What is Digg?165 Comments
- maz2331, on 10/20/2008, -2/+40Actually, the REAL problem requires answering the question: "Why is it so damn expensive in the first place?"
My wife got a battery of tests recently due to a platelet issue, and the hospital "billed" over $3000 for it, whereas the "real amount" allowed under the insurance was $500. Talk about trying to overcharge!
The best reform is the simplest: truth in pricing. Simply require all providers to list their price for every procedure, with no "special deals" for the insured vs. the uninsured, or one insurance company getting a bigger discount than any other. Everyone should pay the same for the same services.
A huge amount of the need for insurance is simply the need for a type of discount card, even more than the reduction of out-of-pocket expense.
We also need to greatly increase the ratio of caregivers to administrative personnel. I've done IT stuff at physicians offices, and they need nearly as many paper-pushers to deal with insurance issues as they have doctors. That needs to end immediately, as that basically parasitic overhead does nothing to improve care and only causes costs to be greatly increased.
The next regulation is also simple: mandate individuals can buy at the same premiums as groups, and make policies fall into either a "major medical" (covers big stuff only, low premium) or "comprehensive" that covers everything. Two choices, one flat price per, no exceptions allowed for "preexisting conditions," "in-network" or any other bull. And if coverage is mandated, require the companies can clear no more than a 5% profit margin.
None of these are difficult to implement at all. - Cancerkitty, on 10/20/2008, -10/+42No, please don't.
- granolajoe, on 10/20/2008, -16/+38Offer universal healthcare
- manstein01, on 10/20/2008, -2/+19"9. Stop Unnecessary Treatments"
You know WHY doctor's prescribe so many unnecessary tests/treatments? To cover their ass. Why doesn't the article mention the huge pink elephant in the room - malpractice lawyers. - andyboyd, on 10/20/2008, -6/+21Move to France. Or Sweden. Or anywhere in Europe and outside of North America for that matter.
- cptshamrock, on 10/20/2008, -3/+17Most of these suggestions are very good and do not really need the federal government to be involved (i.e. universal healthcare). There are some that do cross the line, i.e. having schools decide what you can and cannot bring to eat. But overall most of these things are common sense. Healthcare wouldn't really be much of an issue if people just got up and moved around a few times during the week.
- AmyVernon, on 10/20/2008, -2/+16If they took just one page out, wouldn't it be difficult to read and confusing? ;-)
- StevieJanowski, on 04/02/2009, -11/+23I totally agree that healthcare reform is needed asap but these changes are going to take much longer than a single term presidency. for anything to have a chance to last we will need to reelect obama (if he wins)
- inactive, on 10/20/2008, -0/+12My best friend had broken his leg and shattered his pelvis riding his dirtbike, and we would go visit him, first at the hospital itself, and later at the physical rehabilitation. One of us noticed that there were a large number of cars in the parking lot with Canadian tags. We walked around and estimated the Canadian cars outnumbered American cars by about double. No matter when we came, over the course of five months, this was always the case. This was a relatively small town, yet the parking lot was overflowing. I don't pretend to know anything about Canadian healthcare, but I don't understand why so many of them come to the states if they're country's healthcare is so great, and ours is so terrible. If anyone knows, please enlighten me.
- Wargalas, on 10/20/2008, -8/+19Great, you going to pay for it all? Because I don't mind paying for someone who truly needs healthcare, but I'll be damned if I'm going to pay for the triple bypass heart surgery of some fatty who sits around all day long and doesn't have a job.
- pentupentropy, on 10/20/2008, -4/+15Just... look... at Germany
- doctechnical, on 10/20/2008, -1/+11Laughter is the Best Medicine. Also from the Reader's Digest.
- DyceFreak, on 10/20/2008, -3/+13Canada has only a few main hospitals, and are having patients ferried between them just to use the assortment of machines and techniques unique to each... The hospitals are also not up to date, and not well staffed. keep in mind for them the closest hospital "competition" is more than 100 miles away. Walking into a hospital there is like walking into a hospital in a 3rd world country comparatively...
I'm a cancer survivor and I think anyone who wants Canada's health care doesn't deserve premium health care, ya know, the kind that actually save's lives. - badqat, on 10/20/2008, -3/+12He hasn't been elected for his first term, he could be a complete failure, yet you're already calling for a second term?
- manstein01, on 10/20/2008, -2/+11Along that line, in Northern New England, my last three doctors have been Canadians. They ran, err moved out as soon as they could.
- steve9924, on 10/20/2008, -2/+9yes, really... all it needs in ONE way... just someone needs to implement it !
- inactive, on 10/20/2008, -23/+30Take a page out of Canada's book.
- mrseptic, on 10/20/2008, -0/+7Dad always thought laughter was the best medicine, which I guess is why several of us died of tuberculosis - Jack Handey.
- dreicher, on 10/20/2008, -2/+9You keep using that word "free". I don't think it means what you think it means.
- guyincognitoo, on 10/21/2008, -0/+7When in practice, Doctor's engage in defensive medicine to protect themselves against a lawsuit. They perform tests and provide treatments that they would not otherwise perform merely to protect themselves against the risk of possible litigation. The survey revealed that over 76% are concerned that malpractice litigation has hurt their ability to provide quality care to patients.
Because of the resulting legal fear:
· 79% said that they had ordered more tests than they would, based only on professional judgment of what is medically needed, and 91% have noticed other physicians ordering more tests;
· 74% have referred patients to specialists more often than they believed was medically necessary;
· 51% have recommended invasive procedures such as biopsies to confirm diagnoses more often than they believed was medically necessary; and
· 41% said that they had prescribed more medications, such as antibiotics, than they would based only on their professional judgment, and
. 73% have noticed other doctors similarly prescribing excessive medications.
http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/litrefm.pdf - exegesisClique, on 10/20/2008, -3/+9One of the most important aspects about Universal Health Care is the focus on *preventative* medicine.
- inactive, on 10/20/2008, -4/+10I lived in upstate New York for seven years, and every time I went to the hospital, it was full of Canadians.
- mrdeathgod, on 10/20/2008, -3/+9PUPPIES!
- scamper22, on 10/21/2008, -1/+7"I refuse to pay for your police force."
As much as you might like to make that point, it nonsense.
Government provides regulation in order for a society to function.
Security, police force, law, monetary system, public health (in the orignal sense)...
Get rid of these and society itself collapses. Try living in a third world country to see how important such things are. You will then maybe understand the difference between law/regulation and an entitlement.
Government also provides entitlements.
Healthcare falls under an entitlement. Society is not going break down if people can't get healthcare. Maybe you die from cancer instead of getting treatment... but we all die eventually. Society moves on.
Im not suggesting we shouldn't fund healthcare. But you should recognize the important difference of entitlements. Countries like singapore for example function just fine in terms of law and order and everything. However, they don't have a lot of government funding for healthcare or other entitlements. - BeShirtHappy, on 10/20/2008, -1/+7Well said!
- macman2k, on 10/20/2008, -2/+7We all know how well "universal home ownership" worked out.
- spyd3rweb, on 10/20/2008, -0/+5why make it worse.
- nickymouse, on 10/20/2008, -1/+6if we have universal health care, I want a voucher. I'll pay a little more and it great health care while people under the government system would cry... "it's not fair. Why does he have better coverage or have to wait in long lines or have clean bed sheets.
- nickymouse, on 10/20/2008, -1/+6The Canadian side of my family does like they're prescription drug coverage, but they have to wait 4 months to see a specialist and 18 months for a new hip. So they usually go to Michigan to see a doctor.
- akchrs, on 10/20/2008, -2/+7Canadians come to the US to get medical treatment cause they hate waiting in line.
- spyd3rweb, on 10/20/2008, -4/+9Corporations don't have the power of taxation or the power of deadly force. You can pick and choose whatever corporations or private entities you want. Don't like what one is doing you can pick another or start your own. With the government you have no choice. And if you don't like it, too bad, its the law.
- kalvinb, on 10/21/2008, -1/+6It's amazing how many $5000 a year plans there will be if McCain gets in and gives everyone a $5000 credit to buy health insurance with.
The key problem with the government paying for your health care is that the government can decide that your life isn't worth the cost to society.
With private insurance, your life is worth as much as you're willing to pay for it. - Wargalas, on 10/20/2008, -0/+5Actually, I read through Hillary's AND Obama's "healthcare" plan, and it mentions drugs up the ying yang, but very rarely did it mention diet and exercise.
- thedrizzle21, on 10/21/2008, -0/+4Alright, fine let's say you're right and we need someone to watch the doctors, but who's watching the lawyers? Or is that a double standard?
Just go look up and read about the number of frivolous lawsuits that are filed each year.
Anyone who thinks doctors are just trying to ***** people over on pricing is badly misinformed. Doctors have to raise prices to cover their malpractice insurance and then the health-care providers refuse to pay the higher prices. Quality of care suffers across the board.
I agree doctors need to have some kind of check in place, but the way it's set up now is NOT the way to go. - filovirus, on 10/20/2008, -2/+6Wear a seatbelt. Don't drive like an idot. Don't drive intoxicated.
When the time comes, let your loved one die with dignity instead of torturing them with ventilators and expensive drugs that do no benefit. Don't put them through a surgery when the surgeon says it unlikely to change their outcomes. When they ask you to let them die, accept their wishes. People die. Accept it. - spyd3rweb, on 10/20/2008, -1/+5By accepting the benefit you are bound by whatever terms the person offering it sets.
- mattrmcg, on 10/20/2008, -2/+6Because it isn't free for those who actually pay taxes
If I get healthcare from my work/school, which is better than Medicaid, then why should I put money into Medicaid? - craftyguy, on 10/21/2008, -0/+4@PrintScrn12
It's the government's responsibility to protect its citizens (ie. police force), NOT its responsibility to tell you how to take care of yourself, and use taxpayer dollars to pay for your infazema because you smoked your entire life, or your failing liver because you abuse alcohol, or for your skin cancer because you refuse to wear sunscreen, or even for your diabetes treatments because you did not care to learn how to eat right. - inactive, on 10/20/2008, -1/+5Because 95% of donations from trial attorneys go to Democrats?
- TPorter72, on 10/21/2008, -0/+4they speak german
- nickymouse, on 10/20/2008, -3/+7Yes... because the government runs things so well.
- twomeyw23334, on 10/20/2008, -2/+6The cost of health care in the U.S has absolutely skyrocketed since the 1973 HMO Act. Our employer based health care system has been a disaster.
If I'm wrong and it's really because "free markets" suck so much, what happened in 1973 to the free markets? Is that when corporations suddenly decided to become evil? - nickymouse, on 10/20/2008, -1/+5what about it?
- Thuban, on 10/21/2008, -0/+3Yeah especially the ones who jump across the border for specialized tests and treatment here.
- scamper22, on 10/21/2008, -0/+3please don't. Considering many of the changes listed here NEED to be done in Canada!
-we need nurse practitioners to be able to practice on their own as well.
-we need electronic health records as we....
This report is full of things many healthcare systems need to do. - nickymouse, on 10/20/2008, -0/+3True that
- dave11980, on 10/21/2008, -1/+4The question to me isn't so much of the individual reforms as it is a matter of how it's implemented. Do you use the government to force the changes through socialized health care, which may or may not have very serious unintended consequences, or do you use the government to open the door to allowing the free market to make these changes.
One thing I have always pointed out to people is that since the government offered tax rebates in the 60's to companies that provide insurance to their employees the nature of insurance has changed. Insurance companies no longer compete for your business, rather they compete for your employers business resulting in the plans and policies being for the betterment of the employer rather than the end user. This has resulted in several unfortunate unintended consequences and is a large part of the health care problem.
The sad truth that the socialists don't want to admit is that regardless of what you do the free market will always be in force. You can meddle with it, you can even control it for a bit, but it will ALWAYS correct itself. The longer you hold it down the more violent the correction. Soviet Russia learned this lesson the hard way.
Another problem is the beast is created now, you can't simply remove the regulation and hope things will go back to how they were. It doesn't work that way. Very smart people will need to sit down and figure out the best combination of phasing between areas of socialization and privatization to get us where we want to be. Unfortunately Washington DC attracts corrupt people, not smart people. - PrintScrn12, on 10/21/2008, -1/+4Public and private health care in Australia is similar in care. In fact they often share doctors and services. Many facilities having both a public and private hospital, can result in patients popping out of one to the other and back. The main difference is private having private rooms, better food and more nurses, while it may be limited in some services. Public often handles the high-risk patients and new emergencies.
Haven't heard of rare diseases being a public health problem. Doctors have to be well trained in their field whether they go public, private or public and private. - skews13, on 10/20/2008, -4/+7so now the crys of socialism rear their ugly head when the very companies that sell us insurance for everything from our cars to our homes in the free market, and we are obliged to do so by government sanction on those cars, and those homes to protect the mortgage companies. that by very definition is socialism. i guess requiring insurance on things, is more important than doing so on people. lets you know what they consider an asset doesn't it?
- spyd3rweb, on 10/21/2008, -0/+3What system did we have before then? It seemed to work didn't it?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 168 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is