« First « Previous Comments 13 - 52 of 58 Next » Last » Search these comments
What we have now needs improvement (especially with price transparency)
We need to make cross-state health insurance legal, and allow companies to collude to create insurance companies for the benefit of employees.
No reason 50 local businesses shouldn't be allowed to combine into a pool and buy or start health insurance for their employees. Other than big Donor Insurance Companies.
Free Market Approach:
Allow insurance across state lines
Allow off shore procedures
Allow Catastrophic coverage (paying out of pocket for immunizations and routine medicine would lower costs)
Allow club or employer co-ops to buy medical insurance wholesale
Free for Everyone National Medical Service:
Set up Medical Academies and Medical ROTC where the graduate serve a 5 year commitment and are assigned locations where they are needed.
Set up High School medical tracks to train medics, equipment technicians, dental hygienists and the like
Why should the burden of health care be tasked to employers?
Wouldn’t it be much easier to ban employers from being involved in the healthcare of employees?
errc saysWhy should the burden of health care be tasked to employers?
Wouldn’t it be much easier to ban employers from being involved in the healthcare of employees?
Lol, burden? Employers want it that way, so that employees have the problem of changing insurance when they change jobs.
The enemy is really the US Chamber of Commerce, the biggest lobbyist in DC by a long shot, which wants "strengthening the employer-sponsored system".
Why I'm glad ObamaCare is dead and single payer along with it
Obama care is based on private insurances.
Heraclitusstudent saysObama care is based on private insurances.
You can't call something "privatized" when the government is forcing you to buy it. That's the antithesis of a free market.
Yep, it's amazing that, as bad as others characterize the health care systems of Canada or the UK, they deliver better care (by any measurable result) for ~1/2 the cost.
Personally, I'm typically in favor of systems that deliver better results for less money, but that's just me.
Personally, I'm typically in favor of systems that deliver better results for less money, but that's just me.
I like that they blacked out the Drs name in the text but left it in the FAX notes at the top.
anon_8f378 saysI like that they blacked out the Drs name in the text but left it in the FAX notes at the top.
I noticed that too. I'm sure that's a private fax number though
If you search that fax number, it comes back to the doctor, so it appears it's a good number.
You can't call something "privatized" when the government is forcing you to buy it. That's the antithesis of a free market.
Britain's National Health Service suggests the answer is NO.
The free market can definitely improve non-emergency health care in the US. What we have now is hidden random prices which are not even the same for every patient of the same provider. "For you? Let's see, I think I'll charge you more than I charge others because you're trying to escape the insurance cartel...
4.5 years! Hope that brain cancer clears up on its own!
Too late. The Chinese beat us to it...
errc saysSo should we make the roads look like the 1900’s?
You have a single provider for water and electricity, right? Do you ever get water and electricity?
You have a single road network, right? it's a miracle you can get anywhere.
Patrick says
The free market can definitely improve non-emergency health care in the US. What we have now is hidden random prices which are not even the same for every patient of the same provider. "For you? Let's see, I think I'll charge you more than I charge others because you're trying to escape the insurance cartel...
I'll ask again, how will this happen under the insurance company billing system? You keep spewing out these lame platitudes that mean nothing. How about some nuts and bolts details of how posting prices, which anyone can find out anyway if they wanted, will create a free market and lower prices? People go to the doctors that are on their insurance.
Still waiting for this information from the last 10 times I've asked. It's true because I believe it should be true doesn't count.
An insurance is a socialist systems whereby the people who are healthy pay for the rest - until they are sick.
Not at all. Insurance is a free market phenomenon, just like one would buy home insurance, life insurance and portfolio insurance.
Medical insurance mandated by government to include events that are guaranteed to happen (such as contraceptive pills) is indeed socialism, just like welfare paying out to allegedly intended recipients 13 cents for every dollar forcibly collected for that purpose; the rest is lost in the bureaucracy. Obamacare, single-payer and the government enforced supply restriction on who can deliver medical service are all ways of sky-rocketing the medical bill.
Goran_K saysI agree. The Right is wrong about the mandate. Everyone must be forced to have catastrophic insurance at least, or we need to turn people away at the ER.
The system in which you pay the LESS for other people, is in fact when these other people are "forced" to buy insurance.
But providing universal coverage for 'luxury' health care doesn't. While I tend to be liberal on social issues, I'm solidly conservative fiscally, and providing deluxe coverage is financial suicide for a nation.
There are at least two ways to look at Capitalism in relation to health care.
One way is the classic concept, where winners win and losers lose. Ideal for many aspects of society. If you can't afford a car, you don't get a car. Take public transit. If a business is inefficient, it should fail to make room for a better competitor. For health care, if you can afford great health care, you can have every need met. If you are in the middle, basic needs will be met, but worse conditions will mean death. Losers have the privilege of dying outside a hospital.
The second is a national Capitalistic competitiveness model. In order for a nation to be competitive, it needs a healthy and mobile workforce. Universal coverage is more oriented towards preventative medicine, which is very effective. Keeps workers at work. With universal coverage, workers can move from employer to employer without health insurance being a factor. More importantly, workers can become entrepreneur...
https://m.chron.com/news/houston-texas/texas/article/North-Texas-teacher-dies-after-getting-the-flu-12555825.php
North Texas teacher dies after getting the flu
Heather Holland, a second-grade teacher at Ikard Elementary School with the Weatherford Independent School District died over the weekend, the Weatherford Democrat reports. Holland got sick about a week ago and took medication, but delayed picking up the prescription due to the $116 copay, according to the newspaper.
If she were on welfare, there would have been no co-pay.
If you let everyone have access to Drs. then people might have to wait several weeks to have elective surgery.
We cannot have that.
In Europe, public system is pretty good with long wait lines.
It's not like she was dead broke, and penniless. She made $80,000 a year.
It's frightening to think people would trust the same entity that runs USPS, or the DMV to run our health care system.
« First « Previous Comments 13 - 52 of 58 Next » Last » Search these comments
4.5 years! Hope that brain cancer clears up on its own!