bought and sold.


I just want to see Obama declare a huge, radical shift in business practices in america when it concerns the health care industry.

[Duff McCartney]

It's a ing disgrace that the USA is being used to suck americans dry.

All across the board, in every ing field, americans are taking it up the ass.

Financial areas, banking, credit = americans take it up the ass, used to reap $$$

Health care = americans take it up the ass, used to reap $$$

Job benefits, frozen wages since 1963, higher cost of living = take it up the ass, reap $$

national debt, taxes = american taxpayer takes it up the ass

CEO's receiving bonuses and salaries in the hundreds of millions while workers get laid off and make pennies by comparison = take it up the ass, you are used to make $$$$


it's ing sad how this country has been bought and sold.


I just want to see Obama declare a huge, radical shift in business practices in america when it concerns the health care industry.

That's been happening forever. Like they say in Platoon, "Everybody know the poor always being ed over by the rich. Always have, always will."