Americans agree that health care reform is needed. But our government has demonstrated time and again that it cannot be trusted to run ANY system - let alone one as large as 1/6 of our entire economy. The entitlement programs it DOES run - medicare, medicaid, VA care, etc. - are bleeding debt out every pore. They have racked up trillions of dollars in debt. I cannot imagine extending that to the 47 or so million uninsured (among this particular statistic, illegal aliens were included as well as the uninsured by choice - young, healthy people starting out their lives on tight budgets). Until very recently, I myself chose to keep the money that I would otherwise be paying into a system that will not benefit me yet. Right or wrong, that is certainly a choice Americans should make for themselves, and not one the government makes for us.
Only 4% of our medical breakthroughs originate from the government or government funded studies. Yet, if we subsidize a health plan, artificially shrink deductibles, and penalize business not providing care to their employees (paying the government 8% is dramatically easier than paying for private plans for your employees), you will see businesses that do NOT provide health care go bankrupt, while businesses that DO provide it will switch to the government plan, saving money and effectively destroying the private industry as we know it.
The problem in America is not lack of technology or skill, or even emergency treatment - healthcare or not, money or not, if I'm shot on the sidewalk, I'm taken to a hospital where I am patched up immeddiately. The problem is treatment for non "emergency" issues - rather, things that won't kill you "today." Chronic disease, Cancers, etc...these require multiple treatments in combinations of rx's, radiation, chemicals...you need health care for it. And people are dying.
The problem is not that "not everyone is not covered." The hierarchy of needs says you need food, shelter, reproduction, etc. But we don't guarantee a house, 3 meals a day and a mate for everyone in our country. The problem is that it just is not "available" enough right now. The way to make it more available, without turning us into a nanny state, is to decrease costs. There are many ways this can be done, but the unifying factor is that it is through LESS government invention, or rather, the elimination of laws that are destroying our industry.
1) Preventative care.
One of the lightning-rod issues, preventative care cost estimates on health insurance price range from 1% to 70%. That is an enormous gap. The reason I believe that lower numbers such as 1% show up is because the study probably only took into account legal fees, and NOT the extra cost of "defensive medicine"s extra, redundant studies to rule out strange exotic diseases you have no chance of having.
Inextricably linked to this is the medical malpractice insurance, which is literally hundreds of thousands of dollars. We need to deregulate this system desperately.
Fix the system and make it "loser pays." Tort reform is a must, here. And allow competitive pricing on malpractice insurance. This brings us to
2) De-regulate the collusive system.
That's right, one reason our health care costs are so high is because our government has mandated that only X amount of hcp's can compete within each state. This is ridiculous, but it's not hard to imagine why the lobbyists fought for it. We absolutely need to repeal these laws and allow the buying and selling of health care across state lines This move alone will DRASTICALLY decrease prices, stimulate a market, and reinvigorate a stagnating, bloated and collusive market. This single act would turn "the only game in town" into a national bidding war.
Much of the rest can be found in John Mackey's Wall Street Journal editorial, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204251404574342170072865070.html
But there is one point he doesn't make that I would like to introduce.
When health care becomes more affordable through these points (if we were to take such a path), we would run into the same problem that socialized health care would - when health care is cheaper (or in the socialized case, "free"), more doctors will be required.
I propose a a fund that subsidizes the cost of a basic medical education that could either be taken along with a college major path or if, say, a 43 year old wanted a new career. There would be some bureaucracy involved in selecting participants least-likely to drop out or fail (and waste the taxpayer's money). We do this on the requirement that, upon completion of their medical schooling, they work off their "debt" by working as a provider pro-bono for X hours/patients.
The end result is that the money we invest in this program is payed back in benefits to our system, increased availability of care and, best of all, an empowered population where our government invests in the people and not the problem.
Comment Reply
Americans agree that health care reform is needed. But our government has demonstrated time and again that it cannot be trusted to run ANY system - let alone one as large as 1/6 of our entire economy. The entitlement programs it DOES run - medicare, medicaid, VA care, etc. - are bleeding debt out every pore. They have racked up trillions of dollars in debt. I cannot imagine extending that to the 47 or so million uninsured (among this particular statistic, illegal aliens were included as well as the uninsured by choice - young, healthy people starting out their lives on tight budgets). Until very recently, I myself chose to keep the money that I would otherwise be paying into a system that will not benefit me yet. Right or wrong, that is certainly a choice Americans should make for themselves, and not one the government makes for us.
Only 4% of our medical breakthroughs originate from the government or government funded studies. Yet, if we subsidize a health plan, artificially shrink deductibles, and penalize business not providing care to their employees (paying the government 8% is dramatically easier than paying for private plans for your employees), you will see businesses that do NOT provide health care go bankrupt, while businesses that DO provide it will switch to the government plan, saving money and effectively destroying the private industry as we know it.
The problem in America is not lack of technology or skill, or even emergency treatment - healthcare or not, money or not, if I'm shot on the sidewalk, I'm taken to a hospital where I am patched up immeddiately. The problem is treatment for non "emergency" issues - rather, things that won't kill you "today." Chronic disease, Cancers, etc...these require multiple treatments in combinations of rx's, radiation, chemicals...you need health care for it. And people are dying.
The problem is not that "not everyone is not covered." The hierarchy of needs says you need food, shelter, reproduction, etc. But we don't guarantee a house, 3 meals a day and a mate for everyone in our country. The problem is that it just is not "available" enough right now. The way to make it more available, without turning us into a nanny state, is to decrease costs. There are many ways this can be done, but the unifying factor is that it is through LESS government invention, or rather, the elimination of laws that are destroying our industry.
1) Preventative care.
One of the lightning-rod issues, preventative care cost estimates on health insurance price range from 1% to 70%. That is an enormous gap. The reason I believe that lower numbers such as 1% show up is because the study probably only took into account legal fees, and NOT the extra cost of "defensive medicine"s extra, redundant studies to rule out strange exotic diseases you have no chance of having.
Inextricably linked to this is the medical malpractice insurance, which is literally hundreds of thousands of dollars. We need to deregulate this system desperately.
Fix the system and make it "loser pays." Tort reform is a must, here. And allow competitive pricing on malpractice insurance. This brings us to
2) De-regulate the collusive system.
That's right, one reason our health care costs are so high is because our government has mandated that only X amount of hcp's can compete within each state. This is ridiculous, but it's not hard to imagine why the lobbyists fought for it. We absolutely need to repeal these laws and allow the buying and selling of health care across state lines This move alone will DRASTICALLY decrease prices, stimulate a market, and reinvigorate a stagnating, bloated and collusive market. This single act would turn "the only game in town" into a national bidding war.
Much of the rest can be found in John Mackey's Wall Street Journal editorial, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204251404574342170072865070.html
But there is one point he doesn't make that I would like to introduce.
When health care becomes more affordable through these points (if we were to take such a path), we would run into the same problem that socialized health care would - when health care is cheaper (or in the socialized case, "free"), more doctors will be required.
I propose a a fund that subsidizes the cost of a basic medical education that could either be taken along with a college major path or if, say, a 43 year old wanted a new career. There would be some bureaucracy involved in selecting participants least-likely to drop out or fail (and waste the taxpayer's money). We do this on the requirement that, upon completion of their medical schooling, they work off their "debt" by working as a provider pro-bono for X hours/patients.
The end result is that the money we invest in this program is payed back in benefits to our system, increased availability of care and, best of all, an empowered population where our government invests in the people and not the problem.
~Oppo
August 27, 2009 - 11:11amThis Comment
Reply