Universal Healthcare? YES, we CAN!

The parts about the pharmaceutical costs are good.

I am of the opinion that a "universal" health plan should be about catastrophic coverage, in the event of something that would cost a patient more than 10,000 (just throwing a number out there for now). But in the everyday doctor visits, people should pay out of pocket and the prices are up to the medical practitioner and medical establishment (market based). When the insurance middle man is out of the equation, prices should come done drastically.

I say cut out the freakin' insurance man as much as possible and the catastrophic policy should be backed by the govt. (we pay enough in taxes already to cover this).

Not sure I want the IRS involved any more than they already are.

a reply to: toolgal462

Here's the problem with your reasoning. Catastrophic events become more likely over time from minor ailments. For example, being overweight eventually results in significantly more diabetes treatments, or not helping people quit smoking results in more lung cancer treatments which eventually mean catastrophic coverage payouts. It costs less money in the long run to do yearly checkups and get people into doctors offices early and often.

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: toolgal462

It costs less money in the long run to do yearly checkups and get people into doctors offices early and often.

How do you make Americans eat better and exercise more?

originally posted by: carewemust
How do you make Americans eat better and exercise more?

I've been thinking about this a lot for the past week. I live in Ohio, which is the fattest state, furthermore I live in the most obese area. Last week I was in San Diego for work and one of the things I noticed was that the people were overall much thinner. I would estimate the the average person weighed 75 pounds less.

Both states are under the same federal laws, but California has had the state step in and help out a bit too. In addition to some cultural differences. For example, one of the things I noticed was that the restaurants had a much more limited soda selection... it was generally Coke/Pepsi and maybe Sprite. There were very few actual options and most people settled for water or unsweet iced tea (often blended with a fruit like mango). Out here though, which identifies strongly with the deep south (despite the state bordering Canada), we have iced tea that's more sugar than water, and every restaurant has 10+ soda options. Additionally, the tap water is of lower quality (older cities=older pipe network), and unsweet tea is the exception, it happens to be my preferred beverage so I'm used to always having to clarify I want unsweet... it was not that way in San Diego.

Another thing I noticed was that soda was for the most part a bigger pain in the ass to get. In the company cafeteria for example, a 16oz bottle cost $4 while a 32? oz bottle of water was just $1.50.

Yet another change I noticed was in the amount of walking done. People would walk 4-6 blocks for lunch if they didn't want to eat at the company cafeteria, yet where I am in Ohio, even going half a block down the street usually involves getting in the car. The employers gave extra time for lunch for employees to do this too.

California is by no means perfect, but I noticed a major shift in culture between here and there. Even something as simple as the cooking recipes were different. There was relatively little sugar, most food was sweetened with fruit rather than sugar.

I don't think you have to be authoritarian to make people exercise and eat better, some financial incentives for doing so would probably generate enough encouragement on their own.

I just realized I didn't give any real solutions in that post, it was just a comparison:

I'm not really sure how any of these could be enforced, especially when scaled from a large business to a small one, but:
1. Company pays the tab for your lunch if you eat a salad and drink something that's lower in calories. Alternatively, gives you a longer lunch break. Reimburse the company with a tax cut.
2. Remove taxes on foods like fruits and vegetables. Add taxes on sugary junk food.
3. Mandatory posting of calories of all restaurant menu items (in many states, including Ohio this isn't required and is rarely done).
4. Bike lanes on roads.
5. Encourage biking... hydration stations on busy streets, better traffic laws, incentives for buying and using a bicycle, etc...

Maybe I can come up with more in the morning.

a reply to: Aazadan


Illinois tried to lower the diabetes and obesity rate by imposing a 1 cent per ounce penalty tax on sugary drinks. It was shot down by the public last month.

In San Diego, are there Burger Kings and McDonalds all over the place. They are as common here in the Chicago area as liquor stores.

a reply to: Aazadan

1. Company pays the tab for your lunch if you eat a salad and drink something that's lower in calories. Alternatively, gives you a longer lunch break. Reimburse the company with a tax cut.

That's something the companies need to work on. It would be hard to get them to do anything in today's economy but if we could get unemployment actually low enough so companies started competing for employees, something like that could take off without tax subsidies paying for it.

2. Remove taxes on foods like fruits and vegetables. Add taxes on sugary junk food.

Generally, I don't like the idea of using taxes to control behavior. Taxes should be fair, and that kinda tosses fairness out of the window. Laws control social behavior; taxes pay the bills.

3. Mandatory posting of calories of all restaurant menu items (in many states, including Ohio this isn't required and is rarely done).

I like that idea. No issue with requiring disclosure.

4. Bike lanes on roads.

Already being done in many cities, and both impractical and unneeded outside of cities.

5. Encourage biking... hydration stations on busy streets, better traffic laws, incentives for buying and using a bicycle, etc...

Maybe a public education push about the health benefits and cost savings of biking?

Maybe I can come up with more in the morning.

I hope you do.

Any change this big is going to come in stages. I even mentioned, I think on the first page, that this is not an all-inclusive plan. It is a framework to work from. We set up the framework and tweak it the next year... adjust it the following year... add a few restrictions as we find loopholes... that sort of thing. The part I am really interested in is clarifying that insurance is an option, not a mandate; healthcare should not be denied based on social status; medical professionals deserve to be paid; people have to be held responsible for their own choices, where possible.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
That's something the companies need to work on. It would be hard to get them to do anything in today's economy but if we could get unemployment actually low enough so companies started competing for employees, something like that could take off without tax subsidies paying for it.

The problem with that, is that lots of people don't like to eat healthy. A company sponsored meal is goign to naturally drift towards what is tastiest and cheapest. Healthy meals are rarely delicious and cheap. The market would push towards what employees most enjoy rather than what's best for them. For that reason I don't think we could make it an entirely market driven perk. There needs to be some government involvement in there to encourage healthy eating and I think the best way to do that is with a corporate tax break so that the company isn't on the hook for their employees eating habits.

Generally, I don't like the idea of using taxes to control behavior. Taxes should be fair, and that kinda tosses fairness out of the window. Laws control social behavior; taxes pay the bills.

Taxes have effectively shaped behavior before though. Tea taxes pushed coffee. Cigarette taxes pushed people to drop tobacco. Sugar taxes have been effective in reducing consumption. I would agree that it's a move we should be careful in using too often, but I think it's reasonable every now and then. Everything in moderation includes tax policy.

Already being done in many cities, and both impractical and unneeded outside of cities.

It depends. My town is small enough that I could ride a bike around town, but there's no sidewalks to ride on, and no median I can ride in. The only option is to take up a traffic lane and be a road hazard. I saw bike lanes just about everywhere in San Diego. I've taken a couple trips to Tucson in recent years and they're very pro bike (the most friendly bicycle city in the US actually). Copying them could have good results.

Maybe a public education push about the health benefits and cost savings of biking?

Maybe. I tend to think that water fountains on every block or every couple blocks couldn't be a bad thing regardless of bicycles though. It also encourages walking. Surprisingly, I've been finding that walking is more common in cities. People routinely walk a couple blocks to a subway/bus station, in small towns driving is much more common.

Any change this big is going to come in stages. I even mentioned, I think on the first page, that this is not an all-inclusive plan. It is a framework to work from. We set up the framework and tweak it the next year... adjust it the following year... add a few restrictions as we find loopholes... that sort of thing. The part I am really interested in is clarifying that insurance is an option, not a mandate; healthcare should not be denied based on social status; medical professionals deserve to be paid; people have to be held responsible for their own choices, where possible.

Access to health care is a big part of things, but it's still only a part. I think some measures can be taken to encourage public health care that reduces medical costs over a persons life. A little bit of exercise and better eating could go a long way towards people needing fewer doctors appointments.

originally posted by: TheRedneck

I am fed up with listening to idiots trying to drum up support or demonize these silly healthcare proposals. Not a single one fixes things. Not one. Not Obamacare, which made things worse, not the House plan which could be described as Obamacare lite without teeth, and not the Senate bill which is Obamacare with sprinkles.

There's only one plan that works. Canada has it. Copy Canada.

Either the government must leave health care alone, or it must take it over.

There's no "middle ground."

Obama had a great idea, to provide health care for all. The problem isn't Obama. The problem is that the Republicans opposed Obama, and after they fought it out, they arrived at "a compromise".

As British Prime Minister Lady Thatcher famously said,

"A compromise is the worst possible solution to a problem, because it is the only solution where nobody wins."

So, Obama din't "create Obamacare", this was the result of "a compromise" between what Obama wanted and what the Republicans would allow.

So, lets put the fault where it belongs, on "the compromise" solution.

Can't blame Obama, it was the best he could do, given the opposition.

Now, to fix it, either you have to "tear it up" and have no health care legislation at all, or "replace it" with the kind of health care that is known to be successful in other countries like Canada.

originally posted by: AMPTAH
There's only one plan that works. Canada has it. Copy Canada.

Look into Japan. They have a pretty good system, and given our age demographics are going to look similar in coming decades (especially if we clamp down on immigration) we'll be facing the same age related issues. It could be a good basis for a model. It's also not socialized. It's a free market system with a mandate.

a reply to: Aazadan

The problem with that, is that lots of people don't like to eat healthy.

I can't argue with that. I actually hate eating 'healthy,' but I love fresh fruits and veggies and avoid most high-sugar foods (the Mountain Dew makes up for that probably, though, lol).

The real problem is that fresh food is so much more expensive than processed food. When my wife was having to carefully watch carbs because of her blood sugar, we tried to find whole wheat products. Bread is 50% more for whole wheat, the store where we shop was getting about 75% extra for whole wheat crackers (they since quit even carrying them), and whole wheat flour tops in at almost 5 times the cost of white flour!

I can get a pound of canned tomatoes on sale for 89 cents. If I find fresh tomatoes for $1.19 a pound, it's a minor miracle. Spinach is 89 cents a can, and $2.50 for a small bag of fresh.

There's our problem: the high cost of good food. It's not something we can effectively promote via government as long as the free market is fighting us tooth and nail.

Taxes have effectively shaped behavior before though.

Yes, they have been used, but once we began using taxation to control social actions, the impetus is there to use taxation to control other actions. Obamacare is the perfect example of using taxation to force actions: the idea was to provide subsidies to purchase insurance and taxation on non-compliance. The idea was great! If everyone buys insurance, then the costs of high-risk policies will be spread out. The reality became that in order to ensure actual compliance, the insurance plans had to be standardized, which raised costs even faster than before and eventually forced out competition and left monopolies in charge.

Good concept, but completely unworkable in reality... and many warned about this exact problem before it was passed. Any taxation scheme that tries to shape public actions inherently contains the same danger.

It depends. My town is small enough that I could ride a bike around town, but there's no sidewalks to ride on, and no median I can ride in.

That sounds like a good place to get involved. I like the idea of bicycle trails, and I especially like the idea of free water dispensaries scattered around. A small town is the easiest to get something good accomplished in, because your vote is more valuable and your voice can reach a larger percentage of the people.

Access to health care is a big part of things, but it's still only a part. I think some measures can be taken to encourage public health care that reduces medical costs over a persons life. A little bit of exercise and better eating could go a long way towards people needing fewer doctors appointments.

I agree. The only thing we have to decide is how to go about accomplishing the goals while still allowing personal freedom.

TheRedneck

When cutting down or eliminating carbs I found savings on prepared, boxed and junk food more than made up for extra costs on meat, real dairy and fresh vegetables.

Ive also replaced all vegetable based oils with animal based to cut inflammation and it's associated issues with heart disease and arteriosclerosis.

Rounding all that out with lots of vitamins.

I can grill chuck steaks, serve huge spinach salad, grill zucchini and squash with seasonings and wash down with unsweetened tea for far less than going to McDonalds and feeding family 1/4 pounder meals.

For snacks, beef jerky, almonds and hard cheese works very well and staves off hunger for long time.

The so called food pyramid supported by physicians, medical establishment and government is just about criminal in its promotion of carbs.

originally posted by: Phoenix
When cutting down or eliminating carbs I found savings on prepared, boxed and junk food more than made up for extra costs on meat, real dairy and fresh vegetables.

Ive also replaced all vegetable based oils with animal based to cut inflammation and it's associated issues with heart disease and arteriosclerosis.

The issue I've found with that, is that cooking takes time. Higher costs for food, as well as the cost of whatever you value your time at to prepare it. A restaurant is almost always the cheaper option (though finding healthy restaurants can be a challenge).

I've found slow cookers to be invaluable for this reason. They have little prep, can cook a wide variety of foods, low cleaning overhead, and don't require constant supervision. Now that I have a bit of money coming in, I've been a fan of premade salads too. They're expensive but quick to make, and not burdened with all the processed food junk.

Apparently the ObamaCare insurance markets are not "Stabilizing" as Democrats say that they are, year after year.

Look at these staggering premium increase charts for 2018, and over the past 4 years...

www.zerohedge.com...

What the hell can a bi-partisan commission do before September 28th? That's when the 2018 system is locked-down and tested for the commencement of 11.1.2017 Open Enrollment.