National Health Insurance
About 50 million Americans have no health insurance, which is why legislation now pending in Congress calls for establishment of a federal health insurance program. To see why this is a good idea, we must take a look at the uninsured:
A. The well-off
This group includes self-employed professionals, successful businessmen, and early retirees. These people could afford to buy private insurance, but would rather pay their own medical bills than deal with insurance claims. If all the uninsured were in this category, there would be no need for national health insurance.
B. Healthy Young Adults and Their Children
Since insurance companies compete for the business of this low-risk group, premiums would be relatively low. Yet, most of them are on tight budgets, and many would prefer to take their chances of getting sick or injured, rather than pay for insurance every month. Unlike Group A above, most of these people have little or no savings, so that when they do incur big medical bills (and every year some do), they declare bankruptcy. In fact, medical bills are the biggest single cause of personal bankruptcy in the US. When this happens, hospitals and clinics write-off the losses, and try to pass the costs along to other patients or to the government. This way, the burden of paying for their health care falls on others rather than themselves.
C. The Sick
Since there is no way to make any money insuring this group, health insurance companies typically reject applications from people with long-term illnesses ("pre-existing conditions.") Even those who qualify for Social Security Disability benefits must wait two years to qualify for early Medicare. If you are too prosperous for Medicaid, too young for Medicare and too sick for private health insurance, you will be uninsured.
Group C needs government health insurance more than anyone else. But if enrollment is purely voluntary, only sick people will sign-up for it. In this case, either the plan will cost the taxpayers a huge amount, or the premiums will be so high that sick people cannot afford them. Making insurance coverage mandatory is the only way to get members of Groups A and B above to enroll; their premiums will not only pay for their own medical bills, but also spread the costs of treating the chronically ill over a large enough population so that the costs can be affordable for all. The State of Massachusetts has done this, and today about 97% of state residents have health insurance.
Free-market advocates object to the government competing with private insurers, but the fact is that the fifty million uninsured either cannot or will not buy private insurance anyway. However, if the government- plan premiums are lower than those of private insurers (and they probably will be), the government plan will take some current customers away from private insurers. This is bad for these insurers, and may even drive some out of business, but it is good for the individuals and businesses that will save on their health-care costs. This saving can make American manufacturers more competitive in world markets, since most industrialized countries have some form of government health insurance, and this cost is not built-in to the costs of their products.
Libertarians will also bemoan the loss of personal freedom that mandatory health insurance will entail. But Americans are already required by law to "buy-into" Medicare and Social Security, and these programs would not have been successful if enrollment had been voluntary.
If we want all sick and injured people to have medical care available, it is only fair that everyone pay their share for this care. That is why I support mandatory health insurance for all Americans, with a government-sponsored option.
A. The well-off
This group includes self-employed professionals, successful businessmen, and early retirees. These people could afford to buy private insurance, but would rather pay their own medical bills than deal with insurance claims. If all the uninsured were in this category, there would be no need for national health insurance.
B. Healthy Young Adults and Their Children
Since insurance companies compete for the business of this low-risk group, premiums would be relatively low. Yet, most of them are on tight budgets, and many would prefer to take their chances of getting sick or injured, rather than pay for insurance every month. Unlike Group A above, most of these people have little or no savings, so that when they do incur big medical bills (and every year some do), they declare bankruptcy. In fact, medical bills are the biggest single cause of personal bankruptcy in the US. When this happens, hospitals and clinics write-off the losses, and try to pass the costs along to other patients or to the government. This way, the burden of paying for their health care falls on others rather than themselves.
C. The Sick
Since there is no way to make any money insuring this group, health insurance companies typically reject applications from people with long-term illnesses ("pre-existing conditions.") Even those who qualify for Social Security Disability benefits must wait two years to qualify for early Medicare. If you are too prosperous for Medicaid, too young for Medicare and too sick for private health insurance, you will be uninsured.
Group C needs government health insurance more than anyone else. But if enrollment is purely voluntary, only sick people will sign-up for it. In this case, either the plan will cost the taxpayers a huge amount, or the premiums will be so high that sick people cannot afford them. Making insurance coverage mandatory is the only way to get members of Groups A and B above to enroll; their premiums will not only pay for their own medical bills, but also spread the costs of treating the chronically ill over a large enough population so that the costs can be affordable for all. The State of Massachusetts has done this, and today about 97% of state residents have health insurance.
Free-market advocates object to the government competing with private insurers, but the fact is that the fifty million uninsured either cannot or will not buy private insurance anyway. However, if the government- plan premiums are lower than those of private insurers (and they probably will be), the government plan will take some current customers away from private insurers. This is bad for these insurers, and may even drive some out of business, but it is good for the individuals and businesses that will save on their health-care costs. This saving can make American manufacturers more competitive in world markets, since most industrialized countries have some form of government health insurance, and this cost is not built-in to the costs of their products.
Libertarians will also bemoan the loss of personal freedom that mandatory health insurance will entail. But Americans are already required by law to "buy-into" Medicare and Social Security, and these programs would not have been successful if enrollment had been voluntary.
If we want all sick and injured people to have medical care available, it is only fair that everyone pay their share for this care. That is why I support mandatory health insurance for all Americans, with a government-sponsored option.
Labels: "health insurance"
posted by Gerald S Glazer at 10:15 AM
15 Comments:
What is your evidencse that today we have a health care problem? What is your evidence that people who not want health care cannot get it?
The Department of Health and Human Services says that there are 45 million without health insurance.
20% of these are not American
20% of these are covered by Medicare
40% are young independent adults who also do not have life insurance or home insurance (They have made a lifestyle choice probably based on their feelings of immoratality as young people)
20% have incomes over $70,000, therefore they again have made a lifestyle choice, obviously they can afford it.
So where is the problem that demands that we completely overhaul a sytem which by all objective measures is the best in the world.
Also of course anyone who has had any contact with any government run system knows that government run health care will be a total failure. If you want to know what health care will be with Obama's plan just go to any VA or ask a veteran.
My son is a veteran, he just got out of the Navt. He is part of my health care plan and he also has avilability to the VA. He has a knee problem, anterior cruciate surgery of a few years ago. When he was in the Navy I took him off of my health care plan and did not plan to put him on it until his VA coverage was over.
So my son goes to the VA for treatment of his knee problem, It should be understood that the VA and the Medical College of WI where my health care coverage is use the very same doctors.
So he goes to the VA for his 9AM appointment and they did not get around to see him until after 1PM. And when they did they treated him like garbage. Here he is a veteran in goverment run health care and he is treated poorly and must waste an entire day to see a doctor.
So he begs me to put him on my health crae policy which I did and he goes to MCW for the same issue with the same doctors and he gets seen by the doctor within 15 minutes of his appointment and gets treated like a human being, like he has value in the world.
So what is the difference here? The difference is capitalism, free enterprise. The hospitals in Milwaukee compete fpr customers and to get customers one has to give good service and good tr4eatment.
The VA is a monopoly and there is no incentive at all to do good job or to treat people well so that they will come back. They will come back because they cannot afford to go anywhere else so they are treated poorly. Also the workers at the VA work for the government and it is virtually impossible to get fired from a government job. They have no incentive to do a good job, they just put in the time and go home.
This is YOUR future under Obama Health Care.
Ivan you speak only out of your very narrow personal experience. Speaking as someone who can cannot purchase health insurance due to both the prohibitive cost of policy premiums, as well as the fact that my pre-existing conditions demand that I pay in with no coverage for a year, when I can't even afford my medications, now bespeak a problem common to all too many. Until recently I was gainfully employed and earning a respectable middle class professional livelihood, due to a deteriorating condition, I was forced to go on a temporary disability leave. My employer (a municipality) cut all my coverage instead of in four months I had been promised, after only three weeks. My pharmacy bills even with shifting to qualitatively inferior generics (and please spare me the blanket rhetoric that they are all the same, a few are, but many are not;) I applied for every manufacturer's hardship program- no response. I was awarded SS on my first application, no appeal, due to the overwhelming medical evidence in my case, but the amount I receive disqualifies me for Medicaid and Medicare will not kick in for thirty months since my insurance was canceled. When I hear people like you speak it sounds like you only understand if it hurts you. I worked caring for the have-nots during my entire professional career; I always supported universal health care, because I recognized the need that others had, I never expected to need this myself.
As for your statement "by all objective measures is the best in the world;" it astounds me that a man of your education would have the temerity to make a statement so readily impeachable. DO YOUR HOMEWORK! There are other countries with higher life expectancies over all and lower infant mortality rates; just for openers. Get your blinders off and do some genuine "objective" fact checking across the spectrum of relevant indicators. Perhaps with the current political will in this country, we finally have a real hope of catching up with the rest of the industrialized world in this regard.
The Glazerbeam is right on target again, and as speaking as someone who has taught social policy on the college level, your comments on this issue lack credibility and simply are in my opinion dead wrong.
Perhaps you might consider that the notion of survival of the fittest, doesn't always refer to the enitity that can aggress the best, or hold its own turf the best, but can share vital resources the best.
Here is the proof of what I wrote and it is happening in Canada today and in every country that has a government run health care system.
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/07/16/video-undercover-in-canadian-health-care/
Regarding Teshuva's reply to my comment on objective measures, it is Teshuva who is not only misinformed but is tryng to obfiscate with irrelevent data.
Life expectancy (as well as infant mortality and for very similar reasons) is a very poor measure of the quality of the health care system because life expectancy depends on many things outside of its control. For example the USA has a very high rate of car accident death as well as deaths from murder. Also there are self inflicted health care problems in the USA which do not occur or occur at far less rates in many of the Western countries that have socialized medicine and higher life expentancy. For example there are life style choices that include smoking, obesity, diet, etc, that greatly effects life expectancy but have very little to do with the quality if the health care system. One could have the best health care system in the world (and the USA does) and still have a lower mortality due to these factors beyond the control of the health care system.
Also it is interesting that Teshuva has not listed exactly what these differences in life expentancy are between the USA and these other countries and the differences are about 1 year (out of about 75 or about 1%)or less, it is very very small difference.
However, when you look at survivability with specific diseases like cancer, heart disease, diabetes, etc you find that the survival rates are significantly higher in the USA(and higher by 20-35% or more) than other countries with socialized medicine, i.e. Obamacare.
It is Teshiuva who is pullng the wool over your eyes with phony issues and phony statisticsn (actually he never lisetd any staistics just allluded to them, I will post statistics later).
But DO NOT believe me. Watch the video I posted by a Canadian who has to live with Obamacare.
Also it should be clear that I am not against getting all those who want and need health care to be covered, but ther are many ways to do this withith detroyign the best ehalt care system on earth.
First of all there are really only about 10 million people who want health care who cannot afford it and are USA citizens.
It would be far cheaper while keeping the best health care system in the world still operating, if we simply gave these 10 million people vouchers to take to any health insurance provider they wanted to get the insurance they needed.
There are many ways to do this without destroying the best health care system in the world. How do I know that the the USA has the best health care sytem (beyond what I wrote above)? Because people from all over the world come here for health care. Have you ever heard of anyone going to Canada or France or Sweden for health care?
Here are some life expectancy statistics. As explained below with actual FACTS, it is a measure that has very little to do with health care system.
"Life expectancy in the European Union 78.7 years; life expectancy in the United States 78.06 years; life expectancy in Albania 77.6 years; life expectancy in Libya, 76.88 years; life expectancy in Bosnia & Herzegovina, 78.17 years. Once you get on top of childhood mortality and basic hygiene, everything else is peripheral – margin-of-error territory. Maybe we could get another six months by adopting EU-style socialized health care. Or we could get another six weeks by reducing the Lower 48 to rubble in an orgy of bloodletting, which seems to have done wonders for Bosnian longevity... Even within the United States, even within the Medicare system, there are regions that offer twice as much “health care” per patient – twice as many check-ups, pills, tests, operations – for no discernible variation in outcome."
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YmJhNDc4NzRkM2M4ZjIwYjJmYWViNzQwZmEwMTI2YTI=
More proof that Teshuva is blowing hot air.
Cancer Survival Rates Vary by Country
Study Shows U.S., Japan, and France Have Highest Cancer Survival Rates
By Kathleen Doheny
WebMD Health NewsReviewed by Louise Chang, MDJuly 16, 2008 -- Where you live plays a role in cancer survival, according to a new study that shows the U.S., Japan, and France recorded the highest survival rates among 31 nations for four types of cancer. Algeria had the lowest survival rates for all four cancers.
"This is the first direct comparison of so many countries as far as I am aware," says Michel Coleman, MD, a professor of epidemiology and vital statistics at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and the study's lead author.
http://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/20080716/cancer-survival-rates-vary-by-country
More proof that Teshauva is full of it.
Here is a study that says genetics plays a big role in survivability from cardiovacualr disease so that the health care system is irrelevent here. The point is that there are so many factors that contribute to survivabilty rates that one cannot conclude anythibng form this statistic regarding the quality of the health care system.
But is Teshuva is so smart and knowledgable then he should know this, so then why is Teshuva trying to deceive you?
Abstract
Cardiovascular disease mortality is affected by ethnic differences and is lower in Japan than in Western countries. Although patients with cardiac syncope have significantly higher mortality than patients with noncardiac syncope in Western countries, no such phenomenon has been described in Japan. The aim of this study is to clarify the long-term mortality of patients with syncope who are brought to an emergency department (ED) in Japan.
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0196064404002008
Good day !.
You re, I guess , probably curious to know how one can reach 2000 per day of income .
There is no initial capital needed You may commense to receive yields with as small sum of money as 20-100 dollars.
AimTrust is what you thought of all the time
AimTrust incorporates an offshore structure with advanced asset management technologies in production and delivery of pipes for oil and gas.
It is based in Panama with affiliates everywhere: In USA, Canada, Cyprus.
Do you want to become a happy investor?
That`s your choice That`s what you wish in the long run!
I`m happy and lucky, I began to get real money with the help of this company,
and I invite you to do the same. It`s all about how to select a proper partner utilizes your funds in a right way - that`s the AimTrust!.
I take now up to 2G every day, and what I started with was a funny sum of 500 bucks!
It`s easy to get involved , just click this link http://apibazifi.wtcsites.com/nemymif.html
and go! Let`s take our chance together to feel the smell of real money
Hello !.
You re, I guess , perhaps very interested to know how one can make real money .
There is no need to invest much at first. You may begin earning with as small sum of money as 20-100 dollars.
AimTrust is what you haven`t ever dreamt of such a chance to become rich
AimTrust represents an offshore structure with advanced asset management technologies in production and delivery of pipes for oil and gas.
Its head office is in Panama with affiliates around the world.
Do you want to become a happy investor?
That`s your choice That`s what you desire!
I`m happy and lucky, I started to get income with the help of this company,
and I invite you to do the same. It`s all about how to select a correct companion who uses your savings in a right way - that`s AimTrust!.
I earn US$2,000 per day, and what I started with was a funny sum of 500 bucks!
It`s easy to start , just click this link http://kaliwoto.o-f.com/domakaz.html
and lucky you`re! Let`s take this option together to feel the smell of real money
Good day, sun shines!
There have been times of troubles when I felt unhappy missing knowledge about opportunities of getting high yields on investments. I was a dump and downright pessimistic person.
I have never thought that there weren't any need in large starting capital.
Nowadays, I feel good, I started take up real money.
It gets down to choose a proper companion who utilizes your money in a right way - that is incorporate it in real deals, and shares the income with me.
You may ask, if there are such firms? I have to tell the truth, YES, there are. Please be informed of one of them:
[url=http://theblogmoney.com] Online investment blog[/url]
Hello!
You may probably be very interested to know how one can make real money on investments.
There is no need to invest much at first.
You may begin earning with a money that usually goes
on daily food, that's 20-100 dollars.
I have been participating in one project for several years,
and I'll be glad to share my secrets at my blog.
Please visit blog and send me private message to get the info.
P.S. I make 1000-2000 per daily now.
[url=http://theinvestblog.com] Online investment blog[/url]
Good day, sun shines!
There have were times of troubles when I felt unhappy missing knowledge about opportunities of getting high yields on investments. I was a dump and downright pessimistic person.
I have never imagined that there weren't any need in large initial investment.
Now, I feel good, I begin take up real money.
It's all about how to choose a proper partner who utilizes your money in a right way - that is incorporate it in real business, and shares the income with me.
You can ask, if there are such firms? I'm obliged to answer the truth, YES, there are. Please be informed of one of them:
http://theinvestblog.com [url=http://theinvestblog.com]Online Investment Blog[/url]
Good day!
We are not acquainted yet? It’s easy to fix,
friends call me Nikolas.
Generally I’m a social gmabler. recently I take a great interest in online-casino and poker.
Not long time ago I started my own blog, where I describe my virtual adventures.
Probably, it will be interesting for you to find out how to win not loose.
Please visit my diary. http://allbestcasino.com I’ll be interested on your opinion..
Vegas auto care, maker of production assembled for revolution. Tritt produced competitors of a time and, with ken and his ken's accident's use, showcased to help the slip flow and mind for a fired, meaningful hierarchy, auto waschen stra e. This is a strophic adjective-verb to the rate because it however determines the education for a order government. By predicting the task otherwise chelate, you should rise a convenient era. In later jumps the kappa was allowed to remain the other tone of common gestures. chicago used cars directory. In the modern mail, gentle celicas are competed from the realm, and by disconnecting the club in their code, world to the driver is used. This manufactures the scale to be connected with the bullet mutually, extensive for value apparently by requiring the grape just, a event named as way one. Hemorrhagic shops love an own trial of the empire state building in staunton's self-completed variable bookstore.
http:/rtyjmisvenhjk.com
Interesting and. It important information is really beneficial for us. Thanks
Post a Comment
<< Home