M
Man
Guest
So… regulation and taxes?
- Status
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Ah, but the majority of medical expenses come with the final illness. The longer you hang on, the more you cost. Smokers go more quickly than non-smokers.from a small claims standpoint however (small claims meaning claims that add up slowly) …smokers can have more throat illnesses, flus, colds, etc…along the way than their non smoking counterparts. again, medical stats not insurance stats. but, let’s face it…smoking is by far not the only problem out there when it comes to escalating claims and rising health insurance prices…the obesity rate in this country soars far above the rest of the world…and it’s unreal how many diseases are linked to that… even being 40 lbs overweight can impact one’s health. i know that when i don’t work out, i feel pretty lousy, as opposed to when i try to be consistent.
so…there’s proof in the pudding. (non sugar pudding albeit)
ps: the interesting thing that employers need to note though, is that when you ask your ee’s to work 12+ hours per day …lay off people and ask others to do the work of three people…where on earth will be all this extra time for them to work out and cook healthy meals? so, not only will it take personal change, but employers need to step up and stop overworking their employees, quite frankly. two way street.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
No – a more efficient system (less taxes) utilizing the individual’s self-oriented decisions (less regulation.)
The individual has to save something (he doesn’t have to save anything now) and he has an incentive to hang onto that money - which translates into making decisions about consumption and bargaining for health care.
W
whatevergirl
Guest
yes, the large expenses…but there are many years leading up to that.
the truth remains that taking care of ourselves…doesn’t just help the rates…it helps US!
W
whatevergirl
Guest
There is self managed healthcare already out there. We sell it everyday…where you put your own dollars in a fund, and then spend it when you feel you need to see the doctor…and the larger claims come out of the group fund. Some people swear by it…but I take the high deductible plan…I have always liked it, personally. But, making one’s own decisions with his/her own funds is spreading like wild fire…you wouldn’t think people would like it, but it’s really been a popular option for many.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
And we ought to capitalize on that.
A lot of people like the one-size-fits-everyone approach. I don’t. For some people (a lot of people) MSAs are the way to go. For others, different plans might be better. I favor letting people make their own decisions, and facilitating that with appropriate legislation – setting up real MSAs, allowing small businesses to band together to bargain for employee health care, letting people shop for health care across state lines, having a drug card that gives you a simple annual update for the program that’s best for you, and so on…
W
whatevergirl
Guest
sigh vern…we are in agreement again. I think that has happened in two threads now.
All kidding aside–I agree…one size fits all is not only shoving the burden of many on a select few…but it doesn’t make sense from the standpoint of managing one’s own healthcare.
B
boppaid
Guest
Did your friend say what they chose to do this? I’m thinking they thought this was an emergency, because I cannot imagine going to the ER would be more convenient for them than going to an after hours clinic or to their regular doctor. THe ER generally takes hours upon hours to be seen, where a patient is more “in and out” at a routine dr. appt. So, that being the case, I’m inclined to think that maybe they were really fearful it was an actual emergency? Maybe they thought it was strep and that constituted an er visit?? I honestly don’t know. I think it might be more a case of hyperchondria or ignorance, though, than willful wasting of money.
B
boppaid
Guest
I guess I’m wondering who pays for the individual working at McDonalds? Or the guy making $10 an hour trying to support a family of 6? If not taxes, then what?
M
Man
Guest
Well, you either have to use taxes or shaft the insurance companies/hospitals…
Double sliding scales won’t pay for a guy making nothing, and if it does (through gov. regulation), right now, “Earned Income Credit” will pay him back.
T
Trader
Guest
I have not been getting update emails on this thread. I thought I was a thread killer.What an inspiring post! I have considered this, too, as sometimes we just cannot afford health care premiums.Can I ask y ou a few questions?
*Do you get your cholestoral and sugar checked annually with an exam? I know that will also prevent more serious illness down the road as well.
- Do you have enough money saved if you came down with a catestrophic illness, such as cancer? My friend got lung cancer, and never smoked a day in her life.
I do have enough money saved for some diseases. Last year my sister had a kidney transplant only 18 months after suddenly becoming ill. The average wait for a transplant is five years, but the average patient only lives three years on dialysis. Totals for care so far are in excess of $700,000. She had pretty good insurance from her employer. Kidney disease also has a preferred status. If you need dialysis you automatically can get Medicare.
As expensive as kidney transplants are, the limiting factor is not money; it is the availability of suitable organs. This goes back to my point about behavior. Drug abuse and obesity caused high blood pressure are leading to high rates of organ failure. Those same behaviors are reducing the supply of transplantable organs. Abusing your body not only can kill you, it can also prevent you from saving someone else’s life.
Stronger families would also save a lot of money. Living family members are the best source for many organ transplants. My sister volunteered her son to care for both of us if I donated my kidney to her. It turned out that she could not use my kidney due to a DNA conflict even though we had the same blood type. That most likely was caused by a previous blood transfusion after a completely different surgery years ago. A lot of people waiting for a transplant don’t even know who their siblings are. Half siblings and step siblings are less likely to be suitable donors than full siblings.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
I spread good cheer and common sense everywhere I go.
It doesn’t make sense from anyone’s standpoint – other than the bureaucrats paid to “manage” healthcare.
J
JimG
Guest
And speaking of managing healthcare: For those who do not read the Placebo Journal, you might like to see their youtube video awarding this years Tenesmus Award to, of all people–Michael Moore!I spread good cheer and common sense everywhere I go.
It doesn’t make sense from anyone’s standpoint – other than the bureaucrats paid to “manage” healthcare.
youtube.com/watch?v=XLSHEv8n0v8
W
whatevergirl
Guest
ugh
J
JimG
Guest
Do you mean that for Michael Moore? Or Dr. Farrago? I honestly don’t think that the two would agree on much, except that they are both critics of aspects of the health care system.ugh
C
cynic
Guest
oh but you don’t get it. Those people don’t deserve health care. They are the losers. Why should your hard-working entrepreneur or highly paid preofessional pay out 2% out of their incomes to cover them? It’s an abomination, I say.
T
Trader
Guest
Originally Posted by boppaid
I guess I’m wondering who pays for the individual working at McDonalds? Or the guy making $10 an hour trying to support a family of 6? If not taxes, then what?
If you actually visit a McDonald’s it will be obvious that many of those workers will still be covered by their parent’s policies. Others are on Medicare. Still others are part time workers covered under a spouse’s policy.
If you impose a “one size fits all” solution there will be huge duplication and waste. It would not be the first time that happened under a federal program.
If the McDonald’s worker is there because he has quit school and is not qualified for anything else, wouldn’t a better solution be to get him back in school and qualified for work that actually could support him and a family?
I guess I’m wondering who pays for the individual working at McDonalds? Or the guy making $10 an hour trying to support a family of 6? If not taxes, then what?
If you actually visit a McDonald’s it will be obvious that many of those workers will still be covered by their parent’s policies. Others are on Medicare. Still others are part time workers covered under a spouse’s policy.
If you impose a “one size fits all” solution there will be huge duplication and waste. It would not be the first time that happened under a federal program.
If the McDonald’s worker is there because he has quit school and is not qualified for anything else, wouldn’t a better solution be to get him back in school and qualified for work that actually could support him and a family?
A
Al_Masetti
Guest
Excellent summary of the various issues. Very concise. Well done!
M
Man
Guest
This is additional taxes to pay for school and programs, plus you insinuate that all person should be required to continue education. He prepares food for two hundred people a day in a hot annoying job, but has no right to work there. In fact, he doesn’t even have a right to health care. OR, maybe you NEED to pay more for you food. We could regulate that…
T
Trader
Guest
Call me an old fashioned Catholic, but I believe the Church teaches that the PARENTS are the primary educators of their children, not the state. Most parents “hire” a school to assist them with that obligation; some choose to home school. If more parents chose to take their most serious obligations seriously, taxes would not have to go up at all. Without question total productivity and and national wealth would increase with better educated citizens.
Since this particular discussion of health care is supposed to take place within the larger realm of social justice, where is the appropriate balance? Of course we ALL have an obligation to the poor. Of course ALL employers have an obligation to treat their employees fairly.
Guess what? ALL employees have an obligation to prepare themselves to provide work that is worth a living wage. ALL citizens have a duty to make choices that do not leave them unable to support themselves and families. Parents have a serious obligation to guide their children into better choices.
When in the history of the world has anyone been able to support a family with a part time, low skilled job? Hint: if your teenagers can do the job while they are still in high school, it is not a high skill job.
There are two main approaches to increased equality in individual wealth. One is to have more people make good choices. The second is to take from those who make good choices, and give to those who make bad choices.
I think the better plan is behind door #1.
When you subsidize bad choices in anything, including health care, you get more bad choices. Everyone suffers under that plan.
Since this particular discussion of health care is supposed to take place within the larger realm of social justice, where is the appropriate balance? Of course we ALL have an obligation to the poor. Of course ALL employers have an obligation to treat their employees fairly.
Guess what? ALL employees have an obligation to prepare themselves to provide work that is worth a living wage. ALL citizens have a duty to make choices that do not leave them unable to support themselves and families. Parents have a serious obligation to guide their children into better choices.
When in the history of the world has anyone been able to support a family with a part time, low skilled job? Hint: if your teenagers can do the job while they are still in high school, it is not a high skill job.
There are two main approaches to increased equality in individual wealth. One is to have more people make good choices. The second is to take from those who make good choices, and give to those who make bad choices.
I think the better plan is behind door #1.
When you subsidize bad choices in anything, including health care, you get more bad choices. Everyone suffers under that plan.
- Status