Nonsense! Wasteful! Examine carefully for salvageable organs, harvest those worth saving, dump the brain into the jar marked “Abby Normal”…
I have a question - and I will also wander over to great debates to see if anyone over there is talking about it.
I am very conflicted on health care reform. But here is my question, and I truly mean this as a question, I am not trying to be an ass about it. If Medicare and Medicaid are in financial trouble, and are at risk of being insolvent, what makes anyone think the gov’t can do a good job fiscally managing everyone’s health care? These two cover fairly discrete populations. Plus Social Security is not fiscally sound (but because its not health care related, I am completely willing to drop the comparison).
Here’s why I am conflicted: yes Paying for health care is completely messed up, the actual care we all receive is fine. It should not be linked to your job, it should be affordable, and the prices shouldn’t go up 20+% every year. But the gov’t does not (to my limited knowledge) have a very good track record of getting things done in a cost efficient and effective manner. So what’s makes everyone think that the gov’t will this time?
IMO, the government doesn’t have the same incentive to fuck you the way that the insurance company does.
Couple months ago I was at a friend’s house. He was going to take me to Home Depot to pick up some sheets of plywood, since he has a truck, and for me, fitting a 8x4 sheet into an Accord is kind of impossible.
Anyway, we needed to swing by Walgreen’s to get a prescription filled for his infant son. We get there, and the pharmacist tells him that the insurance company (BC/BS) said that the pharmacist would need to speak to the doctor to make sure that the kid REALLY needed that prescription.
No big deal, right? Just call the doctor. Except that this decision was made at 6PM on a Friday. So, the choice is to pay full price (something like $300, unrealistic for an electrician’s apprentice) and hope that the insurance company will deign to reimburse him later, or to just walk away.
Keep this story in mind next time some GOP prick tells you that they evil gummint will get between you and your doctor, because right now your insurance company gets between you and your doctor. Is it possible that some evil, moustach-twirling bureaucrat will screw you just for fun at some point in the future? Absolutely. But I think it’s a less likely than someone at an insurance company screwing you because it’s in his financial best interest to do so.
-Joe
No we don’t. My national defence needs don’t include ludicrous cold war weapon systems, nukes or helping the USA invade other countries on trumped up charges.
I just want to make sure I am clear. So the goal is to get rid of the insurance companies who are screwing people. (and I do not deny the fact that the insurance companies are totally screwing people - they are unbelievably selfish bastards - I agree). Then we can put the gov’t in place of the insurance companies.
That still doesn’t answer the question of whether or not the gov’t can efficiently run the system and maintain a decent financial structure. Yeah they pass it - we are no longer at the mercy of some overpaid insurance CEO asshole!! hurray! Oh wait, the deficit is up, we are going to have to cut the insurance offerings (just like they want to do to Medicare now). But because the gov’t plan was cheaper, we all switched to it, except for those who could afford to stay private (which includes congress, since I believe they are not required to be on their own plan).
Am I nuts to think this could be a problem?
As I understand it, your current insurance from your job will continue on. So, I’ll stick with what I got, thanks everybody!
But, if your job doesn’t offer insurance, or if you are among the 10.2% of the lazy fucks that can’t find a job because you can’t be bothered to singlehandedly turn around this economy, the government offers it’s own health option. Again, as I understand it it isn’t cheaper than the private plans. However, if you’re broke, there will be government subsidies to help you pay for it, rather than putting you on an iceberg and pushing it out to sea if you get sick.
Of course you are correct. We ought to discard what this country was founded upon and re-write all existing governmental documents in order to keep up with the times.
I agree that the government doesn’t have incentive to fuck you (except they are just as corrupt as any other citizen)
Them (being government) are just people, people we elect who have the same wants and desires as the rest of us. If someone gives them incentive to fuck YOU (collective), why wouldn’t they? They have and will continue to do so.
The government means well, the progressives mean well, the conservatives mean well, but something is always lost in the translation.
On top of them being regular Joe’s, they have no INCENTIVE to run it efficiently since they aren’t using or paying for it.
Ha, are you sure?
National defense could surely be spent upon less, I agree. However that doesn’t change that those same cold war munitions, nukes and among other things have keep you safe (some of which you could possibly be ignorant of)
I am sure. I don’t need the Euro-fighter or trident submarines. They make me less safe. I need a bigger and better army with proper battlefield equipment. But can’t have it as the money is wasted elsewhere.
The point is - I don’t understand or respect the USA right-tard position that somehow health is unique among all public provision that doing something even half-arsed corrupt governments like Italy can manage will lead to cats mating with dogs and The Beast of Revelation to rise from the sea.
I don’t take libertarian arguments seriously. Scratch a libertarian, find a loon.
Are you under the impression that private companies are keeping costs under control?
-Joe
no they are not. that is clear. the only thing they keep under control are excessive salaries and their profits (mostly by screwing people). No, I have no cite, but I am not arguing this point with you.
As I said, I am conflicted. I don’t trust the gov’t because of the whole “slippery slope” thing for the most part. But I also don’t trust the insurance companies because they are lying bastards, who are more than happy to cut off someone from their insurance for any one of a number of specious “reasons”.
At this point, though I am not at all convinced that UHC should be passed, I wish they would get it over with so I don’t have to feel conflicted any more. Then I can just be resigned, and I’m getting pretty used to that!
I guess in the larger scheme, I trust private companies more than the gov’t because there is competition to keep them marginally honest. In theory. Its a theory that doesn’t hold up well in practice quite frankly.
I generally agree with you. However, the fact of the matter is that the private industry either can’t or won’t control the problem.
So, fuck 'em. Let’s give someone else a try.
-Joe
How about making some changes to our existing health care system in lieu of scrapping it and going to the government to fix our problems?
Once it becomes a government run agency, it will NEVER EVER be a private sector thing again, no matter how badly run it is.
Where did you get the notion that anyone has proposed “scrapping” our existing health care system? The proposed public option is estimated to cover about 10% of Americans, so that is hardly abandoning the private system.
Unless I’ve been grossly misinformed, that’s exactly what’s going to happen under the current health care bill.
Gosh, wouldna it been sweet if the Pubbies actually came up with something like that? I suppose now you want to “start over” with a ‘rational’ approach?
Sorry, but that train left the station 10 months ago, and it turns out that not a single member of the ‘loyal opposition’ could be found to get on board. Oh well, fuck em. That’s better than they deserve.
I don’t think you are the ‘uninformed beyond the point of imbecility’ one in this ‘discussion’.
Well, the conservatives out there would say that, once the public option is available, many (most?) companies will dump their private plans in favor of paying the extra tax/fine per employee (which is usually far less than they pay now for privt insurance) and shuffle them off to the public option. The companies will say that they must do this to stay competitive in the global economy, as their international competition can do likewise.
Over time, so the argument goes, this will have the effect of driving many insurance companies out of business.
This may be a stupid question, but why can’t insurance companies lower their prices to compete?