|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
posted August 04, 2009 09:49 AM |
|
|
Red tape has really gotten our government to a new level of inneptatude that is mind boggling. The ONLY thing that helps grease the wheels is cold hard cash. You better have a lot of it however. While the current health care providers are indeed just as innept and holding as many loopholes as they possibly can, I can just not see the government doing any better. While SOMETHING has to be done, I have no idea WHAT.
Currently America is ranked 26th in Quality of Healthcare (for the 'average person' and not multi millionaires/billionaires) it is ranked no 1 in COST for said 'average person'. That is a HUGE discrepency. Funding goes for treatment instead of cures (cures are not profitable after all), and insurance companies will use ANY excuse not to pay..even if you have been paying them loyally for years. It's all about the bottom line.
There has to be a way that hospitals/doctors etc can make a profit while people actually get DECENT care. It will take somebody much smarter then me to figure out how to do it.
____________
Message received.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 04, 2009 10:06 AM |
|
|
"Oh, why health costs increase? The basic reason why health costs increased is that health care is a good thing! Because today there is a lot more you can do! Consider all these expenses that are diagnostic. Cat scans, X-rays, MRIs and now the proton-powered whatever-it-is. Something that is the size of a football field, cost $50 million, and has all sorts of diagnostic powers. A lot of these technologies clearly reveal things that would not be revealed otherwise. There's no question about it. Diagnostics have improved. Technology has improved. You know, sending things through your blood stream to help in operations, instead of cutting you open. It's incredible. But these things are costly. But for older people longevity is increasing by a month each year. Now, whether that creates other problems with retirement and social security is another question. But, nevertheless, preserving life is a good thing." - Kenneth Arrow.
Part of the reason costs are so high, though, is because of insurance itself. Not only does it add red tape to the system, but insurance companies are less hesitant to pay for expensive procedures for already insured people. Thus, there is no incentive to do a cost-benefit analysis ("Yeah, that optional surgery has less than a 5% chance of making any significant changes to your health, but I have insurance, so I might as well use it!"). And then, because insurance companies are more willing to pay than individuals would be, costs rise. Thus, insurance companies raise their premiums, making it harder for some people to afford insurance. And the cycle continues.
I think the best solution is health savings accounts (a tax-free account that can only be used for health care expenses) combined with catastrophic insurance. Because catastrophic illnesses are relatively uncommon, the price of insurance would be a lot cheaper. And since catastrophic illnesses are more expensive to treat, thanks to the insurance, it wouldn't break the bank.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted August 04, 2009 03:13 PM |
|
|
@mytical
Quote:
Currently America is ranked 26th in Quality of Healthcare (for the 'average person' and not multi millionaires/billionaires) it is ranked no 1 in COST for said 'average person'.
Rated by whom?
@mvass
Quote:
I think the best solution is health savings accounts (a tax-free account that can only be used for health care expenses)
Absolutely, and it's even better than that, as you get to keep a portion of what you don't use. Coupled with a high-deductable insurance plan, it thus becomes a huge incentive for people to stop the "I have a papercut!" ER visits, which is about 50% of the problem.
HSA/HDHP plans just became available at my place of employment, and I'll be joining as soon as the next open season comes around.
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted August 04, 2009 03:54 PM |
|
|
C'mon Mvass. You know why health care is so expensive. It's the lawyers' fault. 
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted August 04, 2009 04:38 PM |
|
|
Good question Corribus, been about a year since I saw that article. I believe it was on MSN, but I may be mistaken. I know it was either on MSN, Fox (I don't watch fox often so doubtful) or CNN.
____________
Message received.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted August 04, 2009 04:42 PM |
|
|
|
Right. Well, you do understand that numbers don't really mean much unless you know how they are calculated, don't you? After all, statistics can be manipulated to show just about anything you want them to. How can you be sure the ranking wasn't biased? What was their metric? I think you would want to know these things before you start throwing other peoples' numbers around.
|
|
Miru
Supreme Hero
A leaf in the river of time
|
|
posted August 05, 2009 04:05 AM |
|
|
Everyone thinks they want to fix the government. This is basically impossible. No you are not going to be president, no one will join your party, no one will change their mind by having you yell (or even reason) at (with) them. The only thing I can think to do is try to show the public what is happening. Which is also hopeless.
I'm not pessimistic; I'm realistic.
____________
I wish I were employed by a stupendous paragraph, with capitalized English words and expressions.
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted August 05, 2009 06:24 AM |
|
Edited by Mytical at 06:53, 05 Aug 2009.
|
Ah it was the World Health Orginization, which ranked America actually 37th in the world for overall health care. Price wise it was ranked no. 1. Yes I am quite aware that statistics can be made to say just about anything. Perhaps I missed something, however, for I have seen no reason why WHO would manipulate the statistics.
According to the last survey (Which yes can be misleading, so take it with a grain of salt) they took into consideration the following. How well healthcare was accessable (spread out is the word they used), the quality of healthcare given, and many many more factors which you can find on their website. While every list possible would probably be tinted one way or another it gives a decent idea of where to begin. So even with taking in consideration with number fudging (+/- 5) that still doesn't look very good.
Of course it was a year 2000 list, so things may have changed in the last 10 years (give or take) also.
Edit : What absolutely amazes me is I remember this. I usually have trouble remembering my name...
Edit 2: The WHO have the 2009 statistics but not a overall ranking yet (that I could find), so maybe things have improved since 2000.
____________
Message received.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 05, 2009 08:49 AM |
|
|
Britain has free basic public health care.
Insurances usually work with LOW installments for LOW probability HIGH risk cases: pay $1 monthly as an insurance that you get the Alfred E. Neuman desease, to cash in a million in case you get it.
Insurances where paying out is the rule are nonsense, though. A health INSURANCE means HIGH installments for a MIX of all probability and risk classes - it's the same than an insurance against appliances-and-gadgets failure in the household.
So a health INSURANCE obviously makes sense with LOW installments for LOW probability HIGH risk cases: accidents; rare, but expensive-to-treat illnesses, basically everything that involves longer hospital stays or regular hospital visits.
The small stuff should be free, publicly funded, with a small amount, for example something like the absolute basic minimum fee for a short talk with the doc, to be paid by the patient for each (first) visit (no double and triple fees for having to come again).
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 05, 2009 09:25 AM |
|
|
I agree with JJ? About an economic issue? What's wrong with me? Quote:
The small stuff should be free, publicly funded, with a small amount, for example something like the absolute basic minimum fee for a short talk with the doc, to be paid by the patient for each (first) visit (no double and triple fees for having to come again).
Except I disagree with this.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 05, 2009 10:13 AM |
|
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted August 05, 2009 04:01 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 16:03, 05 Aug 2009.
|
Quote:
Ah it was the World Health Orginization, which ranked America actually 37th in the world for overall health care. Price wise it was ranked no. 1. Yes I am quite aware that statistics can be made to say just about anything.
Link, please?
Quote:
Perhaps I missed something, however, for I have seen no reason why WHO would manipulate the statistics.
Every organization has an agenda, Mytical. WHO is based in Europe.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 05, 2009 07:06 PM |
|
|
Quote:
How so?
Because I think the free market should determine such things.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 05, 2009 07:15 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Every organization has an agenda, Mytical. WHO is based in Europe.
I assume something based in America has more credibility?
If not, which one would you pick? Russia?
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted August 05, 2009 07:55 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Every organization has an agenda, Mytical. WHO is based in Europe.
I assume something based in America has more credibility?
Yeah, because that's exactly what I said.
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 05, 2009 08:04 PM |
|
|
No you said that all organizations have an agenda. That was a question, not a statement, and I know you didn't say that. (that's why I even said "If not"...)
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted August 06, 2009 01:10 AM |
|
|
Yeah thats the only way to destabilize any statistic, by determining its location and negate it. That's how America could avoid signing Kyoto for years, thats how Israel can continue the slaughter, thats how Korea is governing its citizens, and so on. If the truth is crude, we create our own truth.
On the other side, don't you think that the health care system should be more severe and responsible? Why people should pay millions for someone who over smoked and contracted a cancer, for someone who contracted AIDS because unprotected sex, for someone who got obese because he does not care about his health? If we are aware about the results of an insane life and still ignore it, I don't see any reasons why the society should help a posteriori. We are warned every day.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
Mamgaeater
Legendary Hero
Shroud, Flying, Trample, Haste
|
|
posted August 06, 2009 01:13 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Every organization has an agenda, Mytical. WHO is based in Europe.
I assume something based in America has more credibility?
Yeah, because that's exactly what I said.
how do we know the american statistics aren't Biased?
____________
Protection From Everything.
dota
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted August 06, 2009 06:26 AM |
|
|
What Corribus is saying (I think) and what I agree with is ALL statistics can be manipulated to say whatever somebody wants. For instance lets take 'hand gun' regulation. They put up statistics on how crime falls when hand guns are illegal. When it may have nothing to do with hand guns being illegal, but some other factor altogether.
The World Health Orginization can be found at http://www.who.int and contains all of its reports.
Now they have stopped ranking (apparantly) overall due to 'complexity' (which I read as pressure from US officials, though I may be wrong). Since Corribus has a keener mind then me, maybe he can make heads or tails out of the current 2009 reports at the above website.
____________
Message received.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 06, 2009 07:05 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
How so?
Because I think the free market should determine such things.
Free market? Fails for reasons of force: people aren't really free in choosing their docs, hospitals and drugs on one hand, while on the other the capacity of any doc or hospital is limited: if you would like to be treated by a certain guy, but his next free appointment is in 4 weeks you can't wait.
You also can't have long ways to a regular doc - you don't want to use up a day, just because you have a sore throat.
Lastly there's no way to effectively compare the abilities or performances of docs, hospitals and drugs for the laymen.
General good health is important for the whole of society - if, for example, there are epidemical outbreaks of all kinds of diseases because people don't want to afford yet another doc visit, the whole of society is suffering. This is especially true with children. So, if it was market-ruled, the consequence would be, generally poorer health (for example teeth) with poorer people, but you don't want slums to become not only a hotbed for crime, but for deseases as well.
So I couldn't disagree more with the market idea.
|
|
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
