What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

joecct said:
2) If I pay $1,000 a year in health insurance, shouldn't I use $1,000 in services? Statistically, the young use less than that each year, which means that the surplus is going to pay for the services of the ill - generally the elderly, but not always...
Click to expand...

Read up on the concept of hedging a bet. Its the same concept Wallstreet attempts to use in order to minimize downsides on their bets...err investments.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Kepler said:
The "problem" with that line of thinking is that when people do get sick we don't "do the right thing" and let them die.

Basic moral responsibilities trump economic theory. That's who we are -- if not as a species, at least as a culture.
Click to expand...

So, if someone wants to slowly eat or smoke themselves to death, we need to intervene and tell them what they can and can't eat...and when and how much?

Moral responsibility is up to the individual.

This is more leftist hypocrisy - when the GOP is in power, we hear the left screaming about "family values" being rammed down their throats. When the left is in power, all of a sudden we need to instill "morals" in people.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

The amusing thing is that Kepler and dtp are both right.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

dropthatpuck said:
So, if someone wants to slowly eat or smoke themselves to death, we need to intervene and tell them what they can and can't eat...and when and how much?

Moral responsibility is up to the individual.

This is more leftist hypocrisy - when the GOP is in power, we hear the left screaming about "family values" being rammed down their throats. When the left is in power, all of a sudden we need to instill "morals" in people.
Click to expand...

I agree with all of this, and it has nothing to do with what I was talking about. :p
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Jon said:
The amusing thing is that Kepler and dtp are both right.
Click to expand...

Shh. Don't tell them, it'll ruin the moment. :D

Maybe as part of Obamacare, every citizen gets a pair of walking shoes and a treadmill ... with a Twinkie tied to the end. :eek: :p
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

ScottM said:
Shh. Don't tell them, it'll ruin the moment. :D

Maybe as part of Obamacare, every citizen gets a pair of walking shoes and a treadmill ... with a Twinkie tied to the end. :eek: :p
Click to expand...

41gYusKDWeL._AA280_.jpg
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

LynahFan said:
So by your reasoning, we should all be buying lottery tickets, then? I mean, you're not guaranteed to win, but why take the chance of not playing?

I believe that everyone should be free to do his own risk/reward calculus - the risk being that you go bankrupt or die due to late/inadequate care. In my mind, that's a pretty easy choice, but that doesn't mean its the right choice for everyone.
Click to expand...

Not sure I see the connection between lottery tix and health insurance, so I'll leave that one alone.

Your idea of everybody doing their own risk/reward calculus would work....in a perfect world. In a perfect world, those who choose not to take insurance, and then need medical coverage, would pay for said coverage out of pocket - essentually, they lost their gamble. As has been mentioned though, there is no way society, or this country, will ever pass laws denying people medical care if they can't pay for it. Think of the boogeyman scenerio of an ER denying a bloody victim life saving care after running an insurance check on them. If a system can be devised where those who don't take insurance don't burden the rest of us with their bills, but still pay for the care they receive - sign me up. I just don't see that as being possible at any time.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Report on US healthcare v. single payer systems

Some of the findings:

1. Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.
2. Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.
3. Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.
4. Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.
5. Lower-income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians.
6. Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom.
7. People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed.
8. Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians.
9. Americans have better access to important new technologies such as medical imaging than do patients in Canada or Britain.
10. Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

MinnFan said:
Report on US healthcare v. single payer systems

Some of the findings:

1. Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.
2. Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.
3. Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.
4. Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.
5. Lower-income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians.
6. Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom.
7. People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed.
8. Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians.
9. Americans have better access to important new technologies such as medical imaging than do patients in Canada or Britain.
10. Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but we don't do it cheaper. And that's the rub. If America doesn't find a way to get the costs down we're going to go bankrupt.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

ScoobyDoo said:
Yeah, but we don't do it cheaper. And that's the rub. If America doesn't find a way to get the costs down we're going to go bankrupt.
Click to expand...

Have to agree. We have some of the best healthcare in the world, but developing a cost-effective delivery system that will cover more people is the tough part. Frankly, none of the stuff I've seen from Congress so far really gets to that point. Just more money chasing more bureaucracy, chasing more programs, chasing more bureaucracy, chasing more money ...
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

ScoobyDoo said:
Yeah, but we don't do it cheaper. And that's the rub. If America doesn't find a way to get the costs down we're going to go bankrupt.
Click to expand...

Thats one of the beauties of free markets. If there isn't money for something changes are made to bring costs down. Products evolve that everyone can afford.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

MinnFan said:
Thats one of the beauties of free markets. If there isn't money for something changes are made to bring costs down. Products evolve that everyone can afford.
Click to expand...

If that was actually occurring in health care we wouldn't be having this conversation.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

MinnFan said:
Report on US healthcare v. single payer systems

Some of the findings:

1. Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.
2. Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.
3. Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.
4. Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.
5. Lower-income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians.
6. Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom.
7. People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed.
8. Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians.
9. Americans have better access to important new technologies such as medical imaging than do patients in Canada or Britain.
10. Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.
Click to expand...

It's a shame we don't pattern our health care after other countries who have single-payer. We can only choose Canada or the UK. If only there were other examples we could follow...like, say, every other industrialized nation in the world...

Edit: And good job using data analysis from an institute named for the president who led us into the Great Depression. Seriously, do Republicans get irony?
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Kepler said:
It's a semantics strategy -- c.f. the other side talking about "bureaucrats getting between you and your doctor," which ignores that under the current system corporate risk-reward computations come between you and your doctor.
Click to expand...

Well it makes more sense than the "If we have Universal Health Care the Government is gonna kill all the OLD PEOPLEZ!!!1!!1!" argument that is going through Congress and Faux News these days. :D
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Handyman said:
Well it makes more sense than the "If we have Universal Health Care the Government is gonna kill all the OLD PEOPLEZ!!!1!!1!" argument that is going through Congress and Faux News these days. :D
Click to expand...

The entrenched interests are grasping at extremely well-funded straws. It's the equivalent of RJ Reynolds fighting cancer studies, Exxon obfuscating on global warming, ADM protecting their subsidies: deny, deflect, delay. The fear-mongering isn't the content, it's the delivery mechanism. Public policy terrorism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top