ObamaCare…coming soon

[an]

[quote=SDEngineer]
And this is exactly what is being proposed – a public plan which will compete as a not for profit alternative to the private insurors.

The advantages should be clear – the private insurors will now have an incentive to reduce costs and expand coverages, which is the exact opposite of their incentives today. Insurance companies have no incentives to control costs today, since they can pass any expenses directly on to their consumers (which, of course they have been doing), and still take their 15% on every transaction, while making every attempt (frequently successful) to decline coverage on any medical expenses that would lead to significant losses on their part. Health plans today are far more restrictive on benefits than they were even 10 years ago – because we’re essentially a captive market to a relatively small group of insurors who all have the same profit motive, and that group is relatively immune to competition, because of the extremely high barrier of entry to competitors (it’s not like you or I could decide to found a healthcare insurance agency to compete with them).[/quote]
It’s a fine line. I hope they pull it off. They didn’t reference Germany or other European country in their example of universal health care, but they reference Canada A LOT. I just hope they don’t go to that extreme. One huge difference between us vs everyone else is malpractice insurance. Here in the US, we can sue for almost anything. A doctor career can be destroyed by 1-2 lawsuit. That in itself contribute to the huge cost. That’s also one of the many reasons why 90% of med students decide to go into specialized area instead of general practice.

Sorry, I never have to look for health insurance. My employers have always provided that to me. So, it’s not the question of who should I choose but more a long the line of, PPO vs HMO. My health care insurance is better today than it was 6 years ago because the employer decided to give a really good plan. My out of pocket either stayed the same or went down (don’t remember exactly).

[CA renter]

[quote=AN]

What is it about the Austrian health care system that make it FAR superior to ours? Please explain.[/quote]

One example would be my mom’s best friend who had to have hip replacement surgery. In Austria, she got the surgery and had a longer hospital stay than U.S. counterparts (a good thing, no matter what they try to tell us), then was sent to a rehab facility (again, an in-patient facility) that is more like a spa, with special pools and massage therapies, etc. Essentially, they believe in a more holistic approach; and rather than send someone home the same day or day after a major procedure, they actually try to **heal** the patient, and make sure they are able to take care of themselves at home. We do no such thing here.

Another benefit of socialized medicine is that people can move freely between employers and careers. For example, my husband and I would like to start a business, but can’t because we’d lose the health benefits provided by his current employer. Socialized medicine would allow labor to move where it is most effective, and would enable our employers to be more competitive with foreign employers who do not have the burden of insuring their employees and the related “legacy costs.”

One more thing… A for-profit healthcare system is only profitable when people are sick. There is no incentive to **cure** people, only to “treat” them with expensive medicines and procedures. Ideally, from the perspective of a for-profit healthcare provider, the perfect patient is one who is chronically ill and requires medicine and treatments for an entire lifetime.

A socialized system has an incentive to **cure,** because the entire goal of socialized medicine is to make people healthy, irrespective of any other (profit) considerations.

———————

More general statements about their socialized government:

The Austrians pay about the same amount in taxes that we do, and get 12-18 months **paid** maternity leave (combination of govt/employer-paid, with one year full pay and 6 months half pay, IIRC).

They get very effective healthcare which will not bankrupt them.

They also get a pension when they retire.

They do not have the disparate levels of wealth that we have, and, generally-speaking, everyone is taken care of. Certainly nobody can take issue with the German or Austrian work ethic, either. The whole boogeyman of “everyone will be lazy” is nonsense.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN]

What is it about the Austrian health care system that make it FAR superior to ours? Please explain.[/quote]

One example would be my mom’s best friend who had to have hip replacement surgery. In Austria, she got the surgery and had a longer hospital stay than U.S. counterparts (a good thing, no matter what they try to tell us), then was sent to a rehab facility (again, an in-patient facility) that is more like a spa, with special pools and massage therapies, etc. Essentially, they believe in a more holistic approach; and rather than send someone home the same day or day after a major procedure, they actually try to **heal** the patient, and make sure they are able to take care of themselves at home. We do no such thing here.

Another benefit of socialized medicine is that people can move freely between employers and careers. For example, my husband and I would like to start a business, but can’t because we’d lose the health benefits provided by his current employer. Socialized medicine would allow labor to move where it is most effective, and would enable our employers to be more competitive with foreign employers who do not have the burden of insuring their employees and the related “legacy costs.”

One more thing… A for-profit healthcare system is only profitable when people are sick. There is no incentive to **cure** people, only to “treat” them with expensive medicines and procedures. Ideally, from the perspective of a for-profit healthcare provider, the perfect patient is one who is chronically ill and requires medicine and treatments for an entire lifetime.

A socialized system has an incentive to **cure,** because the entire goal of socialized medicine is to make people healthy, irrespective of any other (profit) considerations.

———————

More general statements about their socialized government:

The Austrians pay about the same amount in taxes that we do, and get 12-18 months **paid** maternity leave (combination of govt/employer-paid, with one year full pay and 6 months half pay, IIRC).

They get very effective healthcare which will not bankrupt them.

They also get a pension when they retire.

They do not have the disparate levels of wealth that we have, and, generally-speaking, everyone is taken care of. Certainly nobody can take issue with the German or Austrian work ethic, either. The whole boogeyman of “everyone will be lazy” is nonsense.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN]

What is it about the Austrian health care system that make it FAR superior to ours? Please explain.[/quote]

One example would be my mom’s best friend who had to have hip replacement surgery. In Austria, she got the surgery and had a longer hospital stay than U.S. counterparts (a good thing, no matter what they try to tell us), then was sent to a rehab facility (again, an in-patient facility) that is more like a spa, with special pools and massage therapies, etc. Essentially, they believe in a more holistic approach; and rather than send someone home the same day or day after a major procedure, they actually try to **heal** the patient, and make sure they are able to take care of themselves at home. We do no such thing here.

Another benefit of socialized medicine is that people can move freely between employers and careers. For example, my husband and I would like to start a business, but can’t because we’d lose the health benefits provided by his current employer. Socialized medicine would allow labor to move where it is most effective, and would enable our employers to be more competitive with foreign employers who do not have the burden of insuring their employees and the related “legacy costs.”

One more thing… A for-profit healthcare system is only profitable when people are sick. There is no incentive to **cure** people, only to “treat” them with expensive medicines and procedures. Ideally, from the perspective of a for-profit healthcare provider, the perfect patient is one who is chronically ill and requires medicine and treatments for an entire lifetime.

A socialized system has an incentive to **cure,** because the entire goal of socialized medicine is to make people healthy, irrespective of any other (profit) considerations.

———————

More general statements about their socialized government:

The Austrians pay about the same amount in taxes that we do, and get 12-18 months **paid** maternity leave (combination of govt/employer-paid, with one year full pay and 6 months half pay, IIRC).

They get very effective healthcare which will not bankrupt them.

They also get a pension when they retire.

They do not have the disparate levels of wealth that we have, and, generally-speaking, everyone is taken care of. Certainly nobody can take issue with the German or Austrian work ethic, either. The whole boogeyman of “everyone will be lazy” is nonsense.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN]

What is it about the Austrian health care system that make it FAR superior to ours? Please explain.[/quote]

One example would be my mom’s best friend who had to have hip replacement surgery. In Austria, she got the surgery and had a longer hospital stay than U.S. counterparts (a good thing, no matter what they try to tell us), then was sent to a rehab facility (again, an in-patient facility) that is more like a spa, with special pools and massage therapies, etc. Essentially, they believe in a more holistic approach; and rather than send someone home the same day or day after a major procedure, they actually try to **heal** the patient, and make sure they are able to take care of themselves at home. We do no such thing here.

Another benefit of socialized medicine is that people can move freely between employers and careers. For example, my husband and I would like to start a business, but can’t because we’d lose the health benefits provided by his current employer. Socialized medicine would allow labor to move where it is most effective, and would enable our employers to be more competitive with foreign employers who do not have the burden of insuring their employees and the related “legacy costs.”

One more thing… A for-profit healthcare system is only profitable when people are sick. There is no incentive to **cure** people, only to “treat” them with expensive medicines and procedures. Ideally, from the perspective of a for-profit healthcare provider, the perfect patient is one who is chronically ill and requires medicine and treatments for an entire lifetime.

A socialized system has an incentive to **cure,** because the entire goal of socialized medicine is to make people healthy, irrespective of any other (profit) considerations.

———————

More general statements about their socialized government:

The Austrians pay about the same amount in taxes that we do, and get 12-18 months **paid** maternity leave (combination of govt/employer-paid, with one year full pay and 6 months half pay, IIRC).

They get very effective healthcare which will not bankrupt them.

They also get a pension when they retire.

They do not have the disparate levels of wealth that we have, and, generally-speaking, everyone is taken care of. Certainly nobody can take issue with the German or Austrian work ethic, either. The whole boogeyman of “everyone will be lazy” is nonsense.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN]

What is it about the Austrian health care system that make it FAR superior to ours? Please explain.[/quote]

One example would be my mom’s best friend who had to have hip replacement surgery. In Austria, she got the surgery and had a longer hospital stay than U.S. counterparts (a good thing, no matter what they try to tell us), then was sent to a rehab facility (again, an in-patient facility) that is more like a spa, with special pools and massage therapies, etc. Essentially, they believe in a more holistic approach; and rather than send someone home the same day or day after a major procedure, they actually try to **heal** the patient, and make sure they are able to take care of themselves at home. We do no such thing here.

Another benefit of socialized medicine is that people can move freely between employers and careers. For example, my husband and I would like to start a business, but can’t because we’d lose the health benefits provided by his current employer. Socialized medicine would allow labor to move where it is most effective, and would enable our employers to be more competitive with foreign employers who do not have the burden of insuring their employees and the related “legacy costs.”

One more thing… A for-profit healthcare system is only profitable when people are sick. There is no incentive to **cure** people, only to “treat” them with expensive medicines and procedures. Ideally, from the perspective of a for-profit healthcare provider, the perfect patient is one who is chronically ill and requires medicine and treatments for an entire lifetime.

A socialized system has an incentive to **cure,** because the entire goal of socialized medicine is to make people healthy, irrespective of any other (profit) considerations.

———————

More general statements about their socialized government:

The Austrians pay about the same amount in taxes that we do, and get 12-18 months **paid** maternity leave (combination of govt/employer-paid, with one year full pay and 6 months half pay, IIRC).

They get very effective healthcare which will not bankrupt them.

They also get a pension when they retire.

They do not have the disparate levels of wealth that we have, and, generally-speaking, everyone is taken care of. Certainly nobody can take issue with the German or Austrian work ethic, either. The whole boogeyman of “everyone will be lazy” is nonsense.

[CA renter]

More (sorry)…

We pay the most per capita for healthcare:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_hea_car_fun_tot_per_cap-care-funding-total-per-capita

Have the highest total expenditure on health as a percentage of GDP:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_tot_exp_on_hea_as_of_gdp-health-total-expenditure-gdp

But are #22 for “healthy” life expectancy:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_lif_exp_hea_yea-health-life-expectancy-healthy-years

#47 for average life expectancy at birth:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_lif_exp_at_bir_tot_pop-life-expectancy-birth-total-population

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_lif_exp_hea_yea-health-life-expectancy-healthy-years

We’re #1!!! 😉 We have the highest levels of obesity:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_obe-health-obesity

Highest teen pregnancies:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_tee_pre-health-teenage-pregnancy

9th highest rate of death from cancer:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_dea_fro_can-health-death-from-cancer

Not even on the list of top 19 countries rated for “overall health performance”

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_ove_hea_per-health-overall-performance

———————-

Essentially, there is no truth to the notion that the for-profit, U.S. healthcare system is superior to a socialist healthcare system.

If anyone has any evidence to the contrary, I’d like to see it.

[CA renter]

More (sorry)…

We pay the most per capita for healthcare:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_hea_car_fun_tot_per_cap-care-funding-total-per-capita

Have the highest total expenditure on health as a percentage of GDP:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_tot_exp_on_hea_as_of_gdp-health-total-expenditure-gdp

But are #22 for “healthy” life expectancy:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_lif_exp_hea_yea-health-life-expectancy-healthy-years

#47 for average life expectancy at birth:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_lif_exp_at_bir_tot_pop-life-expectancy-birth-total-population

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_lif_exp_hea_yea-health-life-expectancy-healthy-years

We’re #1!!! 😉 We have the highest levels of obesity:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_obe-health-obesity

Highest teen pregnancies:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_tee_pre-health-teenage-pregnancy

9th highest rate of death from cancer:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_dea_fro_can-health-death-from-cancer

Not even on the list of top 19 countries rated for “overall health performance”

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_ove_hea_per-health-overall-performance

———————-

Essentially, there is no truth to the notion that the for-profit, U.S. healthcare system is superior to a socialist healthcare system.

If anyone has any evidence to the contrary, I’d like to see it.

[CA renter]

More (sorry)…

We pay the most per capita for healthcare:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_hea_car_fun_tot_per_cap-care-funding-total-per-capita

Have the highest total expenditure on health as a percentage of GDP:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_tot_exp_on_hea_as_of_gdp-health-total-expenditure-gdp

But are #22 for “healthy” life expectancy:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_lif_exp_hea_yea-health-life-expectancy-healthy-years

#47 for average life expectancy at birth:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_lif_exp_at_bir_tot_pop-life-expectancy-birth-total-population

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_lif_exp_hea_yea-health-life-expectancy-healthy-years

We’re #1!!! 😉 We have the highest levels of obesity:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_obe-health-obesity

Highest teen pregnancies:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_tee_pre-health-teenage-pregnancy

9th highest rate of death from cancer:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_dea_fro_can-health-death-from-cancer

Not even on the list of top 19 countries rated for “overall health performance”

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_ove_hea_per-health-overall-performance

———————-

Essentially, there is no truth to the notion that the for-profit, U.S. healthcare system is superior to a socialist healthcare system.

If anyone has any evidence to the contrary, I’d like to see it.

[CA renter]

More (sorry)…

We pay the most per capita for healthcare:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_hea_car_fun_tot_per_cap-care-funding-total-per-capita

Have the highest total expenditure on health as a percentage of GDP:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_tot_exp_on_hea_as_of_gdp-health-total-expenditure-gdp

But are #22 for “healthy” life expectancy:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_lif_exp_hea_yea-health-life-expectancy-healthy-years

#47 for average life expectancy at birth:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_lif_exp_at_bir_tot_pop-life-expectancy-birth-total-population

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_lif_exp_hea_yea-health-life-expectancy-healthy-years

We’re #1!!! 😉 We have the highest levels of obesity:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_obe-health-obesity

Highest teen pregnancies:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_tee_pre-health-teenage-pregnancy

9th highest rate of death from cancer:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_dea_fro_can-health-death-from-cancer

Not even on the list of top 19 countries rated for “overall health performance”

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_ove_hea_per-health-overall-performance

———————-

Essentially, there is no truth to the notion that the for-profit, U.S. healthcare system is superior to a socialist healthcare system.

If anyone has any evidence to the contrary, I’d like to see it.

[CA renter]

More (sorry)…

We pay the most per capita for healthcare:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_hea_car_fun_tot_per_cap-care-funding-total-per-capita

Have the highest total expenditure on health as a percentage of GDP:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_tot_exp_on_hea_as_of_gdp-health-total-expenditure-gdp

But are #22 for “healthy” life expectancy:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_lif_exp_hea_yea-health-life-expectancy-healthy-years

#47 for average life expectancy at birth:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_lif_exp_at_bir_tot_pop-life-expectancy-birth-total-population

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_lif_exp_hea_yea-health-life-expectancy-healthy-years

We’re #1!!! 😉 We have the highest levels of obesity:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_obe-health-obesity

Highest teen pregnancies:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_tee_pre-health-teenage-pregnancy

9th highest rate of death from cancer:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_dea_fro_can-health-death-from-cancer

Not even on the list of top 19 countries rated for “overall health performance”

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_ove_hea_per-health-overall-performance

———————-

Essentially, there is no truth to the notion that the for-profit, U.S. healthcare system is superior to a socialist healthcare system.

If anyone has any evidence to the contrary, I’d like to see it.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=AN]
It’s a fine line. I hope they pull it off. They didn’t reference Germany or other European country in their example of universal health care, but they reference Canada A LOT. I just hope they don’t go to that extreme. One huge difference between us vs everyone else is malpractice insurance. Here in the US, we can sue for almost anything. A doctor career can be destroyed by 1-2 lawsuit. That in itself contribute to the huge cost. That’s also one of the many reasons why 90% of med students decide to go into specialized area instead of general practice.

Sorry, I never have to look for health insurance. My employers have always provided that to me. So, it’s not the question of who should I choose but more a long the line of, PPO vs HMO. My health care insurance is better today than it was 6 years ago because the employer decided to give a really good plan. My out of pocket either stayed the same or went down (don’t remember exactly).[/quote]

Are you sure it’s not just the naysayers who are referencing Canada?

BTW, on the malpractice thing – my father is a MD (still practicing). Malpractice is an occupational hazard – it does not ruin an MD’s career unless it’s very extreme. All MD’s carry hefty malpractice insurance (btw, specialists, not GP’s are the most frequently sued). Most MD’s are sued several times during their career for malpractice. Yes, some of the extreme abuses need to be curtailed (and in many states, like CA, they already are), but it’s largely overblown. The average MD spends less than 5% of their salary on malpractice insurance. Curtailing malpractice clearly would not even come close to closing the cost gap between our healthcare system and other developed nations healthcare systems.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-03-04-malpractice-cover_x.htm

[SDEngineer]

[quote=AN]
It’s a fine line. I hope they pull it off. They didn’t reference Germany or other European country in their example of universal health care, but they reference Canada A LOT. I just hope they don’t go to that extreme. One huge difference between us vs everyone else is malpractice insurance. Here in the US, we can sue for almost anything. A doctor career can be destroyed by 1-2 lawsuit. That in itself contribute to the huge cost. That’s also one of the many reasons why 90% of med students decide to go into specialized area instead of general practice.

Sorry, I never have to look for health insurance. My employers have always provided that to me. So, it’s not the question of who should I choose but more a long the line of, PPO vs HMO. My health care insurance is better today than it was 6 years ago because the employer decided to give a really good plan. My out of pocket either stayed the same or went down (don’t remember exactly).[/quote]

Are you sure it’s not just the naysayers who are referencing Canada?

BTW, on the malpractice thing – my father is a MD (still practicing). Malpractice is an occupational hazard – it does not ruin an MD’s career unless it’s very extreme. All MD’s carry hefty malpractice insurance (btw, specialists, not GP’s are the most frequently sued). Most MD’s are sued several times during their career for malpractice. Yes, some of the extreme abuses need to be curtailed (and in many states, like CA, they already are), but it’s largely overblown. The average MD spends less than 5% of their salary on malpractice insurance. Curtailing malpractice clearly would not even come close to closing the cost gap between our healthcare system and other developed nations healthcare systems.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-03-04-malpractice-cover_x.htm

[SDEngineer]

[quote=AN]
It’s a fine line. I hope they pull it off. They didn’t reference Germany or other European country in their example of universal health care, but they reference Canada A LOT. I just hope they don’t go to that extreme. One huge difference between us vs everyone else is malpractice insurance. Here in the US, we can sue for almost anything. A doctor career can be destroyed by 1-2 lawsuit. That in itself contribute to the huge cost. That’s also one of the many reasons why 90% of med students decide to go into specialized area instead of general practice.

Sorry, I never have to look for health insurance. My employers have always provided that to me. So, it’s not the question of who should I choose but more a long the line of, PPO vs HMO. My health care insurance is better today than it was 6 years ago because the employer decided to give a really good plan. My out of pocket either stayed the same or went down (don’t remember exactly).[/quote]

Are you sure it’s not just the naysayers who are referencing Canada?

BTW, on the malpractice thing – my father is a MD (still practicing). Malpractice is an occupational hazard – it does not ruin an MD’s career unless it’s very extreme. All MD’s carry hefty malpractice insurance (btw, specialists, not GP’s are the most frequently sued). Most MD’s are sued several times during their career for malpractice. Yes, some of the extreme abuses need to be curtailed (and in many states, like CA, they already are), but it’s largely overblown. The average MD spends less than 5% of their salary on malpractice insurance. Curtailing malpractice clearly would not even come close to closing the cost gap between our healthcare system and other developed nations healthcare systems.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-03-04-malpractice-cover_x.htm

[SDEngineer]

[quote=AN]
It’s a fine line. I hope they pull it off. They didn’t reference Germany or other European country in their example of universal health care, but they reference Canada A LOT. I just hope they don’t go to that extreme. One huge difference between us vs everyone else is malpractice insurance. Here in the US, we can sue for almost anything. A doctor career can be destroyed by 1-2 lawsuit. That in itself contribute to the huge cost. That’s also one of the many reasons why 90% of med students decide to go into specialized area instead of general practice.

Sorry, I never have to look for health insurance. My employers have always provided that to me. So, it’s not the question of who should I choose but more a long the line of, PPO vs HMO. My health care insurance is better today than it was 6 years ago because the employer decided to give a really good plan. My out of pocket either stayed the same or went down (don’t remember exactly).[/quote]

Are you sure it’s not just the naysayers who are referencing Canada?

BTW, on the malpractice thing – my father is a MD (still practicing). Malpractice is an occupational hazard – it does not ruin an MD’s career unless it’s very extreme. All MD’s carry hefty malpractice insurance (btw, specialists, not GP’s are the most frequently sued). Most MD’s are sued several times during their career for malpractice. Yes, some of the extreme abuses need to be curtailed (and in many states, like CA, they already are), but it’s largely overblown. The average MD spends less than 5% of their salary on malpractice insurance. Curtailing malpractice clearly would not even come close to closing the cost gap between our healthcare system and other developed nations healthcare systems.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-03-04-malpractice-cover_x.htm

[Author]

Posts