I'd say all your solutions are pretty sound. Requiring patients to show proof of citizenship for non-life threatening conditions is a good idea, although it may cause problems for children, since they don't exactly have a drivers license, and their social security card probably isn't carried around by the parents at all times. It would be a minor hassle, but would help tremendously keeping illegal immigrants from receiving care and then not paying the bill.
As an alternative, my view of a government insurance option would look something like this:
This care option would only cover the very basic needs, such as doctor checkups, vision care, and routine dentist appointments. The co-pay would be a bit higher than your conventional insurance options (which mine is usually 10 bucks per visit, I imagine you could up this to something like 30). Think of it as more of a discount, rather than full coverage.
You impose a small tax increase on ONLY the individuals who select this service, so as the rest of America does not have to pay for it.
Given your solutions, cost of doctor appointments and such could go down, which would make the co-pay even lower if your idea worked.
This could help younger folks who don't have as many health problems as the older generation to save some money.
Again, just an idea that I'm throwing out there. Hopefully this doesn't turn into a pissing contest.
This can't become anything BUT a pissing contest, but I'll do my part to play nice.
(sarcastic summary of problem). Big fat cat insurance companies are super rich and charge too much for thei insurance, and that isn't right.
(sarcastic solution). F- them and get me free health insurance and I better not have to pay some stupid copays.
This all started when FDR put caps on wages. So in order to attract workers to their companies, bosses started throwing in health care benefits to sweeten the deal. Became expected that e eryone should offer it, and lo...here we are. Instead of making some chicken soup, we run to the doctor every time johnny has a snotty nose. Why? Because I have insurance to pay for it.
There's also an artificial limit on the number of doctors graduating every year. Imagine if it was like lawyers and they had to compete for your business. Prices would go down.
Of course tort reform and multistage shopping are huge fixes, but that would piss off trial lawyers in a big way.
Finally, take some responsibility for our own actions. You have sex with a woman, you pay the bills relating to her pregnancy. You smoke, then pay for your own oxygen tank. Eat too much candy and drink pop all day, don't ask me to subsidize your root canal. To insist that I do is wrong. The legislate it is redistribution of wealth.
“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart
ScottaWhite wrote:This all started when FDR put caps on wages. So in order to attract workers to their companies, bosses started throwing in health care benefits to sweeten the deal. Became expected that e eryone should offer it, and lo...here we are. Instead of making some chicken soup, we run to the doctor every time johnny has a snotty nose. Why? Because I have insurance to pay for it.
I think this is more of an issue of education.
well, it passed the house, barely, 220-215.
i really don't see it passing through the senate, though. too many moderate democrats have said they won't support a government run public option. joe lieberman, for example, said "as a matter of conscience, I will not allow this bill to come to a final vote."
which is good because there's no way our government could properly run health insurance.
Check out my build thread!
For me its as easy as this.
It’s not in the Constitution. Therefore, It’s is not the Federal Governments job to do it.
Simple Right?
Chris
"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."
Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry
Think of it this way,
A clunker that travels 12,000 miles a year at 15 mpg uses 800 gallons of gas a year.
A vehicle that travels 12,000 miles a year at 25 mpg uses 480 gallons a year.
So, the average Cash for Clunkers transaction will reduce US gasoline consumption by 320 gallons per year.
They claim 700,000 vehicles so that's 224 million gallons saved per year.
That equates to a bit over 5 million barrels of oil.
5 million barrels is about 5 hours worth of US consumption.
More importantly, 5 million barrels of oil at $70 per barrel costs about $350 million dollars
So, the government paid $3 billion of our tax dollars to save $350 million.
We spent $8.57 for every dollar
saved.
How good a deal was that ???
They'll probably do a great job with health care though!!
Right?
Chris
"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."
Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry
Taetsch Z-24 wrote:Think of it this way,
A clunker that travels 12,000 miles a year at 15 mpg uses 800 gallons of gas a year.
A vehicle that travels 12,000 miles a year at 25 mpg uses 480 gallons a year.
So, the average Cash for Clunkers transaction will reduce US gasoline consumption by 320 gallons per year.
They claim 700,000 vehicles so that's 224 million gallons saved per year.
That equates to a bit over 5 million barrels of oil.
5 million barrels is about 5 hours worth of US consumption.
More importantly, 5 million barrels of oil at $70 per barrel costs about $350 million dollars
So, the government paid $3 billion of our tax dollars to save $350 million.
We spent $8.57 for every dollar
saved.
How good a deal was that ???
They'll probably do a great job with health care though!!
Right?
Chris
while i wasnt a huge fan of the cash for clunkers, your looking at it from a money standpoint, versus the oil saved. granted its not a huge dent, nor do i think it was meant to be. but nobody said getting the U.S. dependance on oil stopped was going to save us money. reality is its going to cost us more to get off our dependance on oil. but paying more to get off oil would be better then just one day going, oops were out. lets decide to change our entire country now that we dont have any.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography
I hear ya.
To all...Cash for Clunkers was flawed, but hey! how could any one plan please everyone across such a spectrum of needs and wants and political positions and government / private enterprise / etc. Overall, it's amazing it went off as well as it did. It was corporate welfare too, sure...but we did need to sell some cars, and I think about 700,000 sales were enhanced or created by the program. I know, it's got its ups and downs, and no one likes it in every possible way. Still...could have been worse. MUCH worse!
Taetsch Z-24 wrote:For me its as easy as this.
It’s not in the Constitution. Therefore, It’s is not the Federal Governments job to do it.
Simple Right?
Chris
Still goes back to this for me...
As for the oil.....
How about drilling in SD, ND ?
Chris
"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."
Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry
Im all for that.
But unless you count nuke power, crude pound for pound has the highest yeald of power.
IMO the human race will be long gone before that black gold is gone.
When I did the huracane katrena evacuation, you dont want to know how many oil rigs along I-10 that where "dry" yet this black @!#$ was spewing out.
weard that no news covered it right?
OR OR the fact that on base we had a lot for HUMMWV (hummers) that where off limients and if we where patroling them, we had to go to medical if we where in the lot for more then a half an hour at a time. all where wraped in some white tarp like thing, being sucked down in to this big box in the middle.
Guess we f-ed up our own trucks.
ya. news is good.
Chris
"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."
Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry
Taetsch Z-24 wrote:Im all for that.
But unless you count nuke power, crude pound for pound has the highest yeald of power.
IMO the human race will be long gone before that black gold is gone.
When I did the huracane katrena evacuation, you dont want to know how many oil rigs along I-10 that where "dry" yet this black @!#$ was spewing out.
weard that no news covered it right?
OR OR the fact that on base we had a lot for HUMMWV (hummers) that where off limients and if we where patroling them, we had to go to medical if we where in the lot for more then a half an hour at a time. all where wraped in some white tarp like thing, being sucked down in to this big box in the middle.
Guess we f-ed up our own trucks.
ya. news is good.
Chris
dry probalby doesnt neccisarly mean every single drop of oil was gone. it just likely means there was no longer enough oil worth getting, that the supply had grown to small so they moved on. and personally i'd rather not take the bet on when the oil will run out. id prefer to have alternatives in place and runnning long before that ever happened. as for the hummers, i dont have any idea what that is about.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography
Agreed, mostly. As someone pointed out, proof of citizenship would be catchy. And for every person sent away based on someone's definition of "life-threatening" you have another chance for a huge settlement when they end up dead.
I had to sit on a jury for a malpractice suit, it was the biggest waste of resources ever. I believe completely that if that woman had been facing large fees for filing such a frivolous suit, she never would have gone through with it. And if the prosecuting lawyers has been facing fees themselves, they never would have accepted the case.
Oh, I say make smoking in public 100%, completely, shot-on-sight illegal. Just felt like throwing that in there.
And Bill, love the sig. Not totally down with the donkey, but the elephant represents my crazy aunt perfectly. If the right didn't have the Palin-types, they'd never have any significant competition.
fortune cookie say: better a delay than a disaster
Heh, glad you like it. I also found it to be pretty appropos in the current political climate.
Next one will paint the donkeys in an ill light, as I am all about equal time!
Oh, and yes...agree totally with you on MP suits, as well as most of the excessive tort cases today. Why oh why did we decide the Lawyers should also be the Politicians? Jeeze...
heh, pretty hilarious. the dems have to resort to name-calling to get @!#$ passed. i swear, congress acts more like school children every year.
Quote:
The pressure is heating up on Capitol Hill as the health care debate is in its 8th day. This from my colleague on the hill, Z. Byron Wolf:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid equated Republican attempts to slow down and scuttle Democrats' health care reform legislation with historic opposition to the end of slavery or the women's suffrage.
The comments are drawing anger from Republicans, who said the comments were inappropriate and unfair.
Publish
Here's what Reid said on the Senate floor Monday morning:
"Instead of joining us on the right side of history, all Republicans have come up with is this slow down, stop everything, let's start over," said Reid. "You think you've heard these same excuses before, you're right. When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, there were those who dug in their heels and said, slow down, it's too early. Let's wait. Things aren't bad enough. When women spoke up for the right to speak up, they wanted to vote, some insisted slow down, there will be a better day to do that. The day isn't quite right. When this body was on the verge of guaranteeing equal civil rights to everyone, regardless of the color of their skin, some senators resorted to the same filibuster threats that we hear today. More recently, when chairman Chris Dodd of Connecticut, one of the people who will go down as a chief champion of the bill before us today, said that Americans should be able to take care of their families without fear of losing their jobs, you heard the same old excuses. seven years of fighting and more than one presidential veto, it was slow down, stop everything, start over. History is repeating itself before our eyes. There are now those who don't think it is the right time to reform health care. If not now, when, madam president? But the reality for many that feel that way, it will never, never be a good time to reform health care."
Democrats have consistently tried to paint their efforts to extend health insurance to all Americans as historic. Senators said that was also the thrust of President Obama's pep talk to Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill Sunday. But comparing opposition to health reform with opposition to the end of slavery is a new riff on the argument.
Republicans, when asked about the comments, said Reid was inappropriate today. At a press conference, Republican Sens. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, John Thune of South Dakota and Saxby Chambliss of Georgia said Reid was infusing the issue of race into the health reform debate. Thune called the remarks "inflammatory."
Inflammatory or not, Reid's comments do have the benefit pointing out how both parties have found themselves on the wrong side of history.
It was a Republican President that freed the slaves. And former Republican Theodore Roosevelt's Bull Moose party (not the Democrats or the Republicans) was the first major national party to support women's suffrage.
The fight against the Civil rights movement in the last century had more to do with regionalism than political party. It was Sen. Robert Byrd, D-WV, who is now the longest serving Senator, who filibustered the Civil Rights Act for 14 hours in 1964. 44 Democrats and 27 Republicans voted to end that filibuster. 23 Democrats and 6 Republicans voted to sustain it. The Democrat's Majority Leader, Richard Russell, opposed the bill. The Republican Minority Leader, Everett Dirksen, was one of the Republicans who joined with Democrats to end the filibuster after the Civil Rights Act had been on the Senate floor for 57 days. Both men now have Senate office buildings names after them.
Democrats' health reform bill has got a ways to go before it can come close to competing with that long a floor debate. Monday marks the eight day it has been on the Senate floor.
from
ABC News
Check out my build thread!
heh, pretty hilarious. the dems have to resort to name-calling to get @!#$ passed. i swear, congress acts more like school children every year.
Quote:
The pressure is heating up on Capitol Hill as the health care debate is in its 8th day. This from my colleague on the hill, Z. Byron Wolf:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid equated Republican attempts to slow down and scuttle Democrats' health care reform legislation with historic opposition to the end of slavery or the women's suffrage.
The comments are drawing anger from Republicans, who said the comments were inappropriate and unfair.
Publish
Here's what Reid said on the Senate floor Monday morning:
"Instead of joining us on the right side of history, all Republicans have come up with is this slow down, stop everything, let's start over," said Reid. "You think you've heard these same excuses before, you're right. When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, there were those who dug in their heels and said, slow down, it's too early. Let's wait. Things aren't bad enough. When women spoke up for the right to speak up, they wanted to vote, some insisted slow down, there will be a better day to do that. The day isn't quite right. When this body was on the verge of guaranteeing equal civil rights to everyone, regardless of the color of their skin, some senators resorted to the same filibuster threats that we hear today. More recently, when chairman Chris Dodd of Connecticut, one of the people who will go down as a chief champion of the bill before us today, said that Americans should be able to take care of their families without fear of losing their jobs, you heard the same old excuses. seven years of fighting and more than one presidential veto, it was slow down, stop everything, start over. History is repeating itself before our eyes. There are now those who don't think it is the right time to reform health care. If not now, when, madam president? But the reality for many that feel that way, it will never, never be a good time to reform health care."
Democrats have consistently tried to paint their efforts to extend health insurance to all Americans as historic. Senators said that was also the thrust of President Obama's pep talk to Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill Sunday. But comparing opposition to health reform with opposition to the end of slavery is a new riff on the argument.
Republicans, when asked about the comments, said Reid was inappropriate today. At a press conference, Republican Sens. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, John Thune of South Dakota and Saxby Chambliss of Georgia said Reid was infusing the issue of race into the health reform debate. Thune called the remarks "inflammatory."
Inflammatory or not, Reid's comments do have the benefit pointing out how both parties have found themselves on the wrong side of history.
It was a Republican President that freed the slaves. And former Republican Theodore Roosevelt's Bull Moose party (not the Democrats or the Republicans) was the first major national party to support women's suffrage.
The fight against the Civil rights movement in the last century had more to do with regionalism than political party. It was Sen. Robert Byrd, D-WV, who is now the longest serving Senator, who filibustered the Civil Rights Act for 14 hours in 1964. 44 Democrats and 27 Republicans voted to end that filibuster. 23 Democrats and 6 Republicans voted to sustain it. The Democrat's Majority Leader, Richard Russell, opposed the bill. The Republican Minority Leader, Everett Dirksen, was one of the Republicans who joined with Democrats to end the filibuster after the Civil Rights Act had been on the Senate floor for 57 days. Both men now have Senate office buildings names after them.
Democrats' health reform bill has got a ways to go before it can come close to competing with that long a floor debate. Monday marks the eight day it has been on the Senate floor.
from
ABC News
Check out my build thread!
I see no problems with a government run basic health care option. It works in many many many countries (just about every 1st world country but ours). It could easily be implemented and set up similar to England where they have a basic option for everyone paid for by the state, and if you want better coverage you can get it from a private insurer for a price, and it would provide better coverage and benefits. It has been working there for quite awhile, and there isn't any BS waiting lists and lines at hospitals like so many people here claim there are in countries that run these options. Fact of the matter is, the health care industry in this country is so crooked and backwards, it does not focus on what it should, helping people, as opposed to what should come last, the bottom line. Is covering costs important? it sure is. Is making a ridiculous profit for treating as few people as possible important? i dont think so. Do the right thing, and in the end, you will be taken care of.
except for the fact that members of the EU warned us not to get involved with socialized health care...
Check out my build thread!
I'm unsure as to your assertion about satisfaction in Britain's health care system...when I search for information, the broad majority of it is negative. A particularly troubling policy is that should you want better care, you must pay for 100% of it yourself; you may not just "pay the difference" while still accepting the free care, for this collides with their National Health System principles.
Germany, another example, has been working to repair its system to address inefficiency issues brought on by a lack of competition. Reform efforts in 2004 have been unpopular.
Japan's issues include driving the cost of care down too far...most hospitals there now operate in the red, and funding shortfalls beset the system going forward.
This article offers some interesting facts.
nothing is free. someone eventually has to pay. how can the goverment pay. they are allready borrowing billions and billions every year. so that means im paying for a plan. i allready have a plan. why do i want to spend more money on healthcare that will most likely be worse then what i have now. does the system need fixed sure. adress the problem areas and fix them instead of just doling out free healthcare. and dont devise a plan stating i can keep my healthcare but the system as it looks will cause allot fo companies to just dump their healthcare plans and let everyone go on the goverment system.
and personally i like being able to call my doctor and get my kid in usually the same day. most people i know and have talked to in canada say they make theyr appointments 6 months in advance. talk to some people. there are long ass waiting lists.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography
cost: billions
saves billions...in 10 years
then saves a trillion...in 20 years
what are you going to do with those savings?.....
spend it of course!
.
ok... so i havent followed the details of this health care reform much at all.... but lately had the opportunity to work for Aflac as an Insurance Rep and am wondering how do you think this job will/can be affected by the reform?
thanks all
