Hmmm, I didn't get too many responses to my last post, but I can't be sure if that's because the topic is too controversial or because no one gives a crap! Either way, here's your...
Next topic for discussion: Socialized Healthcare
I am not a fan of the idea of socialized healthcare. What I do support is universal healthcare (and there is a difference!). Single payer universal health care is a health care payment system, not a health care delivery system. Health care providers would be in fee for service practice and are not government employees, which would be socialized medicine. This is more a revision of the insurance system than it is the health care system as a whole. I feel this is the best compromise to make sure all of our citizens have access to health care, but we can maintain our competitive system which encourages innovation and research and development. I find it ridiculous that we live in the richest nation in the world but somehow cannot afford to protect our most vulnerable citizens.
Personally, I like the system Massachusetts has. There citizens are required to have health insurance, but the state government covers part of or all of the premium cost for low income families (under $32,000/year). This system might be a good compromise for the time being since it is unlikely Congress will ever be able to overcome its inertia/ineptitude and fight back against the insurance company lobbyists (and money) to push true health care reform.
Fluff:
- Truly encapsulating the American entrepreneurial spirit
- I love this site. Thanks to BIL John the Armenian Deal Hound for turning me on to it. It's also where I found Bacon Salt.
- The World Digital Library is just starting out, but I think once it becomes a little more populated it will be an invaluable resource for both researchers and lay history nerds alike ;)
3 comments:
Holy moly I didn't realize I was falling behind on my MPR quota (Minimum Post Response). I will stay out of the tax one but here goes on the healthcare.
The problem is not the pay side of the equation it is the supply side. Having worked with quite a few companies that are involved with healthcare, the entire concept of our system is screwed up. The system rewards paying outlandish amounts for treatments that focus on the last year of life and saving the marginal. It penalizes all kinds of savings that would accrue from a total wellness focus (even though there is a lot of lip service on that).
Management in healthcare is abysmal.
And on top of this the consumer base is totally unrealistic expecting that all outcomes should have a cure, that no level of pain or suffering is acceptable, and that death should not be considered an option.
I don't care what system you set up if you insist on 100% results you are going to have a system you cannot afford.
Until the system (both suppliers and consumers) are willing to accept some degree of limitation and realism, it is going to cost us an arm and a leg.
interesting, the MA system sounds like the NL system. Here healthcare is "privatized", everyone required to have it, and also subsidized.
I absolutely adore it.
I think socialized health care would be a disaster. Anyone ignorant enough to want socialized health care in America has clearly not had the wonderful opportunity to experience the huge distinction between a cattle herding facility vs. private practice.
Just look at the VA if you need a good example.
I pay out of pocket to be seen by a physician that I have researched and actually like and trust. (The same doctor who suggested that I should have kids; that it would making me happy...every one thought she was nuts....go figure?!)
With the experiences that I've had, I just don't trust the "cheap, cost saving, third tier medical school intern" with my health.
Post a Comment