• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Health Care & Reform

Sandhusker

Well-known member
I think we need to address COSTS, not who is paying the costs. If we can find the places that hemmorage cash, and you know there are a bunch of them, and address those problems to bring the costs down, a lot of the other problems fix themselves.
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
First, the terminology is wrong...there is no need for health care reform...we have the best health care in the world, bar none!!!!

Health care cost issues need to be addressed. My wife is a professional in health care. She spends 1/3 to 1/2 her working time(and many hours on her time) doing paper work documenting what she has done through the day. This is for the purpose of possible law suites. This is essentially a doubling of the cost of health care imposed by trial lawyers...not to mention the cost to insurance companies that pay settlements and have to raise premium rates that are passed on to patients. Without addressing the cost of trial lawyers on the system, nothing will change. The party of the trial lawyers will not address this, as won't most politicians because far to many of them are lawyers.
Is it a conflict of interest for lawyer to make laws?
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
RobertMac said:
First, the terminology is wrong...there is no need for health care reform...we have the best health care in the world, bar none!!!!

Health care cost issues need to be addressed. My wife is a professional in health care. She spends 1/3 to 1/2 her working time(and many hours on her time) doing paper work documenting what she has done through the day. This is for the purpose of possible law suites. This is essentially a doubling of the cost of health care imposed by trial lawyers...not to mention the cost to insurance companies that pay settlements and have to raise premium rates that are passed on to patients. Without addressing the cost of trial lawyers on the system, nothing will change. The party of the trial lawyers will not address this, as won't most politicians because far to many of them are lawyers.
Is it a conflict of interest for lawyer to make laws?



:agree: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
 

cutterone

Well-known member
Well apparently everyone is busy or given the opertunity to present some facts and reasons it's not as much fun as jumping down another poster's throat.
I'll start the ball rolling...
1. I am against any form of government ran program - they have proven time & time again that they cannot run anything effeciently or effectively and I do not want them deciding for me.
2. Why not open up cross state purchase of insurance?
3. We need change in the tory laws and reduce malpractice suits and make practicing medicine less costly.
4. Change regulations that you cannot be droped for having a claim or preixisting conditions. Use a scaled pricing system that is tailored to fit such as driver record in auto.
I should not have to pay the same premium as those with minor children. Use pricing as a means to promote wellness attitudes.
5. A good place to control costs is quit using tax dollars to pay for health care for illegals. We end up paying for this with tax dollars or charges to paying customers to make up the costs.
6 Consider droping coverage for non tramatic treatments such as cosmetic, and everyday cuts, runny nosed kids, teeth braces, ect. If you want that coverage then you pay for it.
I'm sure there are many more ideas and it seems to me that if the government wants to reform and reduce costs then why not do it with regulations and law reform?
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
cutterone said:
Well apparently everyone is busy or given the opertunity to present some facts and reasons it's not as much fun as jumping down another poster's throat.
I'll start the ball rolling...
1. I am against any form of government ran program - they have proven time & time again that they cannot run anything effeciently or effectively and I do not want them deciding for me.
2. Why not open up cross state purchase of insurance?
3. We need change in the tory laws and reduce malpractice suits and make practicing medicine less costly.
4. Change regulations that you cannot be droped for having a claim or preixisting conditions. Use a scaled pricing system that is tailored to fit such as driver record in auto.
I should not have to pay the same premium as those with minor children. Use pricing as a means to promote wellness attitudes.
5. A good place to control costs is quit using tax dollars to pay for health care for illegals. We end up paying for this with tax dollars or charges to paying customers to make up the costs.
6 Consider droping coverage for non tramatic treatments such as cosmetic, and everyday cuts, runny nosed kids, teeth braces, ect. If you want that coverage then you pay for it.
I'm sure there are many more ideas and it seems to me that if the government wants to reform and reduce costs then why not do it with regulations and law reform?
7. Allow hosipitals and doctors to deduct the cost of pro bono care from their taxes.
8 Limit the amount lawyers are paid in medical law suites...limit patient payments only if they are outragous.
9. Attack fraud and abuse in the medical care system.
10 Allow health savings accounts.
11. Develop a Government/Insurance Company plan to protect against catostrofic health care issues.
 

burnt

Well-known member
RobertMac said:
cutterone said:
Well apparently everyone is busy or given the opertunity to present some facts and reasons it's not as much fun as jumping down another poster's throat.
I'll start the ball rolling...
1. I am against any form of government ran program - they have proven time & time again that they cannot run anything effeciently or effectively and I do not want them deciding for me.
2. Why not open up cross state purchase of insurance?
3. We need change in the tory laws and reduce malpractice suits and make practicing medicine less costly.
4. Change regulations that you cannot be droped for having a claim or preixisting conditions. Use a scaled pricing system that is tailored to fit such as driver record in auto.
I should not have to pay the same premium as those with minor children. Use pricing as a means to promote wellness attitudes.
5. A good place to control costs is quit using tax dollars to pay for health care for illegals. We end up paying for this with tax dollars or charges to paying customers to make up the costs.
6 Consider droping coverage for non tramatic treatments such as cosmetic, and everyday cuts, runny nosed kids, teeth braces, ect. If you want that coverage then you pay for it.
I'm sure there are many more ideas and it seems to me that if the government wants to reform and reduce costs then why not do it with regulations and law reform?
7. Allow hosipitals and doctors to deduct the cost of pro bono care from their taxes.
8 Limit the amount lawyers are paid in medical law suites...limit patient payments only if they are outragous.
9. Attack fraud and abuse in the medical care system.
10 Allow health savings accounts.
11. Develop a Government/Insurance Company plan to protect against catostrofic health care issues.

12. Go back to public floggings and hanging for greedy lawyers. (Paper work will then be drastically reduced). :wink:
 

Steve

Well-known member
4. Change regulations that you cannot be droped for having a claim or preixisting conditions.

forcing the insurance company to cover pre-existing conditions will raise costs..

with that said.. a public option for those repeatedly denied coverage and who have "no other" option would be a better choice, with the cost paid /shared by those needing insurance..
 

Steve

Well-known member
10 Allow health savings accounts.

don't we already have them?.. I think the major flaw is that they are annual and the money can't be rolled over into other funds as you may want.. ,

You must be covered by a High Deductible Health Plan (HDHP) to be able to take advantage of HSAs
http://www.ustreas.gov/offices/public-affairs/hsa/
 

badaxemoo

Well-known member
I agree with most of the rebuttals in this article, and the author states it much more clearly than I could:

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_ten_dumbest_arguments_against_health_care_reform

Excerpt dealing with a common argument heard on PB:


Whatever we do, we shouldn't ruin "the best health-care system in the world." Progressives confronted with this common argument often respond with incredulity. "Are you kidding me?" they shout. Fifty million uninsured, the highest per-capita costs in the world, millions of people pushed into bankruptcy by medical bills, worse health outcomes than most of the industrialized world? Are you kidding me?

But this is not a practical argument -- it's a moral argument. Those who make it believe that our system is the best precisely because of its inequality. Systems like those of our European friends, in which everyone has access to high-quality care at a reasonable price, just don't sit right with many conservative Republicans. If a captain of industry can't buy better health care than the guy who cuts his lawn can, then the world just isn't functioning as it should.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
RobertMac said:
First, the terminology is wrong...there is no need for health care reform...we have the best health care in the world, bar none!!!!

Health care cost issues need to be addressed. My wife is a professional in health care. She spends 1/3 to 1/2 her working time(and many hours on her time) doing paper work documenting what she has done through the day. This is for the purpose of possible law suites. This is essentially a doubling of the cost of health care imposed by trial lawyers...not to mention the cost to insurance companies that pay settlements and have to raise premium rates that are passed on to patients. Without addressing the cost of trial lawyers on the system, nothing will change. The party of the trial lawyers will not address this, as won't most politicians because far to many of them are lawyers.
Is it a conflict of interest for lawyer to make laws?

Same with my wife she does home health care and over half the time she is in a patience home is feeling out paper work to cover their butts vs helping the patient learn to use equipment. Then the paper works starts again back at the office. If the cut down the paper work they could probably cut the number of Respiratory therapist in half with their company! And a lot of the paper work has to do with medicare and medicaid!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
RobertMac said:
First, the terminology is wrong...there is no need for health care reform...we have the best health care in the world, bar none!!!!

Health care cost issues need to be addressed. My wife is a professional in health care. She spends 1/3 to 1/2 her working time(and many hours on her time) doing paper work documenting what she has done through the day. This is for the purpose of possible law suites. This is essentially a doubling of the cost of health care imposed by trial lawyers...not to mention the cost to insurance companies that pay settlements and have to raise premium rates that are passed on to patients. Without addressing the cost of trial lawyers on the system, nothing will change. The party of the trial lawyers will not address this, as won't most politicians because far to many of them are lawyers.
Is it a conflict of interest for lawyer to make laws?

Texas answer to insurance: http://www.tdi.state.tx.us/pubs/insight/200404.pdf

Article about mhttp://www.tdi.state.tx.us/pubs/insight/200404.pdfalpratice and insurance:
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
RobertMac said:
First, the terminology is wrong...there is no need for health care reform...we have the best health care in the world, bar none!!!!

Health care cost issues need to be addressed. My wife is a professional in health care. She spends 1/3 to 1/2 her working time(and many hours on her time) doing paper work documenting what she has done through the day. This is for the purpose of possible law suites. This is essentially a doubling of the cost of health care imposed by trial lawyers...not to mention the cost to insurance companies that pay settlements and have to raise premium rates that are passed on to patients. Without addressing the cost of trial lawyers on the system, nothing will change. The party of the trial lawyers will not address this, as won't most politicians because far to many of them are lawyers.
Is it a conflict of interest for lawyer to make laws?

Same with my wife she does home health care and over half the time she is in a patience home is feeling out paper work to cover their butts vs helping the patient learn to use equipment. Then the paper works starts again back at the office. If the cut down the paper work they could probably cut the number of Respiratory therapist in half with their company! And a lot of the paper work has to do with medicare and medicaid!
Without all the paper work, they could see twice the patients or spend twice the time giving health care...either way, cutting cost by almost half!
You are right about medicare and medicaid being the main culprits. With government health care, all health care will be like them...doubling the cost for half the service!!!!!!!

Mine's a home health PT.
 
Top