Correcting some misinformation on medical care for the penniless

[jebmke]

I'm still waiting for more discussion of the subjunctive. At least in this we have an issue that can be settled. No chance at all of flying pigs.

It is really complex, and largely abandoned in casual American speech, but there are guidelines should we care to examine them.

Ha

If need be we could have a separate thread.

 

[obgyn65]

I am with Donheff on this.

I have no problem with a better bill. In fact I am very much in favor of changes. I just don't want to repeal the current bill before going there. If the current legislation is reversed I firmly believe it will be decades before we reform the system. (...) A return to the previous status, horrible.

 

[chinaco]

Yes... The US health care system is broken.

The political discourse has been poisoned with hyperbole (on both sides) to the point that nothing get's done because no one knows which side is up.

There has to be a way to deal with US health care in a reasonably cost effective manner for all citizens.

But providing "Platinum Care for All" is probably not going to be practical in terms of cost. That is the critical flaw with Obamacare.

The Republican party, on the other hand, sat on their hands and did nothing over the last 8 years leading up to the last election (even though the problems were glaring). If they were really wanting to solve the problem... they would have forwarded a plan that attempted to deal with the real problems.... spiraling costs (out of control) and people who fall through the cracks and get no basic care.

 

[donheff]

If the SC repeals it, I would expect action by Congress to get a new, Constitutional bill in place. I'll cross my fingers they do a better job the 2nd time around. From what I've seen of the discussion here on this Wyden/Bennett proposal, it sounds on the right track (haven't been through the details though).

-ERD50

This is where you and I have different faiths. The grid lock seems so severe to me that cooperation on getting anything done will be years in the making. I think a SC reversal will have the same effect as the Clinton health care fiasco. We will move on to the deficit and return to HC in the late 20s. I hope I am wrong about that.

 

[donheff]

For those that are in the mainstream of society (hold a job, want to have good credit, etc), requests for proof of health insurance by employers, creditors, etc should be commonplace. If I ran a mortgage company, I wouldn't lend money to anyone without this insurance--the cost is reasonable, and if they get sick without it, the medical bills reduce the likelihood that I'll be repaid. Same with employers: I want healthy employees. I can't make 'em go to the doctor, but I can screen them to be sure they are insured so they'll likely go when they need to.

Want to enroll Johnny in daycare? Please show us your insurance card.

This massive private sector gaming seems to fly in the face of the leave the choice to me philosophy. I also doubt that much of it would happen. I prefer a mandate.

Set enrollment windows and waiting periods to discourage the gamers. If you're uninsured when the bus hits you, you are out of luck.

That would work, IF we were willing to lock the emergency room doors. Not gonna happen.

For individuals who gambled by being uninsured and lost, they will get care but their assets will be liquidated if necessary and their wages (if any) garnished to pay for their medical care.

That doesn't defer people now. We are largely talking about young immortals with few assets and the poor. Are you going to change bankruptcy laws to allow medical claw backs? Seems no better that a government program from the get go.

Bottom line is this seems like a lot of finagling to give the appearance of choice to obscure the reality that we need to cover everyone one way or the other.

 

[ERD50]

This is where you and I have different faiths. The grid lock seems so severe to me that cooperation on getting anything done will be years in the making. I think a SC reversal will have the same effect as the Clinton health care fiasco. We will move on to the deficit and return to HC in the late 20s. I hope I am wrong about that.

Possibly, but often the gridlock is seen as positive - legislation has to pass a little higher standard to make it through (yes, that sounds pretty naive when I put it to words ).

In your view though, that gridlock would also make getting changes to the current system very difficult. Damned if we do, Damned if we don't? Probably.

-ERD50

 

[NW-Bound]

In reading one of the 2 articles linked by Silver, I spotted the following excerpt.

In November a panel of the Institute of Medicine concluded that having a blood test for vitamin D is pointless: almost everyone has enough D for bone health (20 nanograms per milliliter) without taking supplements or calcium pills. Cost of vitamin D: $425 million per year.​

I would like to relate this story. The wife of one of my brother-in-laws was sick for a while. She had a few problems that her doctor could diagnose, but overall she complained of feeling really lousy. It was perplexing to her doctor, who ordered a bunch of tests and just could not find out why. Finally, they discovered that, you guess it, vitamin D deficiency.

Good grief! Vitamin D deficiency in the SW, where the sun shines nearly 99% of the year! It is generally accepted that unless one is in the Artic, a few minutes of exposure a day would be sufficient for the body to generate enough vitamin D one needs with the help of the sunlight. Obviously, my BIL's wife has been avoiding the sun and must be rushing from her home to the car and to her workplace without having much outdoor activity at all.

As she has good health insurance from her work, it did not cost her too much money, but of course she suffered for a long time before she could get properly diagnosed. I don't blame her doctor for not seeing the problem right away; how one could have known some people are as afraid of sunlight as Dracula?

The moral of the story: A bit of medical knowledge by the patient can help him getting cured faster, as well as keeping the care cost low.

 

[donheff]

In your view though, that gridlock would also make getting changes to the current system very difficult. Damned if we do, Damned if we don't? Probably.

-ERD50

Correct. I don't expect much in the next few years. At best, if the current law isn't reversed, I hope for some bipartisan cost containment efforts down the road. Not exactly a rosy scenario but IMHO better than we had and better than we will have with reversal. On the other hand, if the law gets reversed, I eagerly await the falsification of my views. If a future GOP actually enacts a decent HC system I might actually become an independent Nothing dies on the internet. I can visualize this post being quoted in a future thread

 

[samclem]

Originally Posted by gleaned from another board
Why should I, who count calories and exercise, pay the same amount as the whales I see in the grocery store every day buying family packs of Cokes and mountains of greasy foods? No one has any problem making smokers pay more, so where is the pseudosympathy for McD's chompers coming from?

Originally Posted by gleaned from another board
Don't ask everyone else to pay higher taxes for your diabetes and visits to the doctor when your heart problems emerge. This is unbelievable. What happened to taking responsibility for your own actions?

This is very disturbing to me. We don't offer you enough inane views right here? You have to go elsewhere, to an alien board, for your required amount of aggravation?

I feel like I'm being cheated upon.

(Note: I ended the last post with a preposition. And it felt GOOD!)

 

[Purron]

(Note: I ended the last post with a preposition. And it felt GOOD!)

Glad you're feeling good samclem. It's really what the whole topic of health care is all about.

For you...

YouTube - Michael Bublé - Feeling Good (Video)

 

[M Paquette]

This is very disturbing to me. We don't offer you enough inane views right here? You have to go elsewhere, to an alien board, for your required amount of aggravation?

I feel like I'm being cheated upon.

(Note: I ended the last post with a preposition. And it felt GOOD!)

The folks here are unusually well educated, informed, and rational. For the really inane, we have to look to places like news and blog comments.

That's where we'll find what folks out there think they have, or want. I believe Gene Wilder said it best, in his performance in Blazing Saddles:

These are people of the land. The common clay of the new west. ... You know... morons.

 

[Independent]

From the Washington Post article in your post:

The Congressional Budget Office has reported that this framework is the only one thus far that bends the health-care cost curve down and makes it possible for the new system to pay for itself.

In any case, Obamacare raises taxes, so even if Wyden/Bennett were to raise taxes; if the increase is less than Obamacare, it would still lower taxes on a relative basis.

That article doesn't give a link to the claimed CBO report. I googled a little and found this http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/91xx/doc9184/05-01-HealthCare-Letter.pdf

I didn't find a sentence like "the only one thus far that bends the health-care cost curve down". Maybe you can do better.