Healthcare reform?

aerial1313

What is in the bills for how the "public option" would work, then?  Would it just basically be a government-provided insurance policy, good at any existing private clinic/hospital/medical office?  Would they then force those private companies to accept their insurance?

My understanding of the public option--although it's really impossible to decipher anything for certain now because nothing is anywhere near being finalized--is that you would be able to pick from a number of plans and then purchase that plan through the government at a group rate.  Because it would be such a large group, the premiums would be much less expensive than for similar coverage that you went out and bought individually (just like getting insurance through an employer is generally much less expensive than going out and buying it individually, because the employer gets a group rate).  You would still have to pay for it, it's not government provided.

Every country that has a government-controlled health care option has government-run clinics, hospitals, etc.  Why would it be any different here?

I think you're confusing a socialistic type system, where the government does indeed own clinics and employee medical staff, with what's being proposed here, which is NOT socialized medicine.  As I understand it, the proposed legislation in no way calls for the government to own any clinics, hospitals, employ any doctors or nurses, etc.  Insurance purchased through a government option would work just like any other insurance--you would find a doctor/clinic/hospital that is a provider for whatever plan you purchased, just like you do now with whatever insurance plan you have.

Not being difficult, just trying to understand how it would all work in reality.

Same here.

Universal health care does not work. It sounds nice in theory - oh, everyone gets taken care of when they're sick. But realistically, it just doesn't work. It isn't efficient or practical and will drive taxes WAY up. Some problems with universal health care:

If universal health care becomes official, it is the American middle-class (working) that will be screwed over. More taxes going to people who are not putting money back into the system (illegal immigrants, unemployed citizens, etc.)

People who take measures to be healthy (i.e. not smoking, maintaining a healthy weight) will not be compensated - they'll have to pay for those who smoke and are obese, thus those who have more doctor visits, treatments and procedures.

It isn't fair to doctors. Doctors spend a HECK of a lot of money and time in med school...they need to be compensated financially for both the nature of the job (that they have others health in their hands) and the inevitable loans and debt that pile up from med school. With UHC, doctors will lose patients (why go to a private, expensive doctor if someone can go to a free one). They will be forced to compete with other doctors employed by the government.

There are many more, but quite honestly I'm too tired to list them all now. All I'm saying is, those who work hard to have health insurance should not have to pay for others who don't. Health care is not a right, it's earned.

Gosh, I might sound mean...but honestly, right now anyone can go to an emergency room and receive treatment - it's not like if an uninsured person is in a car crash, he/she won't receive treatment.

Gosh, I might sound mean...but honestly, right now anyone can go to an emergency room and receive treatment - it's not like if an uninsured person is in a car crash, he/she won't receive treatment.

Yes you can, but in the end if they fault on their bill because they have no insurance and no income or god forbid die, then in the end the cost the hospital has to recoup gets filtered into higher costs for everyone else.

There are to many angles and not enough information out there to make an informed decision. And the only side I am on is mine. I would love to have have lower costs. Right now I pay for just myself $4500 dollars a year for health insurance. That does not include any co pays, deductibles or added costs.

boredpuppy08

BEVOLASVEGAS

I also want to point out that this is a government health insurance plan.  Not a health care plan.  It is an outright lie to say that people can't get health care here.  They may not be able to get health insurance, but they aren't denied care.  You can walk into any emergency room & see that for yourself.

I think that is an extremely cruel thing to say BEVOLASVEGAS. Example: I set up say a 8' by 8' square chain link pen in my back yard, do some mcgyver work and make a 2' diameter ever burning ring of fire 1' wide by 2 feet tall and set it in the center of the pen, then inside the center of the ring of fire I place a huge pot roast with gravy, and inside the pen outside the ring of fire I lock a dog that's literally starving to death. Oh - but I didn't deny the dog food, it's right there!

What?! I don't really get what you're saying, boredpuppy. Everyone is allowed to go to the emergency room and get treatment. What's the "ring of fire" you're referring to, in regards to people who don't have health insurance going to emergency rooms? It's everyone ELSE, who is paying for health insurance, that faces the consequences.

IrishSetterGrl

People who take measures to be healthy (i.e. not smoking, maintaining a healthy weight) will not be compensated - they'll have to pay for those who smoke and are obese, thus those who have more doctor visits, treatments and procedures.

And how is that any different from how private insurance works now?  Anyone who is relatively health and pays premiums for private insurance is helping to bear the costs of those who aren't healthy and have the same insurance provider.  That's how insurance works--costs are spread throughout the group.

It isn't fair to doctors. Doctors spend a HECK of a lot of money and time in med school...they need to be compensated financially for both the nature of the job (that they have others health in their hands) and the inevitable loans and debt that pile up from med school. With UHC, doctors will lose patients (why go to a private, expensive doctor if someone can go to a free one). They will be forced to compete with other doctors employed by the government.

None of the proposed legislation includes anything at all about the government employing doctors or running government-owned clinics of any kind.  President Obama and members of Congress have repeatedly said the government is not and has no intention of getting into the business of providing health care.  To say otherwise is simply spreading false information.

All I'm saying is, those who work hard to have health insurance should not have to pay for others who don't.

We are already paying for those who don't have insurance.  Have been for years and years and years.   I saw a report on CNN the other day that said $1,000 is tacked on to the average hospital bill to cover the cost of non-insured people.  Where do you think hospitals get money to pay for ER treatment for uninsured people?  From the tax money that we pay.

Myra

Where do you think hospitals get money to pay for ER treatment for uninsured people?  From the tax money that all of us have to pay.

And that ER treatment is very costly and a huge burden to the system. DH says that the majority of their transports are people who don't have any insurance. The medical issue is often nothing more than a cough or other flu-like symptom. They don't have a dr. though, so the ER is where they go. Catching a ride in an ambulance is just a perk that they don't have to pay for and it's more convenient than asking someone to drive them at 4 AM   The city picks up the tab but we as taxpayers ultimately pay for it all.

 According to this article the complications have gone down as have costs.  Do you have a source you could site that says otherwise?

cakana

Myra

Where do you think hospitals get money to pay for ER treatment for uninsured people?  From the tax money that all of us have to pay.

And that ER treatment is very costly and a huge burden to the system. DH says that the majority of their transports are people who don't have any insurance. The medical issue is often nothing more than a cough or other flu-like symptom. They don't have a dr. though, so the ER is where they go. Catching a ride in an ambulance is just a perk that they don't have to pay for and it's more convenient than asking someone to drive them at 4 AM   The city picks up the tab but we as taxpayers ultimately pay for it all.

IrishSetterGrl

 

. Health care is not a right, it's earned.

 

Leaving the rest of the debate aside, this is a rather bold statement. If that were the case, then no child should be covered by insurance until they're out working on their own, paying for their own insurance since they haven't earned it yet.  Not all jobs provide insurance and insurance premiums can be quite high, even if you are healthy. And if you're over 30 trying to get health insurance, heaven help you.  I hope when you're out on your own and have to find your own insurance that you remember  that statement.

I do have insurance, and I'm currently dealing with health issues that I didn't know I had because I didn't have insurance until this year. Sure, I could  have had a broken bone treated in the ER, but there are far more health issues in the world that don't involve an emergency trip. Doctors here will not take you as a patient if you lack insurance. And, for the record, I do live healthy. I've never smoked, take no drugs of any sort, and don't drink.

For my premium alone (not counting my husband's, as his is less because it is provided at lower costs for educators) it is almost as much as our rent each month. If we have a child, it goes up to nearly $10,000 a year in premiums alone for the child and myself.  Not counting copays, deductibles, prescriptions and so on. 

boredpuppy08

I say the post office does a half way decent job. I get my mail every day except sunday between 3 and 5pm.

The postal service hasn't been government ran since 1971.  It is operated by it's own corportation.  Just, fyi, the postal service lost $2.8 billion, with a B, last year alone.  So while you may get your mail on time, it's not, exactly, what I would consider "efficient".   

I will admit that health care does need "change."  Unfortunately, I believe that "change" needs to be a much slower, more deliberate process.  Tort reform is a great place to start.  If that goes well, then the politicians should look towards reforming medicare, which is, IMO, an absolute mess.  After medicare is reformed & functioning effieciently, then let's look towards making other changes.

grab01

Leaving the rest of the debate aside, this is a rather bold statement. If that were the case, then no child should be covered by insurance until they're out working on their own, paying for their own insurance since they haven't earned it yet.  Not all jobs provide insurance and insurance premiums can be quite high, even if you are healthy. And if you're over 30 trying to get health insurance, heaven help you.  I hope when you're out on your own and have to find your own insurance that you remember  that statement. 

Excellent points.  Yes, of course you can walk into any ER and get treated without insurance.  But when you take the thousands of people who have lost their insurance because they've lost their jobs and add them to the thousands who were already unisured because their jobs didn't provide it, they didn't have a job and  they couldn't pay out of pocket, you have some pretty chaotic ERs.  I imagine the ER situation is much worse in bigger cities than it is in smaller, quieter towns.  Right now, a lot of ERs are way overcrowded with people who should ideally be able to make a regular appointment for a sore throat, cough, bad cold, etc. and maybe keep a situation from becoming an emergency in the first place. I have Kaiser, and while a lot of times it drives me nuts, I feel really blessed to have it.

Joyce