AvgGuyIA
Gold Member
Fix the VA and Medicare FIRST then come talking to us about "fixing" health care.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This is me, searching high and low in this post for any kind of evidence or substantiation of your statement that Medicare and Medicaid are more efficient than private insurance OR your statement that their only problem is that costs are rising too fast for them. Funny how I'm not finding it.
Administrative Efficiencies
Perhaps the most obvious advantage of public insurance is that it is inexpensive to administer. The public Medicare plans administrative overhead costs (in the range of 3 percent) are well below the overhead costs of large companies that are self-insured (5 to 10 percent of premiums), companies in the small group market (25 to 27 percent of premiums), and individual insurance (40 percent of premiums)
Well...you can KEEP YOUR SOCIALIZED HEALTHCARE because all you people know about is "Heil Hitler" and being under the subjugation of the State. We Americans are an independent lot who pull ourselves up by our boot straps. We don't need no stinkin' commune to live in. Our Hippies here have tried that already and it doesn't work because sooner or later the hardest working hippie gets tired of doing all the work while the others kick back.Outsider´s View
As a german, I sometimes do not understand the heat in your debate.
Man, what you already call socialism, would be the lowest standard of healthcare in a lot of industrializes countries.
Anyway, obviously a matter of perspective...
Living in a country, where a healthcare insurance is obligatory, I can tell you, that it is a myth, that any public or state owned system is non-profit orientated.
It is rather an accounting definition how you call a surplus.
In Germany the doctors use a very complex system to charge their costs to the public insurances. Every treatmeant has a point value, which represents a certain worth in EUR.
On the other side is the government fund, all public insurers get their money from.
Simple system: The more points you have via the doctors, the more money you get from the fund.
So, a simple reflux of stomach acid can either be what it is (not many points), or a more difficult thing can be diagnosed, which the doctor gets more points for.
The problem now is, that the government fund (the sum of all payments from the insured) is not limitless available.
Still, it is the interest of all public insurances to get as many points. They even start to train doctors how to "choose" the more lucrative diagnosis.
So, as I see it, you Americans should not think about if the state becomes to powerful, but who is getting his hands into the pot of gold.
As I do have a full-hearted trust in the greed of man, I think, that any system, be it private or public, will be a system, where people try to get a maximum of money out of - better known as profit.
Does competition make a difference ?
I do not think so.
Hands on heart, we all go to the doctr or a hospital, because we trust the one or distrust the other. Or we use a simple calculation of costs:
The best specialist is expensive, so the young doctor will do it.
Or I need a certain operation in case of need and then I just take the one who will save my life or my leg or whatever. Face it: Healthcare is not comparable to buying a car or a computer.
So, it all comes down to what we can afford. And in this regard I prefer a public system like here, where I do have access to specialists, without having to think about the costs.
regards
ze germanguy
Here is a basic economics 101 question.
What will happen if the government artificially keeps cost below market value?
sure harry but the extremists on either side don't usually speak to where most most Americans really are just right or left of the middle LOL
Name one area that the government has run efficienctly? Look at what they did to the post office?
The government's interference will only make things 10 times worse.
We certainly have issues regarding our health care. The government' micromanaging is like throwing gasoline on a fire. It will make it much worse.
The reason costs are as high as they are now is because of too much government interference. The best thing the government can do to help our health care system and make it more affordable is get out of the way and stop driving up costs.
Medicare and Medicaid operate at far greater efficiency than the private insurance market. The reason they're "In trouble" is because they can't keep up with the rising costs, and people are living 20 or so years longer than they did in the past.
The poor post office just makes an easy target. It's a service, partially subsidized by customer contributions. It doesn't have to make a profit; Few government programs do. People want their mail, and people don't want the price to go up. Show me someone else who an deliver a letter from California to New Jersey in a few days for 44 cents.
You're entitled to your opinion, but I disagree. If we can get back to ECO101, the reason the prices are so high is that providers are pricing their services @ market clearing level, and due to staggering redundancies inherent in the system, and as I said before, we are all subsidizing the uninsured in a ridiculously expensive way. I think the current proposal would do wonders to reign in costs. Add a public option, even more. Single payer, more still. But hey, that's just me.
I'll agree that a hands-off approach would also reduce costs, but in order for it to work, you would have to deny care to non-payers, period.
This is me, searching high and low in this post for any kind of evidence or substantiation of your statement that Medicare and Medicaid are more efficient than private insurance OR your statement that their only problem is that costs are rising too fast for them. Funny how I'm not finding it.
Here is a basic economics 101 question.
What will happen if the government artificially keeps cost below market value?
Depends on how they do it, doesn't it?
If they do so by paying the lions share of the costs for the consumers then the price of it will continue to escalate.
If they impose price freezes there will be less HC available.
Here is a basic economics 101 question.
What will happen if the government artificially keeps cost below market value?
Depends on how they do it, doesn't it?
If they do so by paying the lions share of the costs for the consumers then the price of it will continue to escalate.
If they impose price freezes there will be less HC available.
What if they do so by increased efficiency, lower overhead, and getting people help when they have minor issues, rather than letting them balloon?
Well!!!! I know where you can put your nose and lips Forest. If you're not an American, you don't have a say in how WE run things here. (Unless you're China and because we owe you $800 Billion thanks to Progressives and their spending habits.)Yanks? Are you British Grump? Guess whose asses we saved during the war? I don't care if you give me more negative REPS about it, just keep your Euro-trash nose out of America's business.
No, I'm not British, Moron. But I'm not a Yank either. I'll put my nose where I damn well please...
...unless you can take your own advice and keep your Neocon Whackjob nose out of the rest of the world's business...doubtful I know...In which case, STFU, Loser....
amusing how little twits from all over the world add their unsolicited two cents into the business of America and then become so outraged when Americans comment on their part of the world.. that's the DUmmie way alrighty..
Oh do shut up Willow....every time you open your trap the average IQ in this joint slides...
...maybe if America could mind its own business once and a while, you wouldn't get people commenting on yours....
Well...maybe I was a little tough on the Kraut by mentioning "Heil Hitler" and all, but I don't recall them turning Adolph over to the Allies. We had to go in there and kick their butts first. Does anybody recall hearing the Germans saying "we're sorry" about that taking over half of Europe thing? I don't.God IA I love when you wingnuts all use the word "WE", you certainly don't speak for me or a great portion of this nation! you really are one arrogant fuck aren't you
I think he was speaking about americans.
Anyway, we aren't over there telling the Germans how to run their government (except for a couple years after soundly kicking their asses back to Rhine) so they don't need to be telling us how to run our affairs here.
Leave it to you to cheer for the Commies. I bet you think Reagan didn't win the Cold War, huh?Well...maybe I was a little tough on the Kraut by mentioning "Heil Hitler" and all, but I don't recall them turning Adolph over to the Allies. We had to go in there and kick their butts first. Does anybody recall hearing the Germans saying "we're sorry" about that taking over half of Europe thing? I don't.I think he was speaking about americans.
Anyway, we aren't over there telling the Germans how to run their government (except for a couple years after soundly kicking their asses back to Rhine) so they don't need to be telling us how to run our affairs here.
Odd sense of history...but considering the source, it is expected
Germany has repeatedly said "I'm sorry" for the war and they are one of our closest allies today.
As to WWII. It was the Soviets who defeated the Germans at great cost. They faced the bulk of the German Army while we mopped up the Western front. By the time the US finally landed at Normandy, the Soviets had already turned the tide
Leave it to you to cheer for the Commies. I bet you think Reagan didn't win the Cold War, huh?Well...maybe I was a little tough on the Kraut by mentioning "Heil Hitler" and all, but I don't recall them turning Adolph over to the Allies. We had to go in there and kick their butts first. Does anybody recall hearing the Germans saying "we're sorry" about that taking over half of Europe thing? I don't.
Anyway, we aren't over there telling the Germans how to run their government (except for a couple years after soundly kicking their asses back to Rhine) so they don't need to be telling us how to run our affairs here.
Odd sense of history...but considering the source, it is expected
Germany has repeatedly said "I'm sorry" for the war and they are one of our closest allies today.
As to WWII. It was the Soviets who defeated the Germans at great cost. They faced the bulk of the German Army while we mopped up the Western front. By the time the US finally landed at Normandy, the Soviets had already turned the tide
Yeah...as the winner of the Cold War.Leave it to you to cheer for the Commies. I bet you think Reagan didn't win the Cold War, huh?Odd sense of history...but considering the source, it is expected
Germany has repeatedly said "I'm sorry" for the war and they are one of our closest allies today.
As to WWII. It was the Soviets who defeated the Germans at great cost. They faced the bulk of the German Army while we mopped up the Western front. By the time the US finally landed at Normandy, the Soviets had already turned the tide
The "Commies" defeated Hitler. Stalingrad in 1942, Kursk in 1943 broke the back of the German Army before we even hit Normandy.
History has already defined Reagans role
Yeah...as the winner of the Cold War.Leave it to you to cheer for the Commies. I bet you think Reagan didn't win the Cold War, huh?
The "Commies" defeated Hitler. Stalingrad in 1942, Kursk in 1943 broke the back of the German Army before we even hit Normandy.
History has already defined Reagans role
Fix the VA and Medicare FIRST then come talking to us about "fixing" health care.
Leave it to you to cheer for the Commies. I bet you think Reagan didn't win the Cold War, huh?
Well...you can KEEP YOUR SOCIALIZED HEALTHCARE because all you people know about is "Heil Hitler" and being under the subjugation of the State. We Americans are an independent lot who pull ourselves up by our boot straps. We don't need no stinkin' commune to live in. Our Hippies here have tried that already and it doesn't work because sooner or later the hardest working hippie gets tired of doing all the work while the others kick back.Outsider´s View
As a german, I sometimes do not understand the heat in your debate.
Man, what you already call socialism, would be the lowest standard of healthcare in a lot of industrializes countries.
Anyway, obviously a matter of perspective...
Living in a country, where a healthcare insurance is obligatory, I can tell you, that it is a myth, that any public or state owned system is non-profit orientated.
It is rather an accounting definition how you call a surplus.
In Germany the doctors use a very complex system to charge their costs to the public insurances. Every treatmeant has a point value, which represents a certain worth in EUR.
On the other side is the government fund, all public insurers get their money from.
Simple system: The more points you have via the doctors, the more money you get from the fund.
So, a simple reflux of stomach acid can either be what it is (not many points), or a more difficult thing can be diagnosed, which the doctor gets more points for.
The problem now is, that the government fund (the sum of all payments from the insured) is not limitless available.
Still, it is the interest of all public insurances to get as many points. They even start to train doctors how to "choose" the more lucrative diagnosis.
So, as I see it, you Americans should not think about if the state becomes to powerful, but who is getting his hands into the pot of gold.
As I do have a full-hearted trust in the greed of man, I think, that any system, be it private or public, will be a system, where people try to get a maximum of money out of - better known as profit.
Does competition make a difference ?
I do not think so.
Hands on heart, we all go to the doctr or a hospital, because we trust the one or distrust the other. Or we use a simple calculation of costs:
The best specialist is expensive, so the young doctor will do it.
Or I need a certain operation in case of need and then I just take the one who will save my life or my leg or whatever. Face it: Healthcare is not comparable to buying a car or a computer.
So, it all comes down to what we can afford. And in this regard I prefer a public system like here, where I do have access to specialists, without having to think about the costs.
regards
ze germanguy