Obama's Health Plan

[Mormon Red Death]

What I see is EVERY person having access to the same medical care regardless of their economic situation. The reality is the US system rations medical care on a far greater scale and with more serious consequences. The US system is truly darwinian.

No one gets turned away from a hospital in the USA. Regardless of their ability to pay.

[TripletDaddy]

No one gets turned away from a hospital in the USA. Regardless of their ability to pay.

You are going in circles. I agree with your post, but what you just stated is textbook socialized medicine. The government subsidizes our health care here.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

For those who are protesting....I ask....is Wal-Mart a good thing for capitalism, the consumer, and its suppliers?

Answer the question, don't go into my motives....just answer the question and explain your answer.

Absolutely it is. P&G loves its relationship with Wal-Mart and China definitely loves Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart has effectively lowered the cost of a lot of goods (though a lot of it is of inferior quality). For people with lower incomes, they can live a bit better because of Wal-Mart.

I don't buy things like sheets, towels, clothes, small pieces of furniture, tools etc. at Wal-Mart because of the quality issues. Put simply, Wal-Mart sells a lot of things of middling quality. The things thing I do buy at times from Wal-Mart are toiletries, cleaning supplies, video games, cds and other things that have a consistent quality no matter where you buy them. Though increasingly I don't want to deal with the hastle of Wal-Mart (long lines) and have found that you can basically get the same prices for most of these goods from other places.

But the main advantage of having Wal-Mart is it gives lower income folks the opportunity to buy necessities, even though they may be of lower quality, at lower prices. For example, my dad has commented before that he's shocked at how inexpensive it is buy something with down in it. For decades down pillows, comforters, coats, etc were pretty expensive. They're shockingly inexpensive at Wal-Mart (though you're going to get better quality at some place like the Pottery Barn, Bed Bath & Beyond and Costco than Wal-Mart).

[Mormon Red Death]

You are going in circles. I agree with your post, but what you just stated is textbook socialized medicine. The government subsidizes our health care here.

I know they do... I just don't want more of it to be subsidized. Obama's plan is include more people into Medicare which has a steadfast rules to be in (you have to be 65). My point is if its now expanded its going to change things even more.

[RobinFinderson]

No one gets turned away from a hospital in the USA. Regardless of their ability to pay.

Sure, you can get 'free' health care in an ER, but the hospital will go after you, ruin your credit, and sue for your wages. After that, you will never qualify to buy a house or car or education. What a bargain!

[Mormon Red Death]

Sure, you can get 'free' health care in an ER, but the hospital will go after you, ruin your credit, and sue for your wages. After that, you will never qualify to buy a house or car or education. What a bargain!

Only if you make over a certain amount. Look, is it so terrible that when a businsess provides a service they expect to get paid for that service?

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Walmart thrives because it limits workers hours and benefits so that a huge chunk of its employees depend heavily on government handouts (food stamps and health care). In other words a big chunk of Walmart's profits are realized at the taxpayers' expense. Also, healthy unions are going to exist in any 'free' market. Walmart leverages its considerable political power to quash unions.

I don't know that Walmart could exist in its current form in a true free market system.

I don't disagree that Walmart does things to limit some employee benefits.

But Walmart prevents unions from forming within its ranks by completely removing the entire management of any store once rumblings of a union occur and a lot of the other employees as needed. I'm not sure of the exact specifics but this is generally what happens.

Costco prevents itself from being unionized by treating their employees well.

Both companies have come to the same conclusion- that unions totally blow and dramatically bring down the efficiency of a business- but have addressed the problem in different ways.

Walmart may use some political pressure to keep the status quo, but mostly its Walmart's strong arm tactics that prevents it from being unionized. But Walmart is hardly alone in the retail sector in not being unionized.

[wuapinmon]

Yes it is.

Explain yourself.

[ERCougar]

Here's my idea for health care reform. I shared this on CG or CB a long time ago but still haven't really heard a good counterargument. Actually, it's not my idea--I first heard it in an econ lecture by Martin Feldstein (former chief economic adviser for Reagan).

We figure out, based on income tax returns, a reasonable amount that each citizen or family can afford to spend on healthcare costs. They are responsible for all costs up to that amount, after which the government covers all further necessary costs for that year (minus a small deductible to discourage abuse). Next year, things start over again. We could make certain exemptions for the "deductible" which the government would cover completely, but only if they have proven benefit to decrease long-term costs (diabetes/hypertension meds, vaccinations, etc).

It's a fairly simple idea. The chief obstacle would be getting our huge HMO/insurance industry to buy in, but nationalized health care is going to be equally hard. It seems like we could just adapt the current industry as figureheads to run the system. The idea's out there; I wonder why it doesn't get more play.

Regarding high-deductible insurance--it's not going up nearly as quickly as the other kinds of insurance. My premium barely bumped this year. It's also something you just get used to, but it does take some getting used to.

[wuapinmon]

I don't disagree that Walmart does things to limit some employee benefits.

But Walmart prevents unions from forming within its ranks by completely removing the entire management of any store once rumblings of a union occur and a lot of the other employees as needed. I'm not sure of the exact specifics but this is generally what happens.

Costco prevents itself from being unionized by treating their employees well.

Both companies have come to the same conclusion- that unions totally blow and dramatically bring down the efficiency of a business- but have addressed the problem in different ways.

Walmart may use some political pressure to keep the status quo, but mostly its Walmart's strong arm tactics that prevents it from being unionized. But Walmart is hardly alone in the retail sector in not being unionized.

Ok, instead of Wal-Mart, substitute Costco. Is Costco good for capitalism, employees, consumers, and suppliers?

[Flystripper]

I think that the soaring health care costs are due to people living to long. If you haven't taken care of yourself like getting fat, smoking, drinking, etc., you just shouldn't be allowed to get all the expensive medical treatment available, especially if you can't afford it.

If Joe Jones can afford to pay for a lot of medicine, he can live longer than Jim Jones who can't. What is the difference between that and Joe able to drive a nicer car than Jim.

If we could convince the liberals there is a heaven, maybe they wouldn't be so concerned about people dieing when they should.

I apply this to myself. It is my fault I am overweight. I refuse to take the cholesterol and blood pressure pills my doctor wants me too. I need to suffer the consequences of my bad health habits. Besides if I don't use the insurance for those drugs, maybe some poor illegal can get the drugs.

I missed you so much <3

[Mormon Red Death]

Here's my idea for health care reform. I shared this on CG or CB a long time ago but still haven't really heard a good counterargument. Actually, it's not my idea--I first heard it in an econ lecture by Martin Feldstein (former chief economic adviser for Reagan).

We figure out, based on income tax returns, a reasonable amount that each citizen or family can afford to spend on healthcare costs. They are responsible for all costs up to that amount, after which the government covers all further necessary costs for that year (minus a small deductible to discourage abuse). Next year, things start over again. We could make certain exemptions for the "deductible" which the government would cover completely, but only if they have proven benefit to decrease long-term costs (diabetes/hypertension meds, vaccinations, etc).

It's a fairly simple idea. The chief obstacle would be getting our huge HMO/insurance industry to buy in, but nationalized health care is going to be equally hard. It seems like we could just adapt the current industry as figureheads to run the system. The idea's out there; I wonder why it doesn't get more play.

Regarding high-deductible insurance--it's not going up nearly as quickly as the other kinds of insurance. My premium barely bumped this year. It's also something you just get used to, but it does take some getting used to.

Here's some counterarguments. How do you figure what the reasonable amount is?

Moral Hazard... everyone now has insurance they now use insurance (reasonable amount sky rockets)

Who determines what should be covered?

How much do we reimburse? How much the hospital/doctor are charging?

[Mormon Red Death]

Ok, instead of Wal-Mart, substitute Costco. Is Costco good for capitalism, employees, consumers, and suppliers?

yes

[ERCougar]

Here's some counterarguments. How do you figure what the reasonable amount is?

Moral Hazard... everyone now has insurance they now use insurance (reasonable amount sky rockets)

Who determines what should be covered?

How much do we reimburse? How much the hospital/doctor are charging?

By income tax returns. That's the easiest obstacle of them all.

Moral hazard only kicks in once you reach your relatively high deductible.

Procedure coverage is tricky, but this applies to every nationalized health plan out there, including Medicare and Medicaid.

Reimbursement's also tricky (but also applies to every nationalized health plan out there...). It's actually easier in this scenario because you have a private market-determined price (before deductible is reached). Doctors charge the government the same price as their other patients.

[Mormon Red Death]

By income tax returns. That's the easiest obstacle of them all.

Moral hazard only kicks in once you reach your relatively high deductible.

Procedure coverage is tricky, but this applies to every nationalized health plan out there, including Medicare and Medicaid.

Reimbursement's also tricky (but also applies to every nationalized health plan out there...). It's actually easier in this scenario because you have a private market-determined price (before deductible is reached). Doctors charge the government the same price as their other patients.

How do we determine the reasonable amount? Is it simple scale that says you are married with 3 kids and make between 50-60k you pay this amount? Is that what you are thinking?

Lets say you are a family of four making 50k and your determined amount is 1,000. Once you pay that amount moral hazard kicks in.

Reimbursement rates. If you go by what hospitals are charging cost sky rocket. If you use Medicare rates you have the same problem I described to DDD earlier