Nothing, absolutely nothing, about health care is mandated by the Constitution, nor, with the exception of service connected issues with Veterans, is any of the government's business.

"everyone" does not and will never equal EVERYONE, what liberal fantasyland have you been living in for the past 17 years?

The main problem is this makes health care a government concern.  This means a few things.

1.) They will mandate that prices be "fair".  This means if you're a healthy 20 year old you're supporting the medical costs of some 60 year old alcholic 300 pound guy down the road.
2.) Given #1, what is the difference between just moving to socialized medicine, we all get the same shitty care and pay the same shitty amount, right?  In 5 years someone they'll spring that on us.
3.) Once your healthcare is a ward of the state, they will begin making sure their investment is protected.  See: Even more tobacco taxes, alcohol taxes, fat food taxes, soda taxes, etc...
4.) What do you have to buy?  I want a high deductible plan and to use my HSA to pay for the gap up to there.  But the government will say that the high deductible plan isn't enough coverage for me.  This means no HSAs.

I think we just need to move towards efficiency and cover the gaps we have in coverage.  Note this isn't 40 million people - that is a Democrat lie.  It's far fewer than 40 million people.  Just provide shitty government coverage for them - they already get covered anyway it's just with very expensive "free" emergency room care.

I'm drunk enough that I would be denied on coverage.

Are you really curious, or do you want a 10 page thread?

Think it through. Listen to responses on this thread and discern which ones are complete shit (that might take a bit, but it is well worth it).

Seriously, if your impressed that SSI checks go out on time, than your bar is pretty low.

Bad idea:



What happens when an entity such as a doctor, hospital, or clinic, is 'at capacity'?



A) .gov intervention to serve more people

B) Longer waits

C) ?





I really, REALLY, don't want to fly to India to get medical treatments because Canada/US takes too long, and STILL be forced to pay for 'healthcare'.



Someone already mentioned that 'everyone' is not actually everyone, but it bears repeating. Insurance is gambling. You're betting $500 a month that you will get sick, and the insurance company is betting an unspecified dollar amount that you will stay healthy. Even if 'everyone' really did mean everyone, insurance wouldn't be insurance anymore. For the insurance companies it would  mean $500 a month from everyone and $XX.XX out for expenses. Besides, since we know 'everyone' doesn't actually mean everyone, just look at it this way: From each according to their ability, to each according to their need. Sound familiar?

No it doesn't make sense. I have always paid my medical bills ( even when 1000s of dollars ) and not acted like the irresponsible pricks you describe.

Why tax me or force me to buy a expensive plan I can't afford/don't want because of others irresponsibility? Im getting awfully tired of that shit.

Luckily I was smart and kept my health insurance back when I was seriously considering getting rid of it because "I never get sick."

In the past year, I've had 2 surgeries, Appendectomy and Gallbladder removal.  Total costs for those 2, and the subsequent complications from the gallbladder removal, would have been around $80,000

Absolutely no way in hell I could afford that without insurance.

I was a perfectly healthy 25 year old until last November when the Appendicitis hit me.  Shit like that is why I will always have health insurance.

Should it be mandatory?  NO!  Should hospitals treat illegal alliens and poor people for free, driving up the costs of healthcare?  NO!  Should we foot the bill for people who can't afford health insurance?  NO!

There's an answer to the problem, but it seems that nobody has found it yet.

It's an adverse selection problem.  As prices for medical care get higher and higher, actors seeking out healthcare become less and less likely to pay.  It happened in the insurance industry first, and now it is spreading to the healthcare industry as a whole (because not having insurance doesn't mean people will forgo healthcare).  If things keep going the way they are, eventually you will have the same problem personally.

The government recognizes this problem, which is why we have medicare and (to a much smaller extent) medicaid.  The same exact reasons we have medicare are the reasons we should have universal coverage.

Lower charges for those with health insurance???

Yeah, right. If they made mandatory health insurance then the rates would stay the same for a year then go up again. They would cite something along the lines of increased operational costs or something like that.

All mandatory insurance would cause is more money in the hospitals pocket.

What they need to do is to LOWER the price of drugs in hospitals, for one thing. The hospitals use the excuse that they have to open a whole bottle and cannot use the meds for another person.  There is this thing called "blister packaging" where you only open one pill at a time.  

They need to limit doctors salaries.

They need to limit malpractice lawsuits and lower doctors malpractice insurance.

They need to get doctors to make housecalls. I believe in Finland they still do this. The sick people don't pay for overpriced hospital rooms full of disease, and they actually heal faster at home.

So yet again punish the responsible for the irresponsible. I've had big ass medical bills and I've paid them. It was still cheaper than buying my own policy and paying 500-1000 for family coverage for years though.

The insurance company and government have no right to my money because they think I might get sick.

How about this ? Make it easier for hospitals to go after deadbeats and make them pay, rather than take money from the healthy.

That's circular reasoning. You're using one .gov program to justify another .gov program. I would've opted out of SS, if I could have, decades ago. This 'no child/person/whoever left behind' mentality is killing this country, one stupid .gov program at a time.





I pay for me. Just because someone finds a way to give a certain group of people something, does not give that person the right to steal my earnings to make it happen.





The current population of the United States is 304M. That's...


304,059,729...


human beings. We're not going to increase that number because of illegal aliens, or any other groups for which the census might not account. The current unemployment rate in the United States is...


9.6%...


That's...


29,189,734...


human beings that are unemployed, right now.





Joe Blow is uninsured and breaks a leg while putting up Christmas lights. He's been unemployed for 3 months. He goes to the ER, gets fixed up, and gets a bill for $9,000.





Are you willing to get 10 random people together and mutually promise to cover the other one's medical expenses? Come on, it's only a $1,000. Remember, you'll have 1 8yo, 1 18yo, 2 28yo, 2 38yo, 1 48yo, 1 58yo, 1 68yo, and 1 78yo. One will be 350lbs. One will be unemployed. One is a child. One is ultra high risk. 2 are retired. One has a chronic condition. 4 smoke. One is a veteran. One is going to get pregnant. 2 don't have auto insurance. 2 own homes. One has child support x3. One is receiving food stamps. One of these will live to 110yo. One is an arfcommer with a neighbor dispute...





I don't think that these people could, as a group, pay the other's medical bills. So, where would the extra money come from?





Republics are supposed to be fair, but when enough people figure out that they can vote/elect/legislate stuff for themselves, AND it involves the .gov 'spending' money, it's mob rule, or 'democracy'. Basic theft, really. Why is a bully a bully? Disparity of force. Why is a mob a mob? Same thing, because they have more votes than we do.





 
 

You don't seem to get it.  Adverse selection problems slowly filter all rational people out of the market.  Here's how it has progressed:

1) Insurance costs a lot of money to maintain executive bonuses/high doctor salary/new lifesaving technology/whatever
2) Less and less jobs provide healthcare benefits due to rising costs, and declining wages being paid out
3) Young healthy people who don't need insurance say "fuck that, ill just get catastrophic" or just opt out all together
4) Insurance rises in cost because those people leave the market
5) More people stop buying insurance
6) Repeat until the only people left are people who absolutely cannot live without insurance (people requiring regular expensive treatments or people with huge future liabilities)

We are somewhere in the Step #4 or 5.  The big problem is that people are bad at understanding risk and will forgo insurance.  Especially people who have nothing to be lose from bankruptcy.  They have been seeking care and then declaring bankruptcy, or otherwise not paying.  This also raises the price of care, which feeds through to the insurance system.

To sum up, in your quest to avoid paying for poor people, America has:
-Built a system that causes more bankruptcies than any other cause
-Tied healthcare to employment, at a time when less and less employers offer healthcare on top of everything else
-Built a system that costs far more overall due to the indirect way of funding healthcare for the poor
-Funneled all of these extra costs through insurance companies.   Insurance companies provide a much needed service, but they are the beneficiaries of people's poor perception of risk, much like casinos.

Jay Leno did a joke about it recently. Basically comparing it to California's mandatory car insurance rules, "we all know it works because everyone in Calif has car insurance?"

Yes, it is a bad idea, just like most everything else the government touches in the market.


ETA: the car insurance analogy is a bad one too. AFAIK no state requires you to have more than liability coverage, meaning they force you to have a means to restore another party in case you damage them or their property. The medical insurance proposal is akin to forcing you to carry full coverage absent liability. How would that sit with you if you were 18 and driving a 1986 K car?

Problem isn't insurance, the problem is government.

Auto insurance, required, right? Get in a crash with an illegal and you're covered by his mandatory insurance, right?

Wrong, government doesn't enforce the laws against those most likely to fuck up. Government enforces the law against those that would pay  anyway, and the skaters...skate. Government takes the handouts from insurance companies, fat with winnings from the Pay anyway types, and all are fat and happy, except those footing the bills and paying twice, us.

Same deal in health care. The illegals and pond scum will still use ERs for colds and coughs, will still skate on "mandatory" insurance, and we will end up paying twice, just like we do now, except we will NOT be paying half extra on one of those payments for lazy, entitled, inefficiant government middle men.

Want to fix the problem?

Fix Washington.

demand performance, and fire non-performers. If you can't fire them at the ballot box, fire them by cutting your taxed income to the bare essentials and run them out of office by denying them tax revenue.

Its easy to fix the health care problem. If you have no money to pay or no insurance,

and you get sick or hurt you are just left to die in the street. Only problem then is who is going to

pay to dispose of all the rotting bodies?

Its fine for them to require auto insurance since the gov owns the roads.  They don't own our bodies though.

Stupiud Statement Number 1.  Government ARMY is bad?  Government NAVY is bad?

Think about what you're saying BEFORE you say it.

That's a bad analogy too.    The 18yo isn't going to rush into an auto dealership and demand a $50,000 car for free because his K car finally gave up.  If he did, the dealer wouldn't give him one.

With collision/comprehensive, I get to choose how expensive a vehicle I drive.  With liability, I don't get to choose how expensive a vehicle I hit.  And of course there's the injury problem, probably much more expensive than vehicle damage.  In effect, we already are forcing people to buy health insurance (for other people we may injure in a car wreck).

+1



 

And yet the same people who say this will defend (until they are blue in the face) a government program to spend 65 billion dollars on a fighter plane, or 9 billion dollars on a new aircraft carrier.  

Because a)raising and maintaining a military is a delegated Constitutional duty it b)protects us from those who wish to kill and enslave us and c)doesn't involve me losing my freedom.



Why the fuck are you still here anyway?





 

Fuck the federal government and fuck obamacare. Someone tell me how they will force street bums to buy insurance? I say full market competition. A little dog eat dog capitalism will lower the prices.

Not having insurance doesn't mean someone can't pay for it.  

Most hospitals offer discounts for those without insurance, and most will offer payments plans if the effort is made before the bill becomes delinquent.  The hospital where I had my cancer treatment says on the back of every statement that they will discount the total by 20% if the consumer does not have insurance.

FWIW, I wouldn't mind covering the cost if ERs were limited in use to real emergencies or issues that needed immediate attention but weren't life-threatening.  It's the use of ERs as primary care physicians for mundate crap like colds that cause the prices to go up.  It's cheaper for an out-of-pocket office visit as well.  But guess who's responsible for using ERs instead of PCPs because they know they won't be seen without legal documents.

Seems like an if-then statement to me.

If hospitals continue to treat uninsured people, then is it better to mandate insurance for all.

The answer...perhaps...though I feel many here would advocate not treating those without insurance.

Yes.

Not having insurance does  not mean you don't  have the ability to pay.  In most cases, with the exception of catastrophic cardiac illness or cancer, medical treatment can be easily paid out of pocket.  





 

Haha yes, the only way to be safe as a country is to spend as much as the next 20 nations combined (and most of those 20 are allies of ours, lol).

The DOD procurement system is basically a social welfare program for the engineering profession





In real life the way it works out is that the Hospital cannot collect a significant portion of its recievables for uninsured persons, and has to increase prices on everyone else

You have correctly identified the problem but your experience in health insurance is blinding you to the multiple solutions to that problem.



Your suggestion of mandatory insurance is one solution (and such a solution greatly favors you/your employers bottom line).



An alternative solution is simply to not give free healthcare to anyone that walks in the door.



There are many places in the world where you cannot walk into an ER and expect free treatment, why do people expect it here?



If you can afford the best healthcare or have good insurance the ambulance takes you to the hospital where you pay a lot but get great service and treatment, if you have no insurance you can go to the charity run hospital supported by all the bleeding-heart liberals.

In 2004, 42.6 percent of all babies born at taxpayer expense in California were born to illegal aliens, according to a state report on Medi-Cal-funded deliveries.    

IFINALLY...THE $64,000 QUESTION WAS ASKED...


YESTERDAY ON "ABC-TV" (BETTER KNOWN AS THE ALL BARRACK CHANNEL) DURING THE "NETWORK SPECIAL ON HEALTH CARE"....  OBAMA WAS ASKED:
 
"MR. PRESIDENT WILL YOU AND YOUR FAMILY GIVE UP YOUR CURRENT HEALTH CARE PROGRAM AND JOIN THE NEW 'UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE PROGRAM' THAT THE REST OF US WILL BE ON ????"..... (BET YOU ALREADY KNOW THE ANSWER)....
]THERE WAS A STONEY SILENCE AS OBAMA IGNORED THE QUESTION AND CHOSE NOT TO ANSWER IT !!!...[/u]
IN ADDITION, A NUMBER OF SENATORS WERE ASKED THE SAME QUESTION AND THERE RESPONSE WAS..."WE WILL THINK ABOUT IT."
AND THEY DID. IT WAS ANNOUNCED TODAY ON THE NEWS THAT THE "KENNEDY HEALTH CARE BILL" WAS WRITTEN INTO THE NEW HEALTH CARE REFORM INITIATIVE ENSURING THAT CONGRESS WILL BE 100% EXEMPT !
SO, THIS GREAT NEW HEALTH CARE PLAN THAT IS GOOD FOR YOU AND I... IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR OBAMA, HIS FAMILY OR CONGRESS...??  WE (THE AMERICAN PUBLIC) NEED TO STOP THIS PROPOSED DEBACLE ASAP !!!!.... THIS IS TOTALLY WRONG !!!!!
PERSONALLY, I CAN ONLY ACCEPT A UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE OVERHAUL THAT EXTENDS TO EVERYONE... NOT JUST US LOWLY CITIZENS... WHILE THE WASHINGTON "ELITE" KEEP RIGHT ON WITH THEIR GOLD-PLATED HEALTH CARE COVERAGE'S.
IF YOU AGREE PLEASE TELL YOUR FRIENDS ....IF NOT PLAN TO SUFFER WITH THE OBAMA HEALTH CARE PLAN .....FOR FREE....   WHILE OUR SELF-SERVING POLITICIANS MAKE SURE THAT THEY TAKE CARE  OF THEIR BUTTS AT OUR EXPENSE.  

A lot of healthcare "becomes" free when you do it on Net 30 billing terms.




Those babies are citizens though.  Jus soli for the win!

So, you  are saying that instead of using technology to beat our opponents, we should just send in our military to a proverbial meat grinder?  That's what  you are saying.  Instead of a billion dollar stealth bomber that saves lives, you would want to treat our soldiers as cannon fodder.  Then again, your a liberal, and you take offense to the US military attacking your friends.





You are a dumb ass.  
 

We just recently went to Mandatory Car Insurance.  We were promised that it would reduce the cost of insurance in this State.  Trust me, it actually caused an increase in insurance prices.  Now Obama wants to force us to have Health Insurance and he will verify it on our tax returns.  Does anyone seem to realize that the IRS will probably have to double it's computing power just to verify that you have Health Insurance?  From my understanding, the last time that the IRS tried to upgrade it's computers, it was an abject failure.  The IRS is just barely able to process the information that we give them now.  Or maybe they are just faking it and just going by the last line on your tax forms.

Clearly, there is no middle ground between 65 billion dollar stealth fighters that are vulnerable to rain, and human wave attacks.

Also, if the end purpose is to save lives, I know something that is much cheaper per American life saved.  It starts with "Universal", and ends with "Healthcare".  A recent study by Harvard showed that ~45,000 Americans die every year due to lack of insurance.  So with a good UHC system, we could save 10 times the amount of people lost on 9/11, every year.

How many or lost in UK and Canada because of rationing?  How many or lost in Cuba.




 

Everything about this healthcare deal sounds bad,considering what little we have heard on it. I have even heard some solid democrats express doubts about it being any good. None of it sounds like any kind of reform, it's all just mandates and screwing with people's money. The worst thing here is it sounds like were going to get it shoved up our ass like it or not.

Just think of the money savings that could be realized, if Citizenship wasn't conferred on those who's parents are here illegally.  




 

Here in Taiwan, I met a travel agent who specializes in arranging trips to the US so that Taiwanese parents can give birth in the US and get their children dual citizenship.

They don't stay in the US, they raise the child in the much cheaper Taiwan.  Then the kid goes to US college, gets a high paying US job, and sponsors the parents to come over.

First thing bear_grillz (troll and tool extroidinaire)  you obviously dont know the first thing about working in a hospital or insurance reimbursements.  Its called Contract negotiation which is the first step in two companies agreeing to work together.  Company A (insurance company) says to company B (hospital)  we have 30,000 patients in your geographical location, if you want us to allow them to go there (ie Network coverage) then you need to cut us a deal on the prices.



Second -  you want to cut health care costs - Cap Punitive damages, when DR's don't have to pay 6 million a year for insurance guess what happens to their prices?  



Third - ever seen a reimbursement from Medicare/Medicade, Its roughly 33% of the price  lets take a 2000.00 MRI of the Brain as an example.

35.00 per hour for the MRI Tech (person running the machine)

827.00 - 935.00 per hour for the MRI Machine (to include cooling gases, repairs, computer support etc)



 ––  oops we are already out of money, so guess who eats the costs, thats right the hospital does, so when the nurse or x-ray tech wants a raise or bonus or overtime - Sorry there is no money.



oh and we are not including

Laundry -  for the patients sheets /blankets/ pillows/ gowns

Cleaning supplies / house keeping

Insurance on the MRI machine in case of catastrophic breach

overtime

PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO INSURANCE AND/OR DONT PAY



- –– these are just for the exam, you still have the DR (radiologist) who reads the films,  and the reports who is going to type them up and check them for accuracy and put them on the chart.



Fourth - you don't know what the fuck you are talking about - /story



 

WOW - bear  another piece of bullshit - so soon too



 here you go knuclehead - the insurance company sets its own rules for what they as a company find medically necessary - then AFTER the ER DR, examines, Diagnosis and treats and procedures are done, they review the DIAGNOSIS to see if the treatment falls with in the INSURANCE companies self described acceptable practices.  IF the DR ordered several tests to determine the actual diagnosis guess what - the other tests that dont explicitly fit into the INSURANCE companies Self described practices, the insurance company denies payment.    so guess who the hospital charges for the exams - the patient, but the patient is already fixed and healthy and tells the hospital to charge the insurance company (after all that's why he pays his monthly insurance bill).  If the patient does not pay guess who eats the costs  ––  the hospital.



once again - you have no idea what the fuck you are talking about - take your fake "Taiwanese" address (proxy server) go back to DU.





 

No, on top of all that, insurance companies send the bills to a third party who does this service in exchange for a percentage saved.  I know a few insurance companies went through and bought a lot of these companies, but this is how it works.  Google for Ingenix.  They have the biggest database

So yes, insurance companies do contract out to informatics companies to find out and negotiate prices harshly.

Now there's some good capitalist values.    

Yeah lets pay our atheletes 80 million dollars a year but limit doctors salaries so you can't go to the best doctor you can afford.

It s not a third party if you own the place, and if you have 5 million, in buisness and 4.5 of it comes from one insurance company do you really think the insurance company has no sway over decisions made.  ––  but nice fail in logic  8.5/10



Back to DU Troll



 

Government mandates of any sort have a proven history of not turning out so well.

Besides; the government doesn't have the Constitutional authority to force Americans to take out health insurance policies if they choose not to.

What's next for you leftists; government mandated life insurance policies for Americans with dependents ?

This isn't about healthcare.  It's about the government collecting more money and gaining more power.

Here is the problem.  Most of the people that go to the emergency room with no health insurance and no plans on ever paying their bill are the same types who still won't get insurance.  Think Thuggy B. Fresh with warrants on his name is going to use his real name, let alone carry insurance?.  Do you think Jose the day laborer with no DL or SS# will buy insurance?.

 

In the current welfare setup that BHO has in play, people who work will pay for those who choose not to work...

It says every body gets it, but who pays, not the un employed or permanent welfare cases. SO I will PAY... And it wont be cheap with me supporting mine and  some other welfare family.

I think we should take the opposite approach.  Not saying you MUST buy insurance at all.

Just allow hospitals to turn away people who can't pay.  No insurance or cash payment=no services.

There are only a few ways to fix this problem, and they all suck.  I am totally for anyone who doesn't want to pay for health insurance.  It's your right.

In order to "fix" the healthcare system we must agree that:

1.  Cheaper health insurance coverage would likely equate to more people purchasing it.
2.  More people paying for their care would drive the per person cost down.
3.  More people paying would decrease the ER visits, and increase GP visits.
4.  Fewer non-payers would allow the hospitals to distribute the costs more fairly, therefore you would see a decrease for per patient procedure costs (because they would be getting billed for fewer patients).

There are only a few ways to get people who think it is their right to make me pay for their health care to pay for it.  Either bill them up front in advance and spread the risk out over a pool of customers (health insurance), or to be able to deny a service to someone who doesn't pay for it.

1.  Not paying for health care is akin to shop lifting both in it's immorality and it's effect.  When someone shoplifts an item, the cost of that item is spread out over the rest of the products a store sells, making everything more expensive (and paid for by paying customers).  The same thing is happening with health care.  People are stealing a service.  It's wrong.  It should be illegal.  
2.  Getting those who don't currently pay for health care to become paying customers of the service they are currently stealing would reduce the costs for everyone else.  The hospital is going to get paid, it really only changes who is paying them.  

Call me a moron, a liar, or whatever you will.  I'm not saying that we should force people to have insurance.  What I am saying is that we should allow health care to operate the same way any other business does.  Turn away non-paying customers.  What would happen if you called up a lawn service and told them that they have to mow your lawn, but you aren't going to pay them?  They would laugh at you, likely quite vigorously.  ANY other business will terminate your services (or not provide them in the first place) if you don't pay them.  

The net effect of this would be that people would acquire some kind of insurance, because now they can't pass the cost onto people who ARE paying for their own way.