WebMD Community Talk Show

I AGREE WITH YOU WHOLE HEARTEDLY!!!

YES I AGREE WITH YOU

NO!

From a reply early in this thread

"I have an old bill from a hospital that goes back. I had a three day admittance as a kid for tonsils. My three day stay in 1955 was $165. X rays were $11. Surgery was $75. What has happened?"

Healthcare needs to be un-reformed. It's not government's job nor do they have the legal right to mandate such matters. They have, however regulated the insurance companies more and more and as is usually the case with lobbyiest and politicians, such regulation has destroyed the effieincy of the system. Making the insurance companies rich while those that need healthcare face physical and/or financial suffering.

I don't care how much the CEOs make, but they should be earning it by providing a superior product that thrives in a competitive market.

The framers of our country put great pwer in the the people and great restrictions on government. Over 200 years much has changed through perversion of the legal system with the manipulation of stare decisis.

In 1787 the framers spent countless hours creating a document protecting us from their biggest fear, a government backed religion or vica versa. In my opinion, what they didn't conceive as they built "Free America" was "Coporate America" I wish the establishment clause had something to the effect of seperation of corporations and government.

So many things to consider in this complex law. So complex that even the learned Speaker of the House at the time had the gall to tell us we can't know what's in their 'till we make it law, or something to that effect. 400 sections that it would be a miracle if all in our Congress have even read 1/2 of it. NO the Government should not make anyone buy health insurance. I know, I know the stories of ERs filled to capacity with people who have no insurance are adding to the cost of everything. Consider this; Washington has, in direct proportion to the money made by the health care industry, many people with dollars to spread around to influence decisions by lawmakers. The profits must be maintained to allow too many to wallow in anything this world has to offer.
I've heard it said that nothing the Government does is by mistake, don't know if I believe that but the illegal aliens and ERs have a real sweet relationship and I doubt if any legislation passes to cut that part of the burden out of the picture, they are needed for the tax rolls and will be made citizens in my opinion. The clauses that are being used for a bunch of Gov. in my life laws is ridiculous. This is not new. This downhill slide has been going on for decades now. We are rotting from the inside and the smell of money and power will not cover it up.
This could be America's swan song.
God Almighty please help us.

Social welfare is a form of socialism no matter how you look at. 30 years ago we had the best medical system the world has known. The best and brightest came from around the world and gained student visas to attend our schools so our own students could not.

As we educated the worlds doctors and scientists we let lobbyests and politicians give more and more power to insurance companies and less and less to our own doctors.

Now we have a medical system that is rife with curruption, a space program that no longer can afford manned flights. The leading scientific programs are now in europe and we have a media that likes to paint our soldiers as murderers every chance they get.

I'm more libetarian than conservative, but I do struggle with why we send billions of dollars abroad, yet we can't take care of our own. I certainly don't beleive the answer lies in socialistic approaches, but a competetive market open to all. A system that pays doctors what they're worth and provides affordable insurance for us all with a reasonable safety net to help those that cannot help themselves.

The story I offer may help. I was a single mom on insurance I was buying for my sons and I through the state. I paid $60/mo and got pretty good coverage. When my youngest turned 18, I was dropped. I went a brief period without insurance trying to find something affordable. In the meantime, I was a pedestrian hit by a car, hospitalized for a couple months, became disabled, and my hospital bill alone was up around $300,000. When insurance was distributed, the hospital got $85,000. How was the rest of that bill paid for? The taxpayers. That is just a drop in the bucket. Multiply that by the number of uninsured Americans. So are we paying more by covering these hospital costs or would it cost less to have public health insurance in place where medical costs are controlled, preventive medicine is available so morbidity is greatly decreased, and life expectancy increased, and the insurance premium is alot less? I think that Americans need to think outside the "Socialism" box and look at this more objectively. Yes the cost is coming out of your pocket, but I believe the bottom line would be decreased under public health insurance. There are many positives, and before anyone makes a decision on it, they would do themselves a favor by researching this issue. There is plenty of non-politically driven information out there. Although it's not perfect, it far better than what we have now.

I agree with you in that it's not a simple question of socialism vs capitalism, but if you look back 3-5 decades you'll see the corruption in the insurance companies helped by political regulations that kept competition out of the market allowed insurance companies to get rich, doctors to go broke and all of us to suffer.

I also you know that anything the government runs they screw up! Think of the postal system, the IRS, SS and SSDI. If you want the state to run it then use the DMV for an example.

I don't want the governent involved in my medical care or insurance. Let the insurance companies compete across state lines and instead of capping the doctor's payments, This would in effect limit the insurance company profit, not by regulation, but by competition!!

Unfortunetly, once something is broken it's hard to put it back the way it was.

One more thig. I was listening to a conversation about medical insurance etc. and this guy that had lived all around the globe, Europe, Austraila, Canada and now US siad that we still have the best system by far. He added this: "How much would it save if we used one document for every doctor and every hospital etc." He explained that every doctor or insurance company has their own forms. These all get transcribed and housed in our records. If we just simplified something as simple as a form. Using one form universally would save millions and reduce mistakes.

He explained it better, but I thought it to be quite interesting.

"We are at a stage in our history when we urgently need to make fundamental choices about values, but we should trust no institution of government to make such choices. Courts cannot do it, because as a legal culture we don't want courts choosing among contested matters of values. Congress should not do it because, as a political culture, we are deeply skeptical (and rightly so) about the product of this government. There is much to be proud of in our history and traditions. But the government we now have is a failure. Nothing important should be trusted to its control, even though everything important is."- Lawrence Lessig, Code 2.0
Great book and no written statement has been so true since Orwell penned 1984.

With all respect I think you are confusing issues. Right now we are mandated to cover individuals who do not have insurance when they are sick and seek medical help. Further where the burden has fallen unfairly on the shoulders of responsible individuals, like car insurance for example, that is and should be taken into consideration, which is why it is now law that you must have insurance before you can drive a car. Follow?

Another thing, is obviously healthcare is out of control regarding cost and quality of care. The above is just one issue of the whole healthcare reform. The insurance companies have already skyrocketed costs "because they are preparing fore when they will have to provide insurance to sick people at something that resembles a reasonable rate", what that will be is scary. Do you think for one second, God forbid, Obama Law was repealed the insurance companies would refund the increase? The insurance companies make a killing on providing perverse incentives to control cost, and approximately 30 percent goes toward administration and paying the top CEO's and board millions. Compare that with Medicare where less than 10 percent does the same. Medicare needs updating but it works and not at record profits with prohibitive cost to obtain.I also do know depending on your income level what you will be required to pay will vary and the government will subsidize where necessary.

We are the only industrialized country that allows healthcare to become prohibitive, I need to send you something from consumer reports, a chart, which is startling showing the comparisons between what people pay in other countries and life expectancy. Greed, as always, is at the bottom of this, regarding the insurance companies. The government allwoed insurance companies to organize because they (the government) felt competition between the insurance companies would benefit the American people, and the government agreed to subsidize the insurance companies. I may be wrong, and have to look at it further, but I've heard on top of obscene profits they are still receiving subsidies. I hope I'm wrong.

Anyway, I would advise you to watch CNN line up for a repeat of a recent documentary, long overdue, of how healthcare for all was made available and successfully in other countries. Yes, somethings need to be tweaked, nothings perfect, but they are much better off than we are. You may have to go to CNN site and pull up the documentary.

This is just one of so many things that needs to be changed in our government. Our representatives seem to think they are royalty, they have quite a package for getting in office. Healthcare, the best, for life, pension for life, and the deals they've made on the side to their campaign contributors (which the supreme court totally screwed America by not capping what a corporation can donate to a campaign). Ever hear of being beholden t to someone, seems common sense. So the lobbyists can on behalf of any corporation give any amount to a campaign, encouraging the campaign to be beholden t, not to mention the common knowledge that deals are make, ie. after your term is up you can sit on our board and earn enormous amounts of money if you vote how we would like things to go. Campaign reform is hugely necessary. The American people are working their butts off while the representatives in turn take the hard earned taxes and do whats best for themselves. We need campaign reform. And we need to term the supreme court.

I believe that everyone should have health insurance unless you are financially able to pay for any and all health care out of pocket. If buying health insurance is not a prioirty and people choose not to have it, then yes, they should be forced to carry something. We all have the carry car insurance if we want to drive, homeowners insurance if we have a mortgage on a home. I don't believe health insurance should be any different. Eventually everyone will more than likely require the care of a doctor, hospital, etc. For every person who gets treatment that has no insurance, all of us who do have it pay more.

am really tired of hearing the car insurance / homeowners insurance analogies. they don't apply here. i can chose to not drive a car or own a home, and therefore forego the insurance.

there is no comparable choice with the individual mandate. by virtue of breathing within our borders, i am forced to purchase a product i may not want.

arguing that everyone at some point in their life will require health care, and that there are people who require health care who cannot afford it, as reason for forcing me to buy a product i neither want nor need now is inane.

here is a more appropriate analogy: everyone in this country will have to file a tax return, and not all citizens have the knowledge to complete the returns themselves or the financial means to pay an attorney or accountant to complete the forms for them. should we force all citizens to pay for tax filing services for those in need?

is it not more efficient and in the spirit of this country to allow the market to handle that, and is the market not serving those users (think non-profits and charitable organizations) with free tax filing assistance during tax season?

the tax code is massive, bureaucratic, and unfair, and good people suffer because of it. and all people are subject to it at some point in their lives. the answer is not to force some people to pay for the assistance others may need.

i don't want your universal health care product. freedom in this country is not being forced to purchase it.

Your analogy indeed fits better.

I agree with you fully, except ...

Health insurance companies are far more the bad guys than health care providers.

If medicare was expanded to include all, their incredible profit motive would be removed from the equation. That's idealistic and impossible under current lobby-controlled Congress. Never hurts to dream, though.

Summarizing previous posts, health insurance companies stopped the Clinton health plan. But they got behind Obamacare specifically because of the mandate to include everyone. (Except, of course, for getting annual coverage limits for THEIR OWN insurance employees.) Can you spell h-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-s ? So, with insurance companies lobbying FOR Obamacare, it passed.

We can only hope the Supreme Court does not allow the country to become socialist.

believe everyone should have insurance wheather they are rich or poor