Nationalized Health Care is Broken

Parent Cafe
62

<p>“opie, the snide comment about Calgary was unnecessary”</p>

<p>OK Chilliwack BC then, jeeeese I can’t spell onterio, cut me some slack and don’t be so sensitive that you miss the point. Calgary is a fine place, The stampeders are awsome, the flames even better… OK?</p>

<p>The point is innovation does come mainly from the profit motive doesn’t it. With supressed margins on RX in other countries, pharmasuiticals work here to develope more (yes for profit) because in the states so far their profit is not capped. </p>

<p>This doesn’t mean I support what’s going on, it means I understand it though. Canada may not have the entire formulary of drugs that we have simply because of price controls. </p>

<p>Half my family is Canadian, I love them, they are total fun… but I keep going up for funerals before any of them hit 70. I’d rather attend aniversery parties and retirement parties… being a pall bearer sucks.</p>

63

<p>mini:</p>

<p>My details are not relevant. But, again, don’t confuse coverage isssues of an HMO with a PPO. All HMO’s and many EPO’s have gatekeepers, regardless of who pays, or how many payors exist. PPOs, by definition, do not have gatekeepers.</p>

64

<p>I’m probably the only person on this list who:</p>

<p>“1. Was an employer with employees on both sides of the border, who paid for health care on both sides of the border, and dealt with sick employees on both sides of the border.”</p>

<p>The question would be then why did you leave Canada, wasn’t it better?</p>

<p>“2. Has been enrolled in both private health insurance and self-ensured single-payor in the same state, which, by law, offered the same set of services. (I was “thrown to the wolves” through “good insurance” provided by my employer. Besides pain and suffering, it probably, and unnecessarily, cost my daughter a $200k athletic scholarship.)”</p>

<p>ahh, ok outside of the one experience were all others bad? Since you have a choice in plans, could you lay some blame at your own feet for choosing group death? I’ve never placed GH in 20 years.</p>

<p>"3. Spent ten years analyzing health data provided to both Governor and Legislature on health-related matters, and specifically analyzed health care options for a statewide health care commission. "</p>

<p>Whose goal was what? c’mon figures don’t lie but liars can figure…
Most studies are done to prove a arguement. not to find truth… just ask the cigarette companies…</p>

<p>You’ve asked me If I am afriad of competition in the marketplace? like that’s a bad thing? HEY mini, I used to be able to offer 20 different companies for a person to choose, now about 3. </p>

<p>Right now I pay your premium as a taxpayer. You are right, that’s a government advantage…in the same way that when I sell a AAA government bond…safety. Where does the safety come from “the taxing authority of the government”. Government run health care doesn’t have to worry about building reserves if they can levy tax upon the population. There is no competition mini when the government takes it over. </p>

<p>The guy who runs your plan worries about claims and his budget. Things are good right now, but… without proper reserves trouble.</p>

<p>This is why I question you and your time in studying health care here. I’ve watched it for 20 years and know it moves in cycles up and down back and forth among carriers, the majority being nonprofits by the way… </p>

<p>The hot plan stays hot for a few years, gets too many people, which then generate more claims than the plan can handle, which leads to higher premiums… and so people leave and go to company B (similar to what you did within your own plan options mini, you didn’t like your plan and you LEFT to greener pastures and your happy as a clam. right now…</p>

<p>Take away that competitor and put everybody in the same boat. The laws of probability take over and claims run higher than revenues… (“I know mini, since you cherry pick your years, this will “never” happen…” ) what happens? Canada? You either cut services to stay within budget or you raise taxes to cover higher than predicted claims. </p>

<p>I am interested in what mass is doing, I’m not against everyone having healthcare at all, I just know your solution isn’t a true one. It’s been done elsewhere and they experience problems as well because no matter where you are you can expect one year on an average cycle of five to be more expensive than predicted. Just cause Canada works better now than the year before, doesn’t mean the next year or the year after they’ll have the problems again…</p>

<p>Health careclaims cycles like the stock market up and down and it to is hard to predict. A single payor isn’t the answer by itself, because it won’t work that way, hasn’t elsewhere, but I forget we’re “merica”, we’re always better than that other guy over there and up there and down there…:wink: </p>

<p>I love ya mini, I could sit and drink beer and exchange healthcare and soccer stories for hours…</p>

65

<p>

</p>

<p>Everyone means everyone. </p>

<p>What is covered, under Clinton’s American Health Choices plan, depends on which health care plan you choose. You have a choice of any private insurance plan (employer or otherwise), any of the options available in your state under Congress’ Federal Employees plans (a range from Blue Cross to various HMOs), or enrollment in one of the government administered plans (such as Medicaid).</p>

<p>Just as today, these plans all offer a different mix of benefits at differing price points. If you want more extensive coverage, you can choose a fancy plan at a higher cost. If you want a lower cost plan with less fancy benefits, you can choose one of those. For example, federal employees in New York can choose a high deductable Blue Cross plan or a lower deductable plan (at a higher cost).</p>

<p>One of the most signficant changes is that insurance providers will no longer be able to charge you higher premiums or refuse you coverage based on pre-existing conditions. The pricing model will have to change to one of averaging the risk of large pools rather than different prices for each person. To make this work, more healthy younger consumers (who are profitable for insurance pools) will be included in the system to balance the higher costs of older consumers who are often denied coverage today.</p>

<p>Over time, consumers will dictate which of the three broad options (private insurance, the federal employees programs, or government-administered insurance pools) are the most attractive – just as mini and his fellow Washington state consumers make choices in a competitive environment.</p>

66

<p>“Everyone means everyone”</p>

<p>I was asking the poster that I quoted for his opinion.</p>