Cost of Health Care

[Winslowalrob]

you must be ignorant, because the "last days" is not just for olded citizens, anyone with a disease and a life expectancy of less then 6 months have the option :doh:

Crap I did not word it right. Its not a "last days" thing for euthanasia, I am trying to find the info as we speak. It drives politicans nuts, I know someone here has gotta know about it. Someone more eloquent than I.

[Destino]

Destino, yes healthy people can get the same types of disease, but not at the same rate or percentage that people who are not healthy do, there are countless studies on this, why should companies pay for bad habits of their employees? that is who is responsible in the end

I agree with you but again JBooma, policy can NOT be crafted with the ideal situation in mind. It has to be based in reality, and the reality is Americans engage in tons of unhealthy behavior.

Insurance is based on "shared risk" so there is no way to seperate these people out. Sure you can deny smokers coverage, but what about people that eat fatty foods? Will you insist the nation eay salads 90% of the time or deny them coverage? Perhaps mandate that certain amount of time be devoted to working out at risk of losing benefits?

How will you take out the costs of people living unhealthy life styles in a shared risk system? How far will you take it?

3. Consumer driven healthcare is a new type of plan that employers are looking it, it focuses on the abuse of dr visits that we currently have, in this type of plan the more you go the more you pay, it is geared to get people more involved in their own health, you start out with a certain amount of money like a health savings plan, once you get to a certain level then you pay for more yourself etc...

What happens if someone gets cancer?

5. People have other options, the 24 hour phone lines where you talk to a nurse are a great place to go and they can inform you what you should or shouldn't do, people sometimes think heartburn is a heart attack, there is so much information at our finger tips then ever before to know what types of pains, or signs to look at etc... plus most plans have hundreds of dr's it is actually good to always get a second opinion anyway

Most plans do have hundreds of doctors, but they almost all require you to have a primary physician. Most whave rules against going to someone that is not your primary but not about the ER. This is why a lot of people go to the ER.

Also if you think you are having a heart attack, I'm sorry but it's absolute lunacy to think "I should call a 24 hour hot line" The only thing you do in such an instance is go to the hospital as fast as you can. And that is the only thing you should do, because if you delay and you are having a heart attack you can die.

6. is not idealism it is fact, there are many other types of medication, therapy that work, yogo is excellent for flexibility, the #1 cause of backpain is overweight or no flexibility etc...

another interesting study is what you eat, if you understand how long certain food take to digest you might think twice on eating a hamburger and then a steak the next night

You aren't thinking about human behavior. How do you get humans to do this realistically. You can't possibly expect people to suddenly all enroll in yoga. What will motivate them to do this. Do they have the time to do this? Will they want to? How much does it cost and who pays?

[zoony]

Are you claiming that Tort Reform and other items mentioned here have NO affect on Health Ins costs rising?

Nice try.

What I'm saying is that there is a 20 megaton nuclear blast occuring under your nose, yet you're worried about the safety matches in the kitchen

2nd, should the Govt step in and limit the profits a private company can earn? And if so, will they subsidize the share-holders of those companies who now earn less than they did int he free market?

I'm wondering where the outrage is among the people?

Newsflash for you Kilmer.... none of these companies will go out of business as issues arise in the health care industry. They will continue to pass along the cost to you and I in order to pad their bottom line.

Now tell me, Kilmer, what other industry affords this luxury? Unlimited, unsupervised, inelastic demand. I can think of one other.... the petroleum industry.

Absolute power corrupts, absolutely.

.......

[zoony]

you claim to know a lot about healthcare and how it works, do you by chance work in the field??? i would say no

No, I'm not in the healthcare industry, but as a taxpayer I think I am entitled to my say.

Or should we ignore your views on president Bush because you've never been president and you don't really know how it works?

Great argument man, sincerely.

What do you do for a living?

[Destino]

Are you claiming that Tort Reform and other items mentioned here have NO affect on Health Ins costs rising?

It would have a positive impact, but the last proposed limit was far too low. 200k is nothing these days, and a serious act of malpractice could leave you unable to work forthe rest of your life. Tort reform, by capping rewards, looks to me like lazy options that cause as many problems as they fix. What we need is a way to filter out bogus malpractice claims. AFTER that is done, caps should be looked at.

2nd, should the Govt step in and limit the profits a private company can earn? And if so, will they subsidize the share-holders of those companies who now earn less than they did int he free market?

What free market? They are currently banning foriegn meds and stopping real competition.

[Kilmer17]

Nice try.

What I'm saying is that there is a 20 megaton nuclear blast occuring under your nose, yet you're worried about the safety matches in the kitchen

I'm wondering where the outrage is among the people?

Newsflash for you Kilmer.... none of these companies will go out of business as issues arise in the health care industry. They will continue to pass along the cost to you and I in order to pad their bottom line.

Now tell me, Kilmer, what other industry affords this luxury? Unlimited, unsupervised, inelastic demand. I can think of one other.... the petroleum industry.

Absolute power corrupts, absolutely.

.......

Sure, but they WILL make less money. Thereby causing other people (stockholders) to lose money. So you save some people money, but at the same time transfer that to the people losing money in the stock.

I disagree that the demand is inelastic. I think the current model makes that the path of least resistance, but as Jboo points out, the first step in controlling health care costs is decrease the demand.

[Winslowalrob]

Also if you think you are having a heart attack, I'm sorry but it's absolute lunacy to think "I should call a 24 hour hot line" The only thing you do in such an instance is go to the hospital as fast as you can. And that is the only thing you should do, because if you delay and you are having a heart attack you can die.

After all, you wouldn't want a smoking gun to turn into a mushroom cloud. Be consistent in how you want people to act.

[Kilmer17]

It would have a positive impact, but the last proposed limit was far too low. 200k is nothing these days, and a serious act of malpractice could leave you unable to work forthe rest of your life. Tort reform, by capping rewards, looks to me like lazy options that cause as many problems as they fix. What we need is a way to filter out bogus malpractice claims. AFTER that is done, caps should be looked at.

What free market? They are currently banning foriegn meds and stopping real competition.

And that should stop. But only after the county of origin enacts laws to protect the patents.

CDs would cost 1 dollar if we allowed Chinese piracy to be sold here too. Same theory applies. If a Canadian Pharm comes up with a drug that does the same thing and is cheaper, it should be allowed. If all they do is copy a US pharms patent and makes the same drug cheaper, that should be stopped.

[jbooma]

I agree with you but again JBooma, policy can NOT be crafted with the ideal situation in mind. It has to be based in reality, and the reality is Americans engage in tons of unhealthy behavior.

What happens if someone gets cancer?

?

The plan still has the same types of coverage on disaster type things such as cancer etc... overall it is identical execept for what ever the amount you are responsible after the amount chosen by the company what they pay up front.

Its goal is to limit the amount of times you go to the Dr' etc...

As for plans, depending on the plan yes you do have to have a primary but some will then let you go to other drs' without you having to get a recommendation. The companies need to do a better job about educating the consumer on what they can or can not do.

[zoony]

Sure, but they WILL make less money. Thereby causing other people (stockholders) to lose money. So you save some people money, but at the same time transfer that to the people losing money in the stock.

I'm not quite at a point in life where I would ever argue that making personal fortunes off of sickness and disease is intrinsically unethical, but I'm getting there.

So I'll leave that argument alone for now, and say that you're right. However the savy investor would, of course, put their money somewhere else.

I disagree that the demand is inelastic. I think the current model makes that the path of least resistance, but as Jboo points out, the first step in controlling health care costs is decrease the demand.

An idealest notion, but I'm not going to say you are wrong. Just that it is not going to happen.

We should focus on what can work.

.......

[zoony]

What free market? They are currently banning foriegn meds and stopping real competition.

GREAT point. One I overlooked.

[Destino]

Sure, but they WILL make less money. Thereby causing other people (stockholders) to lose money. So you save some people money, but at the same time transfer that to the people losing money in the stock.

I disagree that the demand is inelastic. I think the current model makes that the path of least resistance, but as Jboo points out, the first step in controlling health care costs is decrease the demand.

Decrease demand? The only known way to decrease demand is to raise the cost or provide alternatives.

Raising the cost reduces demand by stopping people from being able to afford it. That works well for luxary cars, because people don't need them. They are a luxary and thus controlling demand in this fashion has no real negative consequences. Health care however does not provide us with this option. It is needed, and if it is not in reach sick people wind up in the ER and can't pay....who pays? Tax payers.

The second way is to provide alternatives. One of these is opening the market to foriegn prescription drugs. We all know competition lowers the cost of drugs. Companies have to reduce their prices to compete EVEN IF THAT MEANS LOWER PROFITS becuase to do otherwise is to lose your market share entirely. The current situation is why you see such high profits, they have no real competition and thus charge prices 4 times as high to americans as they do in other markets.

[Destino]

And that should stop. But only after the county of origin enacts laws to protect the patents.

CDs would cost 1 dollar if we allowed Chinese piracy to be sold here too. Same theory applies. If a Canadian Pharm comes up with a drug that does the same thing and is cheaper, it should be allowed. If all they do is copy a US pharms patent and makes the same drug cheaper, that should be stopped.

Yes people will break the law and yes it should be stopped, but the big picture is clear - more competition equals lower prices.

[jbooma]

An idealest notion, but I'm not going to say you are wrong. Just that it is not going to happen.

We should focus on what can work.

.......

you would be surpried how fast it isn't and idealest notion when the DR tells them change or die

[SkinsHokieFan]

Decrease demand? The only known way to decrease demand is to raise the cost or provide alternatives.

Raising the cost reduces demand by stopping people from being able to afford it. That works well for luxary cars, because people don't need them. They are a luxary and thus controlling demand in this fashion has no real negative consequences. Health care however does not provide us with this option. It is needed, and if it is not in reach sick people wind up in the ER and can't pay....who pays? Tax payers.

The second way is to provide alternatives. One of these is opening the market to foriegn prescription drugs. We all know competition lowers the cost of drugs. Companies have to reduce their prices to compete EVEN IF THAT MEANS LOWER PROFITS becuase to do otherwise is to lose your market share entirely. The current situation is why you see such high profits, they have no real competition and thus charge prices 4 times as high to americans as they do in other markets.

I think he meant by decreasing demand through healtheir lifestyle

Less face this fact, you are less likely to suffer a myriad of ailments and illness' if you take care of yourself

Don't smoke cigs, don't drink too much, eat in moderation, and excercise consistantly, I doubt you will be a person that needs much medical care

[jbooma]

I think he meant by decreasing demand through healtheir lifestyle

Less face this fact, you are less likely to suffer a myriad of ailments and illness' if you take care of yourself

Don't smoke cigs, don't drink too much, eat in moderation, and excercise consistantly, I doubt you will be a person that needs much medical care

:applause: :applause:

pills are not the answer to everything

[zoony]

:applause: :applause:

pills are not the answer to everything

again... why no outrage on the practices of the pharmaceutical companies?

where is the outrage, seriously?

What other countries in the world have a pharmaceutical industry that advertises (shamelessly) PRESCRIPTION medication to the masses?

Tune into the nightly news, and see how far you get before you get spammed by drug commercials.

But we shouldn't be focusing on them, right?

[SkinsHokieFan]

again... why no outrage on the practices of the pharmaceutical companies?

where is the outrage, seriously?

What other countries in the world have a pharmaceutical industry that advertises (shamelessly) PRESCRIPTION medication to the masses?

Tune into the nightly news, and see how far you get before you get spammed by drug commercials.

But we shouldn't be focusing on them, right?

I think the point is that they wouldn't be spamming us with every pill possible if we actually took care of ourselves!

You are less likely to have a host of things happen to you if simply take 10 minutes out of your day and go run a mile

My dad has diabeties and this past May had a triple by pass done. Both of these could have been very preventable had he not eaten so much damn candy his whole life, and if he actually went to the gym 3 times a week

It cost his insurance company over 200 grand for the heart surgery, and I know the constant insulin has to add up

Preventable stuff

[Kilmer17]

They exist BECAUSE of the problems of the system, they are not the only cause of the probelms.

[Destino]

I think he meant by decreasing demand through healtheir lifestyle

Less face this fact, you are less likely to suffer a myriad of ailments and illness' if you take care of yourself

Don't smoke cigs, don't drink too much, eat in moderation, and excercise consistantly, I doubt you will be a person that needs much medical care

The problem is that this is idealism. The consequences for a not eating right come later in life, what is the trigger to motivate a person to be healthy RIGHT NOW.

You will never solve anything at all if you operate in the world of idealism. Real world solutions can not be based on good sense that no one will follow.

[Kilmer17]

I would argue that it's idealistic for the Govt to be responsible for the personal choices of an individual.

The reality is that we will have a Natl Health care system in our lifetime. And it will be the greatest failure in the history of Govt and our kids will bear the punishment.

[Destino]

They exist BECAUSE of the problems of the system, they are not the only cause of the probelms.

Kilmer are you telling me they don't actively lobby to keep foriegn drugs out? They don't simply exist because of the system, they work to actively keep the status quo from changing.

[SkinsHokieFan]

The problem is that this is idealism. The consequences for a not eating right come later in life, what is the trigger to motivate a person to be healthy RIGHT NOW.

To not be a fat ass and be able to pick up girls :laugh:

That is my motivation at least

I do realize that with overweight people, some have serious genetic issues which need to be treated medically

Many many others though simply have to figure out a way to live a healthier lifestyle, work out, eat right, etc, and they will avoid many health problems

I can't figure out why people allow themselves to get a certain way physically. Seriously, it takes 10 minutes to go out and run a mile (if you are slow) and burn 150 calories and get that heart rate up

[Destino]

I would argue that it's idealistic for the Govt to be responsible for the personal choices of an individual.

The reality is that we will have a Natl Health care system in our lifetime. And it will be the greatest failure in the history of Govt and our kids will bear the punishment.

I would agree with you completely. The problem isn't too little government. But that doesn't take away from my point that telling people to be more healthy isn't a solution. It's a fantasy.

[SkinsHokieFan]

I would argue that it's idealistic for the Govt to be responsible for the personal choices of an individual.

The reality is that we will have a Natl Health care system in our lifetime. And it will be the greatest failure in the history of Govt and our kids will bear the punishment.

Oh dear God no :doh:

I just do not understand how hard it is to take of yourself. Your lifestyle change has been documented on here and you run your own company, probably working riddiculous hours

I simply can't believe how ignorant we as Americans are to preventive health care