I agree that reform is needed --but get the economy going first; get tort reform. As long as lawyers make their living by suing doctors and settling out of court because of suffering people --regardless of fault for their suffering, there will be no real reform in the high cost of healthcare. A national system will simply mean that you pay your exorbitant monthly insurance premium per month to the gov't in new taxes to squander wherever --instead of to the health insurer who would invest the money in order to cover your healthcare.
Profit-motive in people of integrity can mean efficiency and prudence in healthcare and business --the gov't purse covering everything guarantees greed and graft, inefficiency and sloth and ever rising pay for poor service. That's why we need to keep gov't local and small --and look for REAL reforms. Gov't and law should help to keep private industry honest and fair --not replace it. And they'd do well to start policing the malpractice lawyers --and limit their rewards for chasing ambulances.
"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
The public option exists to break regional monopolies which allow health-care providers to pursue profitablity at the expense of service. It isn't the British model. It is closer to the French model.
Profitability ain't all bad --even in healthcare. Everything we do to reduce costs affects economy --e.g. the hospital administrator from Toledo who said there is too much advertising for drugs. Some of that is to make people aware to ask for something their doc may not have considered for them --and to WARN them of side affects--maybe, in part, so they can't sue and say they didn't know!!! In fact, the warnings are such that people won't be rushing to use certain drugs as a panacea--having only heard the good side.
So, if you reduce healthcare costs by billions by eliminating advertising --how many people are out of a job? If you say pharm reps can't bring lunch to doctors' staffs in order to talk about their drugs to them, how many restaurants are hurt? How many drug reps are out of a job? And how will the doctor find the time to hear about the new drugs? With healthcare "reform," how many insurance companies and their employees will fold?
I want everyone to have all the care they need for optimum health --but we are mortal, after all--there is a limit.
Meanwhile, we shouldn't be dealing deathblows to our own economy all the time in the name of "reform."
I don't, however, feel sorry for lawyers who won't get to make millions off of doctors without even proving malpractice--like John Edwards. They drive up the costs for ill-gotten means.
Fact is, everybody's profit or perk is someone else's profit.
We have spent a lot of money this year at our house --giving work to lots of people --replacing an immense cement stairwell with pavers and timber --putting up a storage shed made in Ohio -- and bought an American-made lake pontoon, also - because my husband's year has been good in insurance companies paying him for their insured patients --and because he works 16-18 hours a day--at least. We also are having drywall holes repaired due to leaky plumbing (and paid a plumber) and a leak in a roof.
So the healthcare provider who makes a profit spends more, hires more, gives more and pays huge taxes.
BTW, my husband does a lot of free care as it is.
Barb,
Your hypotheticals ignore realities. The Pharmaceutical industry has cooperated with the Obama administration and offered new efficiencies to drive waste out of their system (e.g. e-detailing, and new pharma codes regulating premiums).
Get informed on some real world facts before you reply.
Thanks.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hdgni2jdm4kvnmvjPGs-wL8n6gEwD9ASCUN80
I thought that was an interesting article. The article is saying that health care costs are driven up by doctors and hospitals because they nickel and dime and don't deliver health care efficiently. What the president would like to do is make many things payable in blocks, or flat rate things. That would give the incentive to doctors and hospitals to provide more efficient care. For example, instead of getting your knee replacement, and then having to go to the doctor 2 or 3 times a week over the next month, you make one visit in 2 weeks and pretty much recuperate on your own barring complications. You would get much more robust teaching about wound care, infection, ect..
Now as someone who is going into the medical field as a nurse I have mixed feelings about this. I'm really suffering right now through the blood sweat and tears of nursing school. So I want to be paid well after I graduate. But, I don't want to be an added burden to the cost of our healthcare. So in a lot of ways health care cost can be reduced by getting back to basics. More family practitioners, more hands on vs multi million dollar MRI's for every little thing. You're probably correct in that some reform is needed in malpractice. But if we didn't have all these greed miesters coming out of medical school looking to go right into Podiatry or whatever.. thats an issue as well on the care side of things.
Post a Comment