The American "Healthcare" thread

[DaShi]

All the GOP was good for was a counterparty. One to keep the most the extreme and possibly damaging bills out of Congress. However, since they decided just to block everything, the Blue Dogs took over their position and have been doing it correctly. Your very post supports this. If the GOP was to disappear, it would make no difference on what bills are passed. At the very least, it could make it easier for constructive legislation to pass, without the party of "no."

[Az]

So can anyone post any links to "Responsible" "bipartisan" plans?

do they basically keep the whole model of the "medical ensurance industry"?

because if so, LOL.

[DirtyMartini]

One thing is certain however, if the intention is to target only the profit motive of health care providers the marked disincentive to enter the field of health care providers is real. Given the intention is to increase the demand of health care by providing health care for an additional 10-15% of the populace, finding a way to remove suppliers of providers by disincentivizing them doesn't make sense. How does one end up dealing with the disconnect between supply and demand?

This.

Stats about life expectancy have always been skewed by other factors that have little to do with quality of health care provided such as higher auto accident rates, obesity rates, etc. In fact one can make arguements that availability to better health care procedures in infant care can make for delivery of many under weight children (that unfortunately have unavoidable high mortality rates) that get counted in the mortality statistics that would never go full term and hence don't show up in mortality statistics of other nations.

This also.

[Az]

This This This...

It's not supposed to be a market. It's supposed to be a public service.......

[DirtyMartini]

That's great, but

1) Hospitals have to pay their bills. Despite the vast sums Americans spend on health care, most hospitals run on 1-2% margins. You can tell hospital adminstrators "but it's supposed to be a service" all you want -- they have to find a way to pay their staff. The government approach to cost cutting is to simply pay less and less over time while also slapping on a bunch of rules (which cost money in compliance) that must be followed in order to be paid anything at all.

2) Altruism and love of one's fellow man are awesome, but I'd choose a greedy genius over an average brained do-gooder as my surgeon every day of the week.

I've said it in another thread -- the plans on the table are going to end up with the goverment as the payment driver for all insurance plans while they remain disconnnected from the costs. This hasn't worked for Medicare, so it won't work for any other goverment health care plan. If the goverment wants to set reimbursement, they must be willing to be responsible for the actual costs. The only way is a full blown government run health system a la Great Britain. You want the goverment to pay for your health care, you go to a goverment owned hospital or clinic.

[Tuberski]

That's great, but

1) Hospitals have to pay their bills. Despite the vast sums Americans spend on health care, most hospitals run on 1-2% margins. You can tell hospital adminstrators "but it's supposed to be a service" all you want -- they have to find a way to pay their staff. The government approach to cost cutting is to simply pay less and less over time while also slapping on a bunch of rules (which cost money in compliance) that must be followed in order to be paid anything at all.

lol:

My little hospital made ~$20 million profit last year, after paying for the cost of an expansion and my very high wages.

My hospital is part of a nationwide private healthcare system.

ACK!

[DirtyMartini]

That's great. What's the profit margin? If their profit margin is only 2% it doesn't take a big decrease in reimbursement to wipe it out. Also, I'd be willing to bet they aren't doing quite so hot so far this year.

[Az]

That's great, but

1) Hospitals have to pay their bills. Despite the vast sums Americans spend on health care, most hospitals run on 1-2% margins. You can tell hospital adminstrators "but it's supposed to be a service" all you want -- they have to find a way to pay their staff. The government approach to cost cutting is to simply pay less and less over time while also slapping on a bunch of rules (which cost money in compliance) that must be followed in order to be paid anything at all.

2) Altruism and love of one's fellow man are awesome, but I'd choose a greedy genius over an average brained do-gooder as my surgeon every day of the week.

I've said it in another thread -- the plans on the table are going to end up with the goverment as the payment driver for all insurance plans while they remain disconnnected from the costs. This hasn't worked for Medicare, so it won't work for any other goverment health care plan. If the goverment wants to set reimbursement, they must be willing to be responsible for the actual costs. The only way is a full blown government run health system a la Great Britain. You want the goverment to pay for your health care, you go to a goverment owned hospital or clinic.

Have you seen this show on healthcare around the world by the Stalinist Junta of PBS?

It's despicable garbage - they are pretending that this can be worked out!

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/

[Straybow]

I tell you what, oerdy, YOU sign up for that health plan. Leave me my choices in the free market. I promise I'll attend your funeral and weep genuine tears after the government decides you have lived long enough and shouldn't get any care at all. But you'll still be the stupid one. Sorry.

Countries by life expectancy

1. Macau
14. Canada.
42 Bosnia and Herzegovina
45. USA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ife_expectancy

Ah, yes. Life expectancy is only controlled by medicine, not by environmental, cultural, and other demographic factors. By that logic, past generations in my family lived into their nineties because of medical treatments they would have gotten if they weren't healthy. We already know that certain breast cancers have sure-fire genetic triggers. How many other causes of death are not controlled by medicine, but by luck?

Second, let's remove deaths by homicide and non-age-releted accident and then compare life expectancies. How much higher would that adjusted life expectancy be in Africa, for example? Oh, then adjust for the people who are alive because they got medical treatment other than that provided by the government, like the Canadian woman in the ad. They'd be dead, so count them as dead at the age they got treatment. How much lower would that adjusted life expectancy be in Canada, for example?

Health care isn't about broad measures of life expectancy, it is about how decisions are made about health care. The proposed system will make it illegal for doctors to provide medical care outside the government system, and illegal for patients to pay for medical care outside the government system.

That's supposed to make health care better?

MORONS!

[Straybow]

My little hospital made ~$20 million profit last year, after paying for the cost of an expansion and my very high wages.

My hospital is part of a nationwide private healthcare system.

ACK!

But what is that $20M in percent of gross receipts?

[Sava]

Ah, yes. Life expectancy is only controlled by medicine, not by environmental, cultural, and other demographic factors. By that logic, past generations in my family lived into their nineties because of medical treatments they would have gotten if they weren't healthy. We already know that certain breast cancers have sure-fire genetic triggers. How many other causes of death are not controlled by medicine, but by luck?

Second, let's remove deaths by homicide and non-age-releted accident and then compare life expectancies. How much higher would that adjusted life expectancy be in Africa, for example? Oh, then adjust for the people who are alive because they got medical treatment other than that provided by the government, like the Canadian woman in the ad. They'd be dead, so count them as dead at the age they got treatment. How much lower would that adjusted life expectancy be in Canada, for example?

Health care isn't about broad measures of life expectancy, it is about how decisions are made about health care. The proposed system will make it illegal for doctors to provide medical care outside the government system, and illegal for patients to pay for medical care outside the government system.

That's supposed to make health care better?

MORONS!

You're right. Let's factor in the availability of firearms.

[Tuberski]

But what is that $20M in percent of gross receipts?

About 12%

ACK!

[Tuberski]

That's great. What's the profit margin? If their profit margin is only 2% it doesn't take a big decrease in reimbursement to wipe it out. Also, I'd be willing to bet they aren't doing quite so hot so far this year.

I'll let you know later this week, we get our quarterly meeting where they talk about earnings.

ACK!

[Straybow]

Have you seen this show on healthcare around the world by the Stalinist Junta of PBS?

It's despicable garbage - they are pretending that this can be worked out!

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...roundtheworld/

Look at Massachussetts; you're pretending a Federal system would be any better. Which example is more apt?

The Swiss and Germans allow people to get more medical services outside the primary (socialized) system, which Obamacare would criminalize. Japan and Taiwan have underfunded their systems, which makes them unsustainable.

Drug companies from these countries make much of their profit selling drugs in the US, essentially subsidizing their health care. Smaller systems are easier to manage; all are far smaller countries. Japan is the largest at just over 1/3rd the US, Germany next at just over 1/4th, with UK at 1/5th. Taiwan and Switzerland are 1/13th and 1/40th. No guarantee any of their systems would scale up to our size, or work in our culture.

When we compare to existing socialized medice programs in this country, medicare only works at all because they underpay for services and private payment patients balance the books. The VA seriously sucked just ten years ago, and only by great effort was it reformed so that now it is as good as private care. On a similar scale, the MA medical system is dismal.

Our politicians screw everything up without external pressure to do otherwise, and you want to put politicians of the same stamp (or worse!) in charge of national healthcare with no private system in competition? No.

[Dinner]

If a sensible plan had been proposed, there would have been lots of GOP support. Missed opportunity.

I seriously doubt that. The party of No has yet to do anything but say no to everything they've ever seen even before they've even seen it. I realize this is a deliberate bit of political maneuvering on their part (I.E. block everything then say "they haven't accomplished anything") and that Democrats did the same thing when they were in the minority but let's call a spade a spade. They're not going to support any reform move no matter what is offered.