Admin

A simple way to look at the healthcare issue

By
Mortgage and Lending with Texana Bank

Two things I want to mention before I go off on a rant here. One, I do not have health insurance for another two weeks and two, I am a 'liberal'- whatever that means.

The way our system works right now, we have one large group of people pooling their money together in the event one or more people get sick. Employers 'pay' for most of the premiums, but let's be real for a minute and admit those payments are passed down to their employees in the form of lowered salary. That's why people are offered 'salary and benefit' packages- they make the salary look better by saying 'look at all this neat stuff that comes with it!!!'.

In this country, unfortunately, there is a large group of people that do not pay into this insurance pool, and yet sometimes require serious help. I would guess that because of their lack of preventive care, the uninsured in this country probably spend MORE on average than the typical insured person. Just a hunch. Guess who pays when they can't? We all do. Out of tax dollars, or in the form of higher payments at the hospital. Hey, they have to recoup those costs somehow, right? So now, the insured actually pay twice- and a TON. Who thinks that's a good thing?????

The issue is, a lot of people are scared of a nation-wide, low-cost health care system, because they think that has something to do with the 'quality of care' and we'll all die waiting for antibiotics and heart surgery because the wait for a doctor will be too long. How? Why would someone think that we'll see a dramatic spike in health care usage? When the baby-boomers start aging, we'll see a dramatic spike. Are we even prepared for THAT then? Should we start recruiting kids to go to medical school at age 4? What do we do to NOT have exorbitant wait periods? Don't just come up with the problem, come up with a solution! Making sure hospitals are properly staffed would be a great start- and we have t o do that regardless. .

Another problem is that people think health care costs will RISE. Where they get this idea from, I don't know. There is nothing more expensive than an industry driven by PROFIT. If we had a system where we pooled money together for payment of services and NOT PROFIT, I'm not sure things would get more expensive. In fact, I'd say that after everything is totalled, we'd make out much better having state run, health care 'co-ops'. Same thing as 'insurance', just more efficiently run.

The bottom line is, early detection and prevention are pretty key. Why have 43 million plus people mucking up the system when we can all pay ONE time, for each service and be done with it! No sneaky taxes added on, no sneaky loss of income from our employer, no sneaky charges at the hospital. Just patient and doctor, with a fiduciary in between- and not someone bent on making money. the pooling of resources is identical- but in my view it would be a heck of a lot cheaper in the short AND long term. Better healthcare for ALL, means better prevention and lower costs for ALL.

 

Am I crazy to think health care has NOTHING to do with profit, and everything to do with our quality of life? 

 

We can do this in Connecticut- we would be the perfect place to test it out. For those of you that say 'oh, the government is going to get involved. Whoever told you the government can help is crazy. The government can't get anything right!'. Well, promise me you will never run for office. It's that kind of attitude that really sinks us. Our government is supposed to be by the people, for the people. If you don't see the power that we have, fine, but at some point something has to be done. If you honestly think corporate America is better at making decisions than our government- HIRE NEW GOVERNMENT, because they obviously have their heads up their....

 

Just a thought. 

Comments(22)

Show All Comments Sort:
Simon Conway
Orlando Area Real Estate Services - Orlando, FL

Jennifer - you make some valid points and some points that are simply not relevant. Socialized medicine is not the answer, but I completely recognize that there is a problem. Tiffany also makes a valid point. In fact there is a hybrid system in the UK. Just about everybody with a middle management level job and above has private medical insurance to back up the National Health Service. What this actually does is encourage a private system where you get the same doctors you would get in the public system, but quicker. The effect is that lines for important procedures (hip replacements, knee surgery, back surgery - non life threatening, but extremely painful conditions) grow because the doctors are busy making real money in the private sector while taking government money in the public sector. In other words (and this happened to me so I know what I'm talking about) you go and see your general doctor; he/she then sends you to see the national health service doctor for surgery or other important proceedures (therefore taking up appointment time); That doctor tells you that you need surgery and the wait time is currently nine months - BUT, he will then say "do you have private coverage?" If you answer "yes" to that question, you are seen the next day (taking u proceedure time). I believe the solution is with getting a lot more people into the private system and to do this I think two things need to happen.

1. Make contributions tax returnable.

2. Allow people to get coverage anywhere in the United States.

This will increase competition (always a way to bring prices down) and with you being able to claim your premiums against tax, many more people will be paying into the system - again, forcing a downward pressure on prices as the companies compete for all that new business.

Once you have done that, the safety net should also be available because no one should die simply because they cannot afford to live.

Real solutions are what is required, not political rhetoric.

May 06, 2008 03:49 AM
James Monastero
Texana Bank - Fuquay Varina, NC
The Matchmaker

Simon- what is 'socialized medicine' to you? A system where government controls not only the money involved, but also the doctors, hospitals, nurses, etc..? In other words, what makes 'socialized medicine' different from our current system, in your estimation? 

 

I tend to think there is only one difference- and that is in who controls the funds. Insurance is not 'insurance'. It does not protect you from getting sick or dying. It's only purpose is to PAY  a service provider for doing his/her job. If we call it what it is (a cooperative system) instead of calling it insurance, would that open up people's eyes to how the system really works? Or would cooperative system sound too much like 'socialism' and freak people out? Would it lead to a revolt where people want the sick to pay more and more and more? I wonder.

 

Also, I'm not entirely sure how what you just said differs all that much from what we have.

May 06, 2008 03:56 AM
Simon Conway
Orlando Area Real Estate Services - Orlando, FL
It's easy - premiums are not tax returnable and you can only shop for coverage from a supplier who is registered with your State. Socialized medicine is a system where the Government is in charge. The Government will set targets (I hope you saw my blog on ambulances in holding patterns to see where that leads) and Government administers the system. THAT is socialized medicine. But hang on a minute. What else is out there that is essential? Power? Maybe we should socialize the oil companies? How about food? Maybe we should socialize the farms? How about agro-chemicals which help us produce more food? Maybe we should socialize them too? What about the druge companies? They certainly need socializing.
May 06, 2008 05:55 AM
James Monastero
Texana Bank - Fuquay Varina, NC
The Matchmaker

I guess you missed my point Simon. You admit the only difference is in who 'controls' the money, and that's it. In case you haven't noticed, HMO's and the like control every single portion of your health care- whether it's visiting a doctor, an emergency room, getting a prescription filled- you name it. Same bureaucratic garbage, but because it's in a profit-driven system, you seem to be ok with it. It's the SAME THING, just not called 'socialism'. 

And again, get 'suppliers' out of the chain. There should be a patient and their money- that's it, that's all. If you walk into an ER, you should be able to hand them a card that guarantees that the people providing you a service will be paid. End of story. Why do you feel there should be a middle-man??? 

 

May 06, 2008 06:09 AM
Simon Conway
Orlando Area Real Estate Services - Orlando, FL
This is the problem Jennifer - you ignored every single point I made. Every one! And yet you are OK with this as long as we have free healthcare for all - paid for by the wealthy of course.
May 06, 2008 06:17 AM
James Monastero
Texana Bank - Fuquay Varina, NC
The Matchmaker

I did not ignore any point, I must have simply not SEEN ONE.

Healthcare isn't free, and in case you haven't noticed, we all pay for everyone ANYWAY. You really are an obtuse sort.  

May 06, 2008 06:45 AM
James Monastero
Texana Bank - Fuquay Varina, NC
The Matchmaker

Terry- I really missed Simon's points- if he feels that 'socialized medicine' is when someone takes your money, puts it in a pot and doles it out as they see fit ISN'T exactly what we have now, I question his thinking ability.

 

Simon- get off your 'I hate England' garbage, and come to the realization that the way things stand now, we pay TWICE for our health care. Once in the form of premiums, and another in the form of higher fees and taxes. If 'socialism' means just paying ONCE, then I am all for it. And I would think that Americans all over the place would agree with that. Your fears are unfounded, and frankly they are tiring. You ASSUME that people will use more healthcare than they do currently. You ASSUME that the government will control who gets what treatment and when. You ASSUME too much.

Maybe I'm just a 'we're only as strong as our weakest link' person, but if our 'weakest link' could go visit a doctor if they needed to, we'd all be better off. Even a once a year physical for every American citizen- what's that? $200? I'd be willing to shell out some extra cash so that every single person can get preventive care.

And Simon, your comments about the wealthy 'paying for it' are so silly. Let's review, shall we? Why are people in this country rich? Because they CAN BE. They are lucky enough to live in a place where the sky is the limit, and they can make, do or be anything they could dream of. And yet they feel they are too good to be thankful for that and offer up a little cash for others? Ungrateful swine, if that's the case. They should go live in a communist country where they won't ever have to complain of making so much and then being taxed on it. 

May 06, 2008 06:57 AM
Simon Conway
Orlando Area Real Estate Services - Orlando, FL

It's actually sad Jennifer. I didn't and indeed do not, hate England. I have merely lived with what you wish us to have. It doesn't work. The system is broken because Governments are not set up to run a country, much less anything else.

The points you ignored from me were about other essentials. You ignroed them all.

Finally, the rich pay way more than everyone else already. My point is you want them to pay more so that Government can waste their money. Please go back and see what the Founders envisaged because this a long way from that.

May 06, 2008 07:06 AM
James Monastero
Texana Bank - Fuquay Varina, NC
The Matchmaker

Simon, you really need to stop rationalizing what is going on. There is a way for all of us TO SPEND LESS. Not more. Less. Think of it this way, and I know your mind is going to get all warped on this too- but if every single person in America paid their 'fair share' of taxes, the total burden on the rest of us would fall. Stop singling out one tiny minority of people and making them out to be whiny, ungrateful wretches. I'm sure most people would be more than happy to help out others at fair and reasonable costs to EVERYONE. 

 

What exactly were your points??? Still can't find one. You just repeat the same old lines over and over. 'I've lived in England' 'Their system is no good' 'The system is broken' 'Put your trust in a corporation, not your government'. What you fail to understand, through no fault of your own, is that we are controlled by corporate interests- and that is a problem! If you do not view it as a problem, fine, we end our discussion here. You trust corporate America to tell you whether or not you can go to the bathroom, I'll trust myself and my doctor. Thanks.

May 06, 2008 07:18 AM
Simon Conway
Orlando Area Real Estate Services - Orlando, FL
The top 5% of income earners in this country are paying 50% of the taxes - even though they are only earning 19% of the income. I know you can't be happy with that and yet you want more from them.
May 06, 2008 07:41 AM
James Monastero
Texana Bank - Fuquay Varina, NC
The Matchmaker

Where do you get your information? So the top 5% of wage-earners EARN 20% of the income? Numbers lie. I'd guess the top 2% earn the majority of that 19% of income, so get real with me. What are you getting at? Stop playing with numbers.

 

Also, where did I say we would burden the rich with this? Each person should pay a fair portion, for their benefit as well as for the benefit of those who can't afford quality health care. Why is everything so rich/poor and class based for you? Again., if someone wants to WHINE about how much money they have to give up in taxes, they can go live somewhere else where they won't know what they're missing. 

 

May 06, 2008 07:56 AM
James Monastero
Texana Bank - Fuquay Varina, NC
The Matchmaker
Terry- when someone in this country feels the need to cry about how unfair all the rich folk have it, I shut off my ears and eyes to their 'pain'. If Simon could just put into words an actual, RATIONAL reason why we can't have a better system then I would listen. But this stupid class-based, woe-is-me crap gets old fast. 
May 06, 2008 08:43 AM
James Monastero
Texana Bank - Fuquay Varina, NC
The Matchmaker
Terry- exactly! It's not like our health care usage will skyrocket- if anything, costs will decrease due to the use of preventive care! It's so simple, I think it gets lost on a lot of people because they would rather concentrate on 'socialism' and 'taxes' and all that crap. 
May 06, 2008 08:51 AM
Sandra Carlisle (Ayers)
Berkshire Hathaway California Properties - Newport Beach, CA
Real Estate Marketing & Sales

I'd love to see a change.  I lived in Canada for a few years and thought it was wonderful that everyone had healthcare.  They seem to have less worries than we do here in America when it comes to health.  I didn't run across anyone who had anything negative to say about the National Program.

The only negative I heard was that it took several years for everyone to adjust to the change.

 

 

May 06, 2008 09:43 AM
Simon Conway
Orlando Area Real Estate Services - Orlando, FL

The following is from the Toronto Sun. Any use of bold is mine. I have nothing to add.

ARTICLE SOURCE LINK

Shorter lines, more doctors, high-flying loonie has Canadians flocking south


By CHRISTINA BLIZZARD, TORONTO SUN

A soaring loonie isn't just good news for cross-border shoppers looking for a good deal on running shoes and plasma televisions.

Suddenly private health care in the U.S. is 30% more affordable.

American clinics have always been an option for patients in this province who want speedier access to health care than our one-tier public system can offer. What's more, this province has a doctor shortage. The U.S. does not.

Joanne Thompson knows all too well the heartache that happens when a loved one needs care in this province -- and can't get it.

Thompson, city editor at the Sault Ste. Marie Star, needed to find an MRI in May for her sister, Jennifer Abbott. A partial paraplegic, Abbott was fearful of the enclosed type of MRI machine, but the wait for a test on an open MRI in the border city was three to five months -- far too long for the neurological condition she suffers from.

So Thompson checked the ads and found a clinic across the border in Michigan that offered same day service for an open MRI -- two hours away.

"Her condition was such that we were too worried to wait any longer," Thompson said in a telephone interview.

"We were able to get an appointment the next day. To me that was unbelievable," she said. And she didn't mind paying a few hundred bucks out of pocket.

"When you can get an MRI within a day, it's worth a few bucks," she said.

Of course, Canadians have shopped for health care in the U.S. for decades. What's new is now it's 30% cheaper.

Windsor family physician Dr. Albert Schumacher is a consultant for the Detroit Medical Centre (DMC). Associated with Wayne State University, DMC is the largest group of teaching hospitals in Michigan. It has nine hospitals three miles from the border. He worries that Canadians seeking care in the U.S. may be attracted by cut-rate clinics. Schumacher's been working with DMC to provide quality care at affordable rates for cross-border health care shoppers.

"You have a lot of peripheral and suburban places not affiliated with brand name institutions that are doing a lot of stuff," he says. Prices for MRIs, colonoscopies etc., at quality institutions in the U.S., are higher than those in Canada. An MRI can cost as much as $1,800. He's working to get Canadians what he calls the "Montreal price." If patients in this province are, in effect, bulk buying from DMC, then they get a better price than a one-off patient from, say, the Middle East would.

Bariatric surgery -- stomach stapling -- is another procedure that is popular with cross-border health shoppers, since there's a shortage of service here.

It's hard to get an accurate count of just how many Ontarians are looking south for treatment, because there's a reluctance to talk about it, Schumacher says.

"There is a huge politics of resentment in this country. If somebody can get care somewhere else, many people are resentful of that, so therefore they don't talk about it," he said.

"If the airline industry was like health care, we wouldn't have first class in Air Canada, because people wouldn't want that to happen. They get very resentful about that," says Schumacher, who is a former head of the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) and the Ontario Medical Association (OMA).

This province just doesn't have the medical staff or the resources to provide the same level of care as the U.S.

Essex County, where Schumacher practises, with a population of 400,000, until recently had only two CT scanners and one MRI machine. They just got a second MRI. Across the border in Port Huron, Mich., population 12,000, they had four MRI machines 10 years ago, Schumacher says.

He points out that despite the new satellite medical school in Windsor, the 2,400 doctors that will be enrolled starting in 2010 will still only give the country 80% of self-sufficiency for doctors.

"The simple math is for every five of me practising here, Western Europe has six and we are only training four to replace us, so the crisis gets worse on a daily basis," he says.

The OMA estimates this province is short more than 2,000 physicians -- all just numbers and statistics for politicians, perhaps. But for Joanne Thompson and her sister, these figures add up to one thing: Prolonged suffering. And the cure? A passport -- and shopping trip.

May 06, 2008 10:18 AM
James Monastero
Texana Bank - Fuquay Varina, NC
The Matchmaker

again Simon, look at the real underlying issue there- lack of DOCTORS. And believe it or not, in certain areas of THIS country, people suffer the same fate- long waits and DEATH... For some strange reason you can't wrap your mind around to the fact that we do not need to have a mirror image of ANYTHING else that's out there.

 

Also, when the baby-boomers start getting sick, do you honestly think we will be immune to widespread doctor shortages? Are you insane???? Wake up Simon. You are a reasonable man. Stop making excuses. Stop pretending that it's black and white- it is not. There are ways to have the best of all worlds- and inexpensively. If you don't believe that, fine. But have a little faith in innovation won't you?

 

Sandra- are you sure? From what Simon says, everyone that's got national health care is inches from death and miserable. :) 

May 06, 2008 10:47 AM
James Monastero
Texana Bank - Fuquay Varina, NC
The Matchmaker

Terry- isn't it beyond ironic??? They pick one 'worst case scenario' to demonstrate their point. Notice, I haven't gone there. Although there are MILLIONS of people that have had awful experiences with our system, why bother just saying 'hey, look. This is the problem I told you about. See???'. How about coming up with a simple solution? Never. And they say 'liberals' never come  up with solutions??? uh huh.

 

In five years, we'll all be one country anyway, so does it really matter? The Canadians will just make it that much more apparent that we need more doctors.  

May 06, 2008 11:07 AM
Chris Horton
Horton's Lawn Care L.L.C. - Burton, MI
I don't have health insurance. I personally do not feel the need for it, I have not been to a doctor in 20 years, I don't get sick, and I don't get hurt to the point I need to see a doctor, so I don't waste my money... hopefully they will figure something decent out when I am older and might actually need it.
May 07, 2008 03:14 PM
Kevin O'Shea
Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices New York Properties - White Plains, NY
White Plains, NY Real Estate

Hi Terry,

I don't think the country would go for National Health care, but a National Health Insurance plan for those who aren't covered would make a lot of sense and it could be done.

We almost need a taxpayer revolt on some issues.

All the best!

 

May 07, 2008 06:26 PM
Chris Horton
Horton's Lawn Care L.L.C. - Burton, MI

Terry- Government doesn't even work for themselves, they work for big business. Plain and simple we have no say in what goes on in the government unless we are BIG BUSINESS controlling their every move like puppetteers.

May 10, 2008 03:26 PM