US Medical System

[burdizzos]

Here's a pdf that shows mandates for the 50 states.

[D Aussie]

Wow.. didn't this thread take off.

Ok.
I've found out more.
Her condition is not life threatening, it is hereditary, and it will prevent her from having children if untreated.
Does that mean, if she did get insurance cover, she would still not be covered due to genetic conditions being pre-existing?

[J.]

Wow.. didn't this thread take off. Ok. I've found out more. Her condition is not life threatening, it is hereditary, and it will prevent her from having children if untreated. Does that mean, if she did get insurance cover, she would still not be covered due to genetic conditions being pre-existing?

 

 

It depends. If she goes out and buys insurance herself (an individual policy), it would not be covered as it's a pre-existing condition. If she got on a group plan (usually provided by employers) she would be covered since group plans cannot discriminate against folks with pre-existing conditions.

[Muddslide]

If she got on a group plan (usually provided by employers) she would be covered since group plans cannot discriminate against folks with pre-existing conditions .

 

 

Incorrect. Mine does. All the time, in fact. Not just with me, but some of my co-workers and other city employees who all have the same plan through the same place (called Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield.)

[Jazz Ad]

 

Unless you accept the premise that Healthcare is a right. Which brings us to my next point. If Healthcare is a right, then what else should be a right? Bonoman is talking abouut equality, so shouldn't there be a minimum standard of housing? I'm thinking that no one should ever have less than 500 sq ft per person in a home, but once you exceed 800 sq ft per person in a given home you should be taxed for the luxury of living in such rich quarters as a means to generate the revenue required to raise the average standard of living.

It sounds a lot like what we have around here. Land taxes pay for social housing.

And yeah healthcare is considered a right. In France this choice was made after WW2.

There are laws stating that you have a right to a roof over your head but they are hardly enforced. Homeless people aren't very good at defending their rights. Theorically they can ask the government to provide them shelter.

Seeking strict equality seems to lead to failure though, as shown in communist countries. Equality of opportunities by balancing chances might be a better concept. That's what social democracy is trying to achieve with more or less success.

[burdizzos]

The 10th Amendement gives every state the ability to be a social democracy should they choose to.

 

I'm not completely against socialized medicine because I hate socialism, I do not support it on a large national scale because I have no faith in a this country's gov't to execute it with any amount of success.

 

HMOs have a certain degree of socialism built into them. Everyone pays and everyone gets a cut when they need it. The only difference is that it is voluntary and no one is forcing me at gun point to pay for it.

 

 

That's why I'd fully support a state's push to move to a single payer system. Why not give that a crack? If it works, then other states can follow in their path.

 

However, I am more inclined to believe that the problems with healthcare in this country have more to do with gov't involvement in the process than corporate greed.

[hawkhuff]

That's just the point. The government is heavily involved in healthcare already.

Who is the largest HMO? Mediscare.

Who is the second largest? Medicaid.

When they negotiate with hospitals and other healthcare facilities they use heavy handed tactics much like the unions and the facilities have no choice or chance in the matter. As a result, many cannot stay solvent and they close their doors. The state tells hospitals how many beds they may have and they tell them whether or not they can have the new technology through what is called a CON process (certificate of need ). If the government says there are too many CT scanners in the area you cannot have one no matter how much money you have.

Hospitals spend millions of dollars to stay compliant with a host of government agencies regs, some of which conflict with other agency regs both on a national and state level. Where do you think that money originates?

There is an 'independent' agency called the JCAHO and they come into your hospital or nursing home and inspect it. If you choose not to allow them in, and you can, then you receive no state or federal reimbursement. Good choice.

Bottom line, these 'agencies' are supposed to be patient advocates (the most recent healthcare-babble PC phrase) but the number and type of lawsuits have not changed over the years nor have the nosocomial infection rates been reduced, nor has the ER wait time, nor have the rates gone down. So why are they there? It's simple if you understand big government; they want control over you and your money and they are doing this successfully day by day week by week. It's called incrementalism and it will eventually lead to them telling you what you can eat and how you can live. It's only a matter of time.

So just because the government isn't in the front end of the healthcare system they have already come in through the backdoor.

It will be a government takeover of 1/7 of the entire US economy. Anyone want to take bets they'll {censored} it up? By then you will have no choice in the matter. Complain all you want and it will do no damn good.

[rcz]

So, if your house was being robbed or was on fire, you'd be okay taking care of that yourself and not having to depend on the police and fire departments we are all "forced" to pay for, correct? If the road you take to work collapsed, you'd get right on fixing that up yourself I guess? Or if you should have a terrible accident, you'd be okay with not being able to pay massive medical bills and then winding up in court being sued, right?

 

 

the analogy you use is not apt. i do not view the police department and fire department as any sort of right, basic and human or otherwise. if i did not think government was an adequate and just provider of these services, i would protest the ideology in much the same way i do socialized health care.

 

roads and protective services are privileges for which i gladly pay, and which i do not expect to exist simply because i exist. after all, basic human rights are those which we possess solely because we live on this earth and regardless of our condition or position in life. the universal declaration of human rights is a good place to start when considering what might qualify as a basic human right. it starts with basic ideas like equality, antislavery, and due process.

 

there is a world of difference between what is right and what is a right. perhaps we could all better understand the differences when discussing policy.

 

robb.

[ranjaman]

the analogy you use is not apt. i do not view the police department and fire department as any sort of right, basic and human or otherwise. if i did not think government was an adequate and just provider of these services, i would protest the ideology in much the same way i do socialized health care. roads and protective services are privileges for which i gladly pay, and which i do not expect to exist simply because i exist . after all, basic human rights are those which we possess solely because we live on this earth and regardless of our condition or position in life. the universal declaration of human rights is a good place to start when considering what might qualify as a basic human right. it starts with basic ideas like equality, antislavery, and due process. there is a world of difference between what is right and what is a right. perhaps we could all better understand the differences when discussing policy. robb.

 

 

Maybe you should read it again, the right to medical care is explicitly stated in article 25:

 

Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

[rcz]

yes, i was aware of that. i offered the document as a starting point in the debate, not as the lone authority on what is, and should be, a right. that is why i said it was, "...a good place to start...." perhaps i could have omitted it in favor of my own arguments, but i thought the debate was more important than just yelling my own ideas. for some reason, i recall the UDHR being only 20 articles long when it was drafted. i don't know if that's even remotely close to being correct. however, article 21 is the last one that i really agree is a right. beyond that, it reads more like a wish list.

 

robb.

[Jugghaid]

Couple of things.

First, I have seen a TON of completely misinformed posts in this thread. Some of you shoud REALLY do some reading before you type nonsense.

Second....and this is a biggie....what a lot of people say they want is "universal" or "equal" heath care. Why would you want that? Any time you try and level the outcome insteead of the opportunity, it's a nightmare. What if I want better healthcare than my neighbor? What will be my options then? will I be able to purchase a higher level of health care coverage? If not, then your plan is very flawed. What if I want less coverage as I'm younger and healthier? when you design a plan to cover your lowerst common denominator, you end up with a crappy plan.


Some of you also don't understand that in the US we pay more for healthcare because we can. Like it or not we subsidize the rest of the world in many ways. Pharmeceuticals are a great example. they cost the consumer a lot more here. In fact we pay for 90% of the R&D right here in USA pharmacies. This is so that the pharm companies can sell the drugs for a much lower price to poorer nations. Are they still making a profit? Sure they are. That's what they are in business to do. It's not altruism. However, without them doing so, there would me many more sick and dying people in the world. Try not to forget that.

think Europe or Canada has a better plan? Well, I don't. For many reasons.

For one, health costs per capita may be higher here in the US, but so is our GDP per capita and our GDP (PPP). we can afford more money per capita to go towards our health care and STILL have it be a lower percentage of our income than other "more advanced" countries programs.

Also, other factors really throw off our figures, such as illegal immigration. People here illegally who use our emergency rooms as primary care facilities and never pay the bill. Billions of dollars a year wasted here. Ever go the the ER and see what the bill adds up to? Guess what, you are paying for all of that. You are picking up the tab. By having the government do so, you will only add another layer of beaurocracy and red tape and additional expense that will only INCREASE the cost of this, not fix it.

Several things need to happen. Tort reform and ending the useless and costly frivolous litigation and instilling serious penalties for doing so to not only the plaintiffs but their attorneys is the logical place to start. Have you checked into the average malpractice insurance cost for a doctor lately? In 2005 it averaged about $15000 anually. Who do you think really pays for that? In 2004 medical malpractice costs we up to $28.7 billion. Where do you think that money comes from? It comes from you and me. In insurance premiums and in moneys paid out for the cost of health care.


Lastly, I'm sick of hearing that universal health care is a right. It is not. Catastrophic health care, maybe I could go with that. But equal health care is not a right any more than equal paychecks or equal cars and houses are a right. as an employer, I pay 100% of all of my employeees health care premiums. Dental and Vision too. Also a $10,000 life insurance policy which is basically a burial policy. All 56 of them. It costs me about $350 per employee per month. That's $19600 per month or over $235,000 per year that I personally pay for them to be covered. Why, you might ask, would a greedy money grubbing conservative like myself do such a thing? Because it's important. Because I care about my employees. Because I don't want to see them financially ruined in case of a major health issue or accident. you know what? I get great employees because of it (and other factors like high compensation and a good working environment). I have insanely high quality people working for me. They love it here. They left my competition to come here. Now I'm more profitable than my competition and you know what? EVERYONE MAKES MORE MONEY.


i also bought my wife a private policy through a different company because I prefer their coverage and she has more health issues than I do. for their best coverage (and it's really {censored}ing good) I pay $192 a month. Many people who are bitching about having to pay for insurance like this also dont' look at the fact they are paying $400 a month on that used Beemer they bought. No sympathy here. But a used Geo.

If your employer doesn't offer a health plan, work for someone else. It's a matter of choice.

[J.]

I've heard opinions (more or less on talk radio) that healthcare costs could be decreased if there was more of a 'free market' aspect to it. People don't really shop around for the best value in doctors and clinics... they just go to whatever their HMO or health plan covers and pay the copay. In a way they're somewhat insulated from the real costs of the service. If everyone had a high deductible and had to pay basic costs out-of-pocket, perhaps the industry would be forced to become more competitive. Granted there are some problems with this point of view, but it does make sense.

 

Back to the original thread topic - D Aussie, anymore news on your friend? What kind of treatment does she need?

[D Aussie]

Back to the original thread topic - D Aussie, anymore news on your friend? What kind of treatment does she need?

 

She needs treatment, probably hormone and a curette because she probably has endometriosis, a mostly heriditary condition where fibroids and mensrual membranes grow outside the womb and attach themselves to other internal organs.

An internal examination thru the belly button is a start, and then a curette. Hormone treatments start after that to try to reduce the size of the growths.

If the growths dont diminish, then a partial hysterectomy is the scientific method of 'fixing' this problem.

She is under 30 and does not have kids.

[J.]

Oh my, that's horrible. Endometriosis is a horrendous disease and those I've know with it have suffered tremendously. As far as care goes in the United States, I suppose she could show up to the emergency room if she's in severe pain (which happens all the time, at least as much as I know about the condition) and they'll treat her. Getting standard treatment from a specialist is a whole 'nother ball game though. They won't see her unless she pays upfront, which from the sound of it she isn't able to do.

 

Hmm. A couple things - she could quit her job and go on disability if it gets bad enough. It would suck having to live that way but at least she'd get medical care. If she has good credit she could open up every credit card account she can, max them all out to pay for care, then file bankruptcy if need be after the bulk of her treatment is done. Granted that's also terrible advice, but sometimes you do what you have to do. By all means she should look for a job that includes insurance so she can get on a group plan. Easier said than done, but she should at least give it her best. She'll have to wait at least 90 days on a new job before benefits kick in, but it's better than nothing. A private insurance plan she would buy on her own would be worthless as nothing related to her condition would be covered (pre-existing condition exemption).

 

My mom worked with a girl who has some serious mental illness issues. She ended up stabbing herself in the abdomen with a knife several times, required admittance to the hospital (of course) and later the psych ward. Since it was self-inflicted she wasn't covered by her insurance, and she ended up staring over $30k in medical bills in the face. She tried to work things out with the hospital in some sort of payment plan at first, but ended up filing chapter 7 bankruptcy. She got in before the new bankruptcy rules took place, although I don't know how much of a difference it would've made. The last congress (or the one before that) rewrote bankruptcy law largely at the behest of credit card companies, so now it's harder to get your debts canceled outright.

[D Aussie]

Oh my, that's horrible. Endometriosis is a horrendous disease and those I've know with it have suffered tremendously.

Well, mate, you paint a grim picture either way.
The irony of this is she is 2nd year studying nursing.
I encouraged her a few years back to move to AU to do the study, but she felt she was too tied to NJ.
If she had moved here she would be all sorted.. but if, if if...

[J.]

Is she in college full time? I know a lot of universities carry health insurance as a group plan that you can be part of. The University of Minnesota requires that you have health insurance, otherwise you cannot attend. You have to prove you have coverage through something else, or you have to buy their plan. It's $500 a semester, but it covers a wide variety of things. She should look into getting coverage through her school, first things first.

[hi.flyer]

Anyone who can't afford health insurance deserves to die. {censored}ing broke-ass pathetic poor losers.

[SirMike1983]

Lastly, I'm sick of hearing that universal health care is a right. It is not. Catastrophic health care, maybe I could go with that. But equal health care is not a right any more than equal paychecks or equal cars and houses are a right.

 

 

I agree- the word "right" has come to be abused often in the media and public.

 

The original definition of the word "right" as the original framers understood is different than is often used today. People have come to view "right" as the same as "entitlement" when in reality a "right" was a traditional avenue of limitation on government. For example the rights in the Bill of Rights actually are limitations on what the government can do to you in certain situations, not a "gimme grab-bag". This tradition can be seen especially in the sense that you can trace these "limitations" back to the Magna Charta. So, I also get angry when I hear the word "right" used to denote some kind of big government entitlement (like massive health care) when in reality that definition is not the original meaning of the word as used in the Constitution or its Amendments. "Rights" as the framers understood them, I think, should limit the size of the government and its powers rather than expand them. If "rights" are the same as "entitlements" and actually are empowering the government to grow, then we have little protection left.

 

I also agree with you about the "equality of opportunity versus equality of ends". Equal opportunity is at the heart of America's creedo, but equal ends would be more like the Soviet Union was.

 

My 2 cents at least.

[Jazz Ad]

It is a right when you decide it is, just like any other.

[Jugghaid]

It is a right when you decide it is, just like any other.

Not sure I follow you Jazzy. If something is a right just because I say it is, them from now on free beer and hourly blowjobs are a right. Because I decided it is.

[hi.flyer]

Not sure I follow you Jazzy. If something is a right just because I say it is, them from now on free beer and hourly blowjobs are a right. Because I decided it is.

Well, if you get enough people together that agree with you, maybe you can push that through and get the government to recognize that as a fundamental right.

Good luck with that.

[Jugghaid]

Well, if you get enough people together that agree with you, maybe you can push that through and get the government to recognize that as a fundamental right. Good luck with that.

Cmon. What guy isn't gonna want free beer and hourly blowjobs? From swimsuit models no less. If it's gonna be a right, then lets go for the gusto.

[hi.flyer]

Cmon. What guy isn't gonna want free beer and hourly blowjobs? From swimsuit models no less. If it's gonna be a right, then lets go for the gusto.

Unfortunately, there remains the imposing obstacle of women's suffrage standing in the way of your plan for wide-spread and indeed nationally instituted female sexual slavery.

[lug]

Anyone who can't afford health insurance deserves to die. {censored}ing broke-ass pathetic poor losers.

We could end poverty this way as well!

[lug]

Cmon. What guy isn't gonna want free beer and hourly blowjobs? From swimsuit models no less. If it's gonna be a right, then lets go for the gusto.

and I quote myself quoting another again...


A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until a majority of voters discover that they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. - Alexander Tytler