R
Rau
Guest
Do you mean like food stamps?
- Status
R
Rau
Guest
Presuming we are talking about the poor, that would be similar wouldn’t it? I know of a system in remote parts of Australia where the indigent receive financial assistance by way of a debit card system that allows purchase of groceries and such essentials, but not alcohol, gambling etc.
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
The NHS should be abolished. It is an instrument of death.
If there are many up to helping the poor, then the moral way to do is to help the poor, voluntarily, through the Church or other organization.
There are indeed many who favor the use of government power in this way, but one cannot accurately call it Christian charity or compassion because it uses the coercive power of government to require some to give up of their property to another perhaps against their will.
That may be utilitarian, but it isn’t compassion , and it isn’t moral
R
Rau
Guest
You’ve lost me. Medical systems comprising single payer for some services and a hybrid of public and private providers for others exist in the world and function well. They appear to contradict some principles you hold dear concerning individualism, scope of government and the like.
The more fundamental point from my perspective is the reality that in many free countries, the people (including the well off) overwhelmingly support progressive taxation and the deployment of taxation receipts to deliver services to the less well off who otherwise would struggle, or worse. The embracing of such a structure by those who on balance will subsidize others is charity in action. It is not the only means to help the needy, but it is a means, and I see no basis to abandon it.
R
Rau
Guest
Thats your proposal. Vastly many more see the sense in what I’ve described and embrace it. But I have an open mind - Let me know when you get your approach up and running.
It is fully Christian charity whenever one willingly supports the arrangement. In my experience there are very few who argue against progressive taxation. Governments have sought support for such arrangements and it has been given. It may not be as perfect as you would wish. But it is achievable, effective and widely embraced.
Individual rights, yes, limited government, yes, but more than that, as the chat is about the morality of government dictated healthcare. We can see already to coercion and immorality that even ACA has brought, along with the demands for more. We can see the growing attempts at oppression of the Church (Little Sisters of the Poor come to mind).
I think this is where we disagree. If individuals embrace it, and it is n overwhelming number that fo, are those who do not have an option to opt out of the taxation, perhaps instead being given the opportunity to instead work through the Church or other charities? If so, good! If not, then one can’t claim it as charitable or compassion. Charity comes voluntarily from the heart, not coerced by the government, even if by a majority rule.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
If this were a perfect world where The Fall hadn’t occurred and all men lived their lives in the uttermost expression of charity, I think your views might actually work.
Alas…
Real problems do, unfortunately, require equally real solutions.
T
Theo520
Guest
Your option 1 is like when Medicaid simply reduces the amount they are willing to cover, and this approach is why doctors refuse new patients and rationalize committing fraud to gain additional ‘just’ compensation. By itself the approach is trying to bully people into submission.
There is also the option of reducing regulations and increasing competition, so that the actual cost of giving the healthcare is reduced. This approach allows the system to make a profit at a lower unit cost, so to speak. It also requires innovation which won’t happen just by cutting the service payment for specific procedures.
.
M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
Innovation and competition are key.
We know for a fact that the ACTUAL cost of medical care is only about 25% of the total cost. The other 75% is for administrate paperwork.
That is why if you look up the cash pay cost, it tends to be only 25%.
AND, also if you use on of those HSA interstate medical reimbursement plans, they are MUCH cheaper than a conventional insurance plan.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Under a single payer system, doctors still get to compete and innovate for your business. The government just acts as the insurance company. Doctors are not federal employees.
Which is interesting given the actual 2017 budget identified about 9 billion dollars in administrative costs out of a total outlay of 700 billion dollars. Or about 1.3%. Not 75%…
With an average cancer treatment cost of $10,000 per month, your unsupportable guess of $2500 per month (or $30,000 per year) is still somehow affordable by the common American?
As long as you’re healthy, you’re totally right.
And authoritarian single payer healthcare is not a real solution, at least for many. These systems always choose based on the value of individuals to the collective society, forces people in lines, denies services to those less valuable.
Besides, I’m not willing to say that since people sin, we should sin by confiscating their property.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Who’s getting their property confiscated?
You seem to be unwilling to understand that a single payer system is not the same thing as a state owned system. Put simply, it means everyone is covered under something like Medicare.
The doctor still owns their practice, the corporation that owns the hospital still owns the hospital.
O
o_mlly
Guest
Reducing unnecessary regulations may help to the extent such regs are costly. Government regulating businesses that directly affect human life – food, drugs, health care, etc. – are necessary and expected by citizens in a free-market economy. Paradoxically, increasing some regulations such as tort reform to limit jury awards would lower health costs.
Increasing competition only reduces costs if the present providers either enjoy excess profits or use more resources than necessary. In an industry where future revenues are most likely seen to be falling and existing providers are already exiting is not an industry likely to attract new entries.
Innovation, like reducing fraud and waste, is always a possible cost cutter but cannot be predicted and, therefore, is a poor planning tool. Efforts to innovate in themselves add costs now in which hard pressed providers with thin margins are unlikely to invest in the hope of lowering costs in the future. For instance, the mandated digitizing of health records did not go as planned. See chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-obama-doctors-ehr-records-medicare-perspec-0529-20150528-story.html.
The old “doctor plumber” joke may come true.
*A pipe burst in a doctor’s house. He called a plumber. The plumber arrived, unpacked his tools, did mysterious plumber-type things for a while, and handed the doctor a bill for $600.
The doctor exclaimed, “This is ridiculous! I don’t even make that much as a doctor!.”
The plumber quietly answered, “Neither did I when I was a doctor.”*
G
GEddie
Guest
At the same time:
A heart surgeon is leaving the garage after his car is fixed. The mechanic, hanging up his tools, says: “Doc, I’ve been wondering: I just replaced a pump and earned $600; you do the same and make $30,000; what makes the difference?”
Doc replied: “Try doing it with the engine running.”
ICXC NIKA
M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
The head of Solidarity HealthShare is on the radio right now, discussing how that group can negotiate a 90% reduction on medical bills.
Bradley Hahn
844-313-4999
tomperna.org/2017/02/15/solidarity-healthshare-the-catholic-answer-to-the-healthcare-dilemma/
Bradley Hahn
844-313-4999
tomperna.org/2017/02/15/solidarity-healthshare-the-catholic-answer-to-the-healthcare-dilemma/
M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
Found this:
Hello,
Just came across your blog while trying to choose a ministry. I started researching this a couple years ago but am about to sign up now. (By the way, THANKS for the great article!) Wanted to drop you a note that it seems you’re now up to 7 (obviously NOT including MCS Inc.)…are these all ACA-qualified?
mychristiancare.org/
chministries.org/default.aspx
libertyhealthshare.org/
samaritanministries.org/
altruahealthshare.org/
solidarityhealthshare.org/
christmedicus.org/
January 28, 2017 at 10:45 am
Yep, 7 (not including Medical Cost Sharing, Inc.)! Will be interesting to see if they continue to grow, I don’t know what the new administration and Congress will do but it seems likely to have some impact, for better or worse I don’t know.
Hello,
Just came across your blog while trying to choose a ministry. I started researching this a couple years ago but am about to sign up now. (By the way, THANKS for the great article!) Wanted to drop you a note that it seems you’re now up to 7 (obviously NOT including MCS Inc.)…are these all ACA-qualified?
mychristiancare.org/
chministries.org/default.aspx
libertyhealthshare.org/
samaritanministries.org/
altruahealthshare.org/
solidarityhealthshare.org/
christmedicus.org/
January 28, 2017 at 10:45 am
Yep, 7 (not including Medical Cost Sharing, Inc.)! Will be interesting to see if they continue to grow, I don’t know what the new administration and Congress will do but it seems likely to have some impact, for better or worse I don’t know.
- Status