Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. Become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

Part of Obamacare Delayed a Year


Recommended Posts

All companies run that risk and they have much higher margins to absorb it.  My whole point is that the insurance profits are small compared to the rest of the industry.

 

If you want to lower insurance costs, lower the healthcare costs.  ACA will do nothing but raise them.

 

Of course because the physicians lobby has so much more money than the insurance companies, ACA doesn't touch them while insurance companies get shit all over.  Americans pay the price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't all companies run that risk? Or is this another case of privatizing the profit and socializing the losses ala Wall St?

 

And I agree...we should be looking at Pharma and the Provider sides of the house. Allow government to directly negotiate prices for drugs...take a closer look at the shenanigans that allow companies to drag out patents. Lots of room to allow companies to make a healthy profit and help bring down/maintain costs. On the provider side we could be taking a page from Europe, using a common fee schedule. Our costs per procedure outpace most every other country, why is that? 

 

In 2010, our healthcare costs were 17.6% of GDP, approximately 1.5 times more than any other country.

I have to believe our quality of care is at least 1.5 times better than most countries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to believe our quality of care is at least 1.5 times better than most countries.

 

hmmm...you may want to do some reading

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=quality+of+healthcare+world+rankings&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS517US517&oq=world+healthcare+quality+&aqs=chrome.1.57j0l3j62l2.4946j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

 

While controversial and you can probably argue around the edges, it's pretty apparent the US healthcare system is not 1.5 times better than the rest of the worlds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hmmm...you may want to do some reading

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=quality+of+healthcare+world+rankings&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS517US517&oq=world+healthcare+quality+&aqs=chrome.1.57j0l3j62l2.4946j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

 

While controversial and you can probably argue around the edges, it's pretty apparent the US healthcare system is not 1.5 times better than the rest of the worlds.

Can you link me to an actual site rather than just a google search?  Most links there factor in everything including cost.  I'm looking just at quality of care regardless of cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I've given you a basic link...at this point if you want to stick with the US being 1.5 times better than the rest of the world, even though most of the summaries on the search page make it pretty clear it's not, it's up to you to provide factual evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you are going to create a high-risk pool, regardless off whether or not it's genetic or self inflicted, in essence a dumping ground so insurance companies can dump only but the healthiest most profitable individuals?

 

I didn't know that George W. Bush had an account here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to believe our quality of care is at least 1.5 times better than most countries.

 

 

 

Speak for yourself.  I had to pay $400 out of pocket for an MRI on my knee.  Never spoke to a doctor, or was given any advice on how to treat the condition.  They gave me a CD, and told me I had a torn meniscus.  That's it.  Everything I learned, I learned from Youtube.  

 

My friend's mom just lost her house because she couldn't afford the co-payments for her cancer treatment.  She HAD insurance--full coverage, no less--but still couldn't save the house she'd been living in and paying for the last two decades.  Who cares if the quality of care is at least 1.5 times better than most countries if a growing number of Americans can't afford to reap the rewards?    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1st link says this "Note that these are for health (i.e. physical well being) not the health system or health technology or any intermediate measure of quality."

 

2nd link talks about a number of things including cost, acceptability, governance etc.

 

Only thing I am talking about is quality of care.  If you had unlimited money and needed a life saving surgery where would you go to get it done?  I'm guessing USA will be the 1st choice for a large number of people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speak for yourself.  I had to pay $400 out of pocket for an MRI on my knee.  Never spoke to a doctor, or was given any advice on how to treat the condition.  They gave me a CD, and told me I had a torn meniscus.  That's it.  Everything I learned, I learned from Youtube.  

 

My friend's mom just lost her house because she couldn't afford the co-payments for her cancer treatment.  She HAD insurance--full coverage, no less--but still couldn't save the house she'd been living in and paying for the last two decades.  Who cares if the quality of care is at least 1.5 times better than most countries if a growing number of Americans can't afford to reap the rewards?    

A good point.  

 

But even with full insurance coverage the house is still lost.  Why even have insurance in the 1st place then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody really doubts that top notch, world class medical care is available in the USA. The question will always be who deserves access to it.

 

My question is, what makes any reasonable person think we're going to ever solve any problem at the 300 million level using corporate profit as the driving factor?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a real issue with health care.  It's too bad that the ACA is what we ended up with.  "Just doing something" is a roadmap to destruction.  

 

I agree with this. We need a system other than private insurance companies controlling everything. However, what we got was well intentioned but hastily put together. Anytime Congress talks about passing something and seeing what is in it afterward, it makes me nervous.

 

Back to the question about quality - if this report from Reuter's doesn't help, I'm giving up.

 

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/23/us-usa-healthcare-last-idUSTRE65M0SU20100623

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The United States ranked last when compared to six other countries -- Britain, Canada, Germany, Netherlands, Australia and New Zealand, the Commonwealth Fund report found.

You want to compare the US with New Zealand? We have probably 10 cities with more people than the entire country. Combine all 5 of those countries and we have about 75 million more people. At what point do we start breaking things down into more manageable numbers, populationwise? Why does everything need to be addressed at the federal level even though it's clearly obvious that federal officials don't act on behalf of the population?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good point.  

 

But even with full insurance coverage the house is still lost.  Why even have insurance in the 1st place then?

Ideally, to minimize the damage.  But you're right, at a certain juncture, it does seem kinda pointless.  Health insurance shouldn't be there to minimize the damage: it should be there to COVER IT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Less than three months until enrollment opens up and there are still several unanswered questions.  We cannot even begin testing any of the electronic data feeds that we will be getting because they are not available to be tested.

 

If I start acting like a total dick (more than normal?) in a couple months, you all will know why. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At what level should issues like this be covered? At what level do the officials act on behalf of their population? It's most certainly not state level. County? Not sure about that one, either. City? That's pretty hit or miss. Maybe every neighborhood or city street could have their own rules and regulations with regards to matters like this. I'm sure that would be effective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But then how would they be transferred to new areas? Do we get new insurance every time we change apartment buildings?

I agree with bringing as much down to the local level as possible. I also recognize that there are some things that don't make sense at the local level. Either we don't regulate it at all or we provide oversight at a very high level. Lower level oversight on stuff like this would just create unnecessary headaches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...