More than 80% of Americans want overhaul of health system

[disneysteve]

Originally Posted by geojen

1) No one should profit from someone's ill health.

What about doctors?

How about pharmaceutical companies? Medical supply companies? Nothing would ever get made if there were no profit in it. We wouldn't have medications, pacemakers, prosthetic joints or even Band-Aids if there were no money to be made selling those items.

[Gruntina]

I have excellent healthcare insurance, vision and dental plans. Only 60 dollars are taken out of my monthly paychecks for a family plan. Co-payments are between 5-15 dollars and often get a three month supply for a 5 dollar payment on my prescriptions.

With that being said, I have to say I am one of the 80%. It breaks my heart when I see my mom pay 10 times more than I do on prescriptions and high doctor bills. She does have diabetes and Manic Depression. Been through 4-6 strokes and 3 heart attacks and has an ICUV implant and has mountains of health debts that she will never be able to repay back all in her lifetime.

I have a friend who has to pay the full amount on migraines prescriptions which is often around 200 dollars for only 9 pills. (I pay 5 - 20 dollars on mine). She has a lower paying job.

I have good health insurance plan because I work for a global high tech company with several thousand employees and the company pays out of pocket cost additional to the insurance payments so the employees do not have to pay much. This is part of an incentive for employees as the company is looking for best talent and retaining them.

While I am happy to be working at my company and having great insurance plans, it just a bad deal for those who do not have those perks and seems so wrong as there got to be a way to achieve a plan similar that is available to others as well. It does seem like those who are well off or working for the right company fare better and making others seem not as important. It breaks my heart.

[cptacek]

Originally Posted by geojen

I am in the 80%. I really dislike the idea of health insurance for several reasons:
1) No one should profit from someone's ill health.

2) Insurance companies have different economic priorities than all other companies. usually, to attract and keep customers, a company will try to provide the most services for the cheapest price. Insurance companies try to provide the least amount of service for the highest price. Doesn't seem right.

3) I REALLY dislike a company, any company, telling my doctor what is and isn't considered medically necessary or in my best interest.

1) No one should profit from someone's ill health, but if that person is going to get better (or more comfortable in the case of a terminal illness), there is nothing wrong with the people doing the fixing or the comforting making a profit.

2) All companies try to make money. For a lot of them, the way to do that is keep their customers happy. Others don't give a rip about the customers because their goods/services are needed and the customers will always be there. I do agree with you a bit, here, though, because if everyone had to buy their own health insurance instead of most people going through their company, the health insurance companies would have to compete for your money. As it is, you really don't have a choice when going through your company unless the company negotiates with multiple insurers. If they were competing for your business, the rates should go down like life insurance has lately.

3) If we don't have health insurance, then who will pay for the treatment we receive? If you are suggesting each person will pay for their own care, good luck with that. How many more people will be destroyed by medical bills and have to declare bankruptcy? If you are suggesting the government, good luck with that too:
The Ugly Truth About Canadian Health Care by David Gratzer, City Journal Summer 2007

[ZenQueen50]

Gotta go 100% with geojen's #3. Health insurance companies are in it for the profits, which essentially is lining their shareholders' pockets.

I buy my own health insurance (HDHP w/HSA) and Unicare(less) has me over a barrel. I've been to see my doctor for things that have come up - read, problems that were NOT previously diagnosed. But just because I had checked off that I've had a history of headaches when I filled in the insurance forms, in that same block with headaches was issues regarding back, neck, fibromyalgia, joint pain, etc. I get diagnosed with fibro a few months after my policy takes effect and they say they will not cover it. The same goes for labs. They sent me an EOB saying that the cost of labs would not be applied to my deductible because of pre-existing problems. This was routine blood work. No where on my policy did they indicate that there was a rider on labs.

If this isn't a way to get out of doing what's obligated of them, then I'm the Queen of England. Oh, and my premiums will have gone up TWICE this year, in the meantime. As stated previously, geojen hit it on the nail regarding a company who takes it upon itself to decide treatment.

Insurance companies of virtually any kind are nothing more than a racket.

[DebtFreeMe2]

Originally Posted by moanymoany

You are mistaken if you think the USA creates all the new drugs! I think you will find that drug companies are multinationals and that many new drugs are created in the UK and in France amongst other places. France has an exemplary reputation in the field of healthcare and medical discoveries. It was the French who isolated the HIV virus and shared the knowledge with - as they thought - their partners in the search - the USA - who promply said THEY had made the discovery! Antibiotics were a British invention, as was DNA. We here in Europe have made - and continue to make - our share of medical discoveries.

The French have the best healthcare system in the world. Here in the UK we are way behind them, but still ahead of the USA. The WHO rates the French number 1, the UK number 18 and the USA number 27th. They take into account many factors including the access of the people to healthcare.

In the UK, if you have to stay in hospital when pregnant - PAID, a baby born early with need for considerable medical care - PAID. I have connections with the USA and the healthcare we get here is every bit as good as in the USA.

My mother spent her last 2 weeks in hospital with pneumonia. The care she received was fantastic - specialist nursing care for the dying - PAID.

We here in Europe believe in caring for each other. There is not one European country that does not have an excellent healthcare system. Americans have consistently said no to any kind of national health care system. I have seen the idea described as 'Communistic' we call it 'love thy neighbour'.

I think you may need to re-read my previous post, I never said the US created ALL NEW DRUGS, I said we end up paying for most of their creation.

Let’s take a little look shall we? According to a MedAdNews report that just came out for their September issue of the top 20 pharmaceutical companies 12 are US based. Also of all the research money spent 55 percent comes from these US based companies. Along with that according to swivel dot com a data and research company people in the US pay nearly 69% more for their drugs then the rest of the world.

Just for good measure, the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry shows that in 2007 of the top 100 prescription medications worldwide 54% came from where?? France, No. Maybe any country in Europe, no, oh how about from all of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, nope wrong again. Oh ya that other place the United States Of America.

As to the question of socializing our medical system, all I can say is no thanks. There is no doubt that we need to change some things, like cutting down on paperwork, and protecting doctors better from frivolous law suits, but letting the government control my health care is not an option. The government has enough problems building a simple fence; I can't imagine what they would do about getting people emergency medical care.

Hope this finds everyone well medicated and happy!

DebtFreeMe2

[Coleroo]

I don't like how reliant people nowadays are on WORK place health insurance. I know many women who work JUST for the benefits. Back when I worked in management, we had superb health care insurance at an excellent price (for employee plus one it was $62 biweekly with a $250 a year deductible). My husband's work provides free insurance for the employee (with a $2,500 yearly deductable) but to add a person on costs about $95 per week and even higher for "family" (WITH a $2,500 deductible per person!!!).

When I was 2 months pregnant, my company moved out of state and I was laid off. We learned of the layoff about 8 weeks before we closed. And wouldn't you know it ...my pregnancy "happened" at the same time as the announcement of the layoff. Being pregnant and LOSING HEALTH INSURANCE wasn't something that I enjoyed.

And mentioning itemization...my dad once found a tylenol (that he had received during a hospitalization for a heart attack) itemized for $90.

A $90 tylenol???

Geez.

I know nothing about free socialized health care of other countries, but I do know that it would be nice to have some sort of "affordable" health care in the US. I'd like to be able to pay for my care out of pocket, without being reliant on insurance OR the government.

Anywho....

[cptacek]

Originally Posted by Coleroo

I don't like how reliant people nowadays are on WORK place health insurance.

I know nothing about free socialized health care of other countries, but I do know that it would be nice to have some sort of "affordable" health care in the US. I'd like to be able to pay for my care out of pocket, without being reliant on insurance OR the government.

Anywho....

I agree with you Coleroo. Work place health insurance has stifled competition because people who have health insurance at work don't shop around.

[disneysteve]

Originally Posted by Coleroo

I know nothing about free socialized health care of other countries, but I do know that it would be nice to have some sort of "affordable" health care in the US.

I don't believe there is such a thing as "free socialized health care" anywhere in the world. Look at the tax rates in the countries with socialized care and you'll see that it most certainly isn't free. Not saying that's good or bad, just pointing out that there definitely is a cost to the plan.

[LivingAlmostLarge]

Yes, but many people in the US, work solely for medical. They barely earn enough to bring home but I work with many women who don't have to work because their husbands bring home lots of bacon. Problem? Well they usually are self-employed and own their own business. So they need to "self-insure".

Sounds cheap right? Wrong. Especially if you had a preexisting condition like diabetes or something. It's impossible to get insurance. So quite a few work so they can cover their families though according to every calculation out there, they basically are working for medical insurance and not much else.

And another one has a disabled child. Well tough, without work provided insurance they'd be screwed. She can't stand the thought that if she's ever laid off they'd be buying Cobra and she'd be looking for another job though her husband makes very good money independently.

Uninsurable is how some of them describe it.

I wonder how fair it is that we all cling to our jobs because we fear being uninsured for even 1 day could come back to haunt us? If we have a "lapse" in coverage that could be construed as the time when our "preexisiting" conditions occur.

[Coleroo]

Originally Posted by LivingAlmostLarge

She can't stand the thought that if she's ever laid off they'd be buying Cobra

Uninsurable is how some of them describe it..

What's bad is that various literature and people make Cobra sound so "good".

When I was laid off, the quote for my Cobra (employee plus one) was $1,150 per month.

Who were they kidding?? There was NO way we could afford that.

[ummabdullah]

While there may be many reports about the cons of countries who have a more socialized medical scheme. This should not deter any of you voting for one here in America.

Many people comment about the uk one too and while it does have its downsides like longer waiting times. The majority of patients are treated effectively and efficiently. Yes their has been some wastage of money. However that is in the Uk and we in the US can really learn from other countries mistakes.

My husband has been responsible in budget for primary care and creating hospitals in the UK. And I cannot tell you enough how amazing it is that all those who need it have access to such facilities.

[kork13]

It seems that many of you in here are either in the medical field (or related), or live in countries where they have national health care.... Like some others, I don't know much about it, but my concerns about such a system are:
1) It seems that quality of care would diminish in a system where doctors have to see many patients.
2) If medical care was paid for already regardless what what care you receive, what is to stop worrisome parents or ... "social dregs"... from coming into the hospital about the most minor things? This would drive up operating costs significantly.
3) 8% of pay from everyone.... in a discussion about taxes I've had with jIM_Ohio (see here), it seems that any flat percentage coming out of pay impacts lower-earning people more significantly, because while the % being taken is the same, lower-earners still have to buy the same stuff high-earners do, but high-earners have more additional funds beyond that 8% to handle it. ...Basically, it could negatively impact low-wage families.
4) It seems that a system like this would lead to massive government bureaucracies, which breed inefficiencies like the plague... is this somehow not a problem in those countries?

I would appreciate some comments on this from anyone able to give them... I'm totally ignorant of how nationalized programs like this work. All I have to base my thoughts on is the American Social Security system, which anyone will tell you is in a shambles....

[disneysteve]

Originally Posted by kork13

1) It seems that quality of care would diminish in a system where doctors have to see many patients.

By many, do you mean quantity of patients? If so, that already happens. I routinely see 5 patients/hour. On a really busy day, it will be more. In my old practice, I would see 6-7 most days. Insurance reimbursement is such that if we see much less than that, we don't make enough money to keep our doors open.

2) If medical care was paid for already regardless what what care you receive, what is to stop worrisome parents or ... "social dregs"... from coming into the hospital about the most minor things? This would drive up operating costs significantly.

You've just perfectly described the Medicaid system in the US.
Spend a few hours in a typical urban emergency room and you'll see just that phenomenon. Patients come in at all hours of the day and night for total nonsense and very little that approaches being an emergency. Various studies have shown that up to 90% of emergency room visits are for non-emergent problems.

Many times, a patient will call my office to schedule an appointment. When they are given an appointment for later that same day, they fail to show up. We find out later that they went to the ER because they didn't feel like waiting 3 or 4 hours to see me. Instead, of course, they went to the ER where they probably waited just as long.

This doesn't just happen at the hospitals. Loads of patients come to see me for "the most minor things" as well. Here's a typical conversation:

Me: What brings you in today?
Patient: I have a terrible cold that I just can't get rid of.
Me: How long have you been sick?
Patient: I woke up with it this morning.
Me: What have you tried taking for it?
Patient: Nothing.

When patients think of medical care as "free" it gets abused.

[kimiko]

While I'm also part of that 80%, I also like to see a mandatory exercise system. But then I guess the latter isn't needed as much since the rise in food price. Eating less and eating food people grow themselves should limit the chemicals they ingest, keeping them out of hospitals.

And let not delude ourselves into thinking that cancer, depression, diabetes, etc... are natural occurrences/genetic and those who had them got bad luck. We are, after all, what we eat and people in this country ate a heck of a lot of chemicals and genetically enhanced food. Ewww.