What's new
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

That would be government investment and government investment is always bad. Except when it isn't (farm subsidies, corporate R&D subsidies, financial sector bailouts, DOD development programs). I would think that would be clear by now.

Government investment directed to people who don't need it: wise policy.
Government investment directed to people who need it: socialism.

Yeah I get that but I am asking an honest question I am not trying to get into a political ****ing match with anyone. Although I believe it was Bush who put the education deal in place FWIW as part of the disgusting NCLB.

Both sides say we need more PCPs and both sides admit no one wants to do it so incentive has to come from somewhere.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Make it viable to go into primary care and more med students will choose it. Make it more attractive to go into a sub-specialty and more med students will choose it. While the Gov't can't (at least at this time) legislate what field med students choose, they most certainly improve the primary care supply by making it more attractive financially. Don't do it and watch the current trend continue. Do it and the supply of PCPs increases and the "gatekeeper" model (if backed up by tort reform) should lower costs.

I see your point about PCPs having a saturation point of sorts, and clearly the "simplest" solution is to improve the viability of PCP (side note: let's bring in the drug puns!). I would counter with the fact that its not just as simple as bringing in more patients. Shaking up the insurance side of the industry can help to tip the financial scales in greater favor for doctors and patients (more insurance options means that the insurance providers have to work harder to please the doctors and patients). But, would that be enough? Clearly, the "simplest" way to do that is, like you say, regulate PCP.

Handyman's comparison to what some states do with teachers is an interesting idea. Force doctors to work primary care before specializing... that'd be an interesting fight to watch.
 
You surely don't think private health insurance companies can compete for long with a government option that doesn't have to make a profit and is supported by the government's ability to print however much money it needs to run the show?

How do private universities function?
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

The provision of public defenders for the indigent sure has driven down the fees lawyers charge. :D
Wins thread


I love the idea of serving the country- ie rural care, urban care, high areas of need to have debt forgiven. Of course you always have the chance you will get a slacker screwing off until s/he has fulfilled her/his obligation but their would still be more access. Requiring every resident to work for a stint in the public clinic sector would be something to consider. There are some models that do this and the care is excellent!

In nursing most schools used to require some time in the field before allowing the pursuit of a second degree. This has gone by the wayside as schools fight to survive in the glut of schools offering the degree. Theoretically it would be great to force a basic time of MDs being PCPs and then letting them specialize.The logistics of requiring that would make my head hurt. Also the time spent to get specialized is already huge.

To fix the system there would need to be a change in mindset in terms of finances and attitudes toward primary care from the top down . Top meaning the medical schools, insurance companies and even the patients. ( I can't tell you how many times the patient has the elitist attitude that they need a specialist to have something simple done and go as far as complaining to the insurance company when they are told to get treatment at the primary office.)

In a perfect scenario (for profit or not), there would be reward for patient management and health promotion by the primary office. Tort reform would be nice. We waste resources because someone is loud enough about a test that to refuse puts you at risk, even if it isn't indicated.

Another observation that no one seems to be talking about- the current crop of MDs coming out have the mentality of entitled spoiled brats. (no strong feelings here:o ) I am sure not all of them, but my exposure is they want no on call, holidays off, shorter hours, larger paychecks than their work ethic can support and little intrusion into their personal life. They have an inflated idea of what they are entitled to when they look for a job- that is what previous generations worked up the ladder to achieve when they were in their 40s. This generation wants everything as they come out of the gate. This is not the life of a PCP. They aren't stupid to figure this out when they pick a specialty. Specialties tend to work in larger groups so have less call and more flexibility in things that conform to what they think they are owed.

Anytime I have been somewhere (all primary care) looking for a new doc it is avg 2-3 yrs to find one and their work ethic isn't that impressive when we get em. They are a commodity as there are so few of them and they know it. Unfortunately many practices cannot meet the demands and the remaining MDs get pretty burnt out.

They have softened up so much on what is required in residency that the Docs coming out are truly shocked at what is required of them. We have had a few that simply decide that they don't want to be a Doc anymore. :eek: Where the system previously winnowed out these folks when the hours were ridiculous, now they get all the way thru and are truly baffled they need to work long hours.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

So, we should eliminate the public school option? How about State Colleges, let's eliminate those too.

In other words, your argument isn't holding water.

Public schools run by local governments (yes, yes, I'm aware of Federal intrusions - and I know you don't like them apples) are in no way the same as a National public health plan. Even state universities at least have to compete with each other.

We're talking about a universal, national plan, which will stifle patient choice. The foxes in Congress will be overseeing the henhouse - they'll both be setting the rules and competing in the game. If that's NOT a concern, and the public plan really is just one more regular ol' option in a sea awash with thousands of choices, then how can it possibly make any difference? For the national plan to change the health care game, it HAS to be unique, otherwise whatever it could do would already have been done (better) by hundreds of private companies.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Public schools run by local governments (yes, yes, I'm aware of Federal intrusions - and I know you don't like them apples) are in no way the same as a National public health plan. Even state universities at least have to compete with each other.

We're talking about a universal, national plan, which will stifle patient choice. The foxes in Congress will be overseeing the henhouse - they'll both be setting the rules and competing in the game. If that's NOT a concern, and the public plan really is just one more regular ol' option in a sea awash with thousands of choices, then how can it possibly make any difference? For the national plan to change the health care game, it HAS to be unique, otherwise whatever it could do would already have been done (better) by hundreds of private companies.
I like the Swiss plan. Not for profit health care insurance but they sell you life insurance. They have a vested interest in keeping you healthy. Now that is an original and brilliant way to protect your investment.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

I like the Swiss plan as well....but it's only good for the Swiss. Last time I checked, they didn't have any immigration issues...and their total population is less than NYC. Apple meet orange.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

I like the Swiss plan as well....but it's only good for the Swiss. Last time I checked, they didn't have any immigration issues...and their total population is less than NYC. Apple meet orange.
And their per capita income is well north of $60k, while the US is down around $45k.

I'm actually moving to Geneva in 6 weeks and will be using their national health scheme - I'll report back in 6 months or so....
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

So, we should eliminate the public school option? How about State Colleges, let's eliminate those too.

In other words, your argument isn't holding water.

Private schools spend less per student than public schools and have far higher achievement.

As far as lawyers go. Would you rather have a public defender or one from a private firm? How would you like it if you could only have the public defender?
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Private schools spend less per student than public schools and have far higher achievement.

As far as lawyers go. Would you rather have a public defender or one from a private firm? How would you like it if you could only have the public defender?

Thanks for making my point for me.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Private schools spend less per student than public schools and have far higher achievement.
That's true information - and totally useless. The pool of students in private schools are self selected to be the better students to begin with, and the private schools get away with paying lower teacher salaries because enough teachers would rather have the lower salary than put up with the discipline problems and bureaucracy at public schools.

If you picked a random public and private school and swapped their student bodies, I'm guessing the public school would suddenly have better achievement than the private. Its the students, not the system.

That's like saying that if you had a pool of people in an insurance plan who never got cancer or heart disease, then the spending per patient would be less AND they would live longer. Well, no duh.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

That's true information - and totally useless. The pool of students in private schools are self selected to be the better students to begin with, and the private schools get away with paying lower teacher salaries because enough teachers would rather have the lower salary than put up with the discipline problems and bureaucracy at public schools.

If you picked a random public and private school and swapped their student bodies, I'm guessing the public school would suddenly have better achievement than the private. Its the students, not the system.

That's like saying that if you had a pool of people in an insurance plan who never got cancer or heart disease, then the spending per patient would be less AND they would live longer. Well, no duh.

Thank you. I could not agree more.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

It's been awhile since I looked in on this thread, and the schools/colleges debate threw me.

But I do have this question. Since it seems to be the consensus here that the existence of public schools has not driven down the price of private education and the existence of public defenders has not driven down the price of lawyers, explain to me again how America's Health Choices become "Affordable"?

Let's be candid here. The end result of all of this will be most of us will be stuck with the public defender/public school version of cut rate but mildly effective health care while those with money will look out for themselves, and that to me is a little distressing.

I've concluded I can't afford the tens of thousands it would cost for high priced legal help, so I just try to stay out of trouble. I can also state with certainty, and with two girls in college, that private college is definitely out of my price range.

But thus far I've at least felt that my employer provided health plan was generally equivalent to, or maybe even better than, what most other Americans have. I guess I'll give that up too when the new public plan prices the private one out of my range.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

It's been awhile since I looked in on this thread, and the schools/colleges debate threw me.

But I do have this question. Since it seems to be the consensus here that the existence of public schools has not driven down the price of private education and the existence of public defenders has not driven down the price of lawyers, explain to me again how America's Health Choices become "Affordable"?

Let's be candid here. The end result of all of this will be most of us will be stuck with the public defender/public school version of cut rate but mildly effective health care while those with money will look out for themselves, and that to me is a little distressing.

I've concluded I can't afford the tens of thousands it would cost for high priced legal help, so I just try to stay out of trouble. I can also state with certainty, and with two girls in college, that private college is definitely out of my price range.

But thus far I've at least felt that my employer provided health plan was generally equivalent to, or maybe even better than, what most other Americans have. I guess I'll give that up too when the new public plan prices the private one out of my range.

I don't disagree. So, maybe the status quo is fine, but then what do we do about the bugaboos that are happening with today's health care.

1. Getting dropped when we get sick.
2. Not being able to be insured at all if we're sick.
3. The uninsured.
4. The fact that the costs are rising twice inflation.

If you can fix those privately or publicly good luck.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Let's be candid here. The end result of all of this will be most of us will be stuck with the public defender/public school version of cut rate but mildly effective health care while those with money will look out for themselves, and that to me is a little distressing.
Well, I'm not in favor of starting up the national plan, but to play devil's advocate: right now, those with money can ALREADY look out for themselves while those who can't have essentially no option (a.k.a. the ER). Even if the public plan doesn't reduce the cost of private plans, at least there would be a lot more people with access to that "mildly effective" health care.

SJHovey said:
I guess I'll give that up too when the new public plan prices the private one out of my range.
And that's the real danger, in my opinion. The government plan will be a dumping ground that companies can use to stop offering health care, so there will be a lot fewer consumers using private plans. Many will go out of business entirely, and the ones that don't will have to find some "boutique" or "speicalty" niches (read: extravagant plans for rich people) to stay in business, because they won't be able to compete on price or value with a taxpayer subsidized non-profit organization. The prices of the private plans that do survive will not go down - they will go up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top