Have you ever noticed this about the Democrat health care plan?

[Questor]

The problem is costs. The plans address coverage. Why aren't they working on the problem?

[magooch]

We're talking about government here.  When has government ever helped costs go down--especially a Dumbocratic controlled government?  We can have cheap health-care insurance if we are willing to accept minimal care and eschew all the modern technology and specialists.  Health-care ain't what it once was and I for one am here because of it.

Government might help a little by fiddling around with the margins, but quality health-care insurance is going to continue to be costly.

[oldandslow]

Well, as someone who is old enough that Medicare is my only option, I have to admit that it works pretty well. I get very little benefit from it as I'm in pretty good shape for an old geezer except for arthritis. It has benefited my wife quite a bit though. I have no idea how the drug part of Medicare is. We retained our drug plan from the company I retired from as it appears to be much better than Medicare's plan.

The thing is, Medicare is about broke and no one want's to do anything about it. All the present bunch of jokers in Washington wants to do is cut it back so they can get more control over everyone else.

If you want an example of how well the government can estimate the cost of a government program, any program, just look at Medicare. Look up the figures projected for it's cost when Lyndon and Company dreamed it up and then look up what it has actually cost.

[Foxxtrot]

1) tort reform
2) insurance across state lines
3) Association group plans
4) tax credit for entrepreneurs and  those with fewer than 50 employees for coverage
5) tax credit for doctors that provide over 100 hours a years (pro bono) with a free health clinic

This doesn't have to be a 2000 page bill, just about 25 pages could do a great deal to help the situation. Less govt is the answer.

What did PJ O'Rourk say...." If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it is free."

[Dances with Geoducks]

Yeah if they took out the 300 page RFID chip rider, it would lighten it up.

Kinda funny how some states are now writing anti RFID chip laws.

Even funnier, some of them are the far left states

[thxmrgarand]

The problem is that we have overwhelming evidence that this government doing anything is going to be worse for tax-paying middle class Americans than having the government do nothing.  Whatever this federal government touches is bound to be unfair to those who pay the bills, is certain to enrich bureaucrats, minorities and people represented by million-dollar lobbyists.  So it is a very reasonabe response for most working class people to advocate for no government, less government, and a change in government before we want this government to do anything.  Therefore we do not want a federal health care plan so long as we cannot trust the federal government to do anything in a reasonably efficient and fair way.

With the loss of high wage manufacturing jobs and the aging of the US population we may see more and more white Americans wanting some of the same governmentally dictated advantages that minorities have enjoyed for over a generation.  For instance, working Americans may say that if manufacturing jobs disappear then before taking a job at Walmart they want assurance that their children and grandchildren can receive the very special consideration by colleges that minorities began receiving back in the 1960's.  I know so many people who say that they have supported this government for their entire working life and now it's their turn for the government to give them something back exactly as the government has kept so many on the dole/payroll.

[dukkillr]

1) tort reform
2) insurance across state lines
3) Association group plans
4) tax credit for entrepreneurs and  those with fewer than 50 employees for coverage
5) tax credit for doctors that provide over 100 hours a years (pro bono) with a free health clinic

This doesn't have to be a 2000 page bill, just about 25 pages could do a great deal to help the situation. Less govt is the answer.

What did PJ O'Rourk say...." If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it is free."

I like these ideas, but whatever is done must cover those who do not have insurance.  Your list doesn't mention them.  To me there are two options on this front:
1) Get rid of the rules requiring that hospitals take everyone who is urgently sick or injured regardless of insurance or ability to pay
2) Make everyone get insurance, much like you are required to have in order to drive

The problem is that perhaps the answer should be 1, but it's not socially or politically possible.  EMTALA is not going anywhere, which means regardless of what we say or do, those of us who have health insurance will continue to pay for those who dont.  The question is, how do we make that as logical and economical as possible?

[Dixie Dude]

85% of the uninsured are offered insurance at their work, but don't take it.  The rest listed from Foxxtrot wouldn't cost the government anything and would lower costs. 

[jhm]

     I am 63 yrs old and have had health care insurance since I was 18, for many yrs we only had 1 TV and it was a B&W, not COLOR, we thought of savings and insurance as the 2 most important BILLS we had to pay B4 the good time shopping spree was to take place, since then we had 4 children 1 of them a vary special child, and due to the ins. he is now 42 yrs old and goes deer hunting with us.   I have had to pay Ins premiums all my life and only on some moccasions do I wish I could get away from it.  I am a DIABETIC for 10 yrs now, I had a STROKE 8 yrs. ago I had throat cancer 6 yrs. ago, and 5 yrs ago I had a QUAD by-pass, now all sounds good dont it because of INSURANCE but I still take 14 Prescriptions a month it was 28 at one time, there is a cutoff on our ins. at 80% and I am on the hook for the other 20%, YES there is a stop clause for a year if it all would have happened in a yr, it would have all been covered by the ins. however it was ALL outside of that yearly coverage, I paid all the 20% out of my pocket not from any government, I pay every Month on the 14 pres. and some of the co-pays are $60 ea, now if the government wants to insure the whole country, FRETURN ALL THE MONEY I HAVE BEEN OUT FOR ALL THESE YEARS AND GET ME DOWN TO THE SAME LEVEL AS THE SORRY ARS PEOPLE WHO WINE AND COMPLAIN THAT THE GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO GIVE IT TO ME ATTITUDE, THATS BOTH PARTIES BY THE WAY.  Forget this health care BS and get the country back to work they are using the health care issue as a crutch so they can, we spent all our time on health car. Jim

[magooch]

People need to keep in mind that there is a big difference between "health-care" and health-care insurance.  The government needs to stay out of health-care except where it can make it better by limiting liabilities etc. against doctors and hospitals.  Government might also have a legitimate roll in setting certain standards, but I would prefer competition.

Government can fascilitate the ability and insentive for people to purchase health-care insurance in a lot of cases where an employer doesn't provide the benefit.  The full cost of the premium should be deductible from one's income taxes.

There is already a program to provide coverage for folks who absolutely can't pay their own way (Medicaid).

So it seems to me that instead of reinventing the whole shebang, it might be better for government to figure out how to dig the fraud and abuse out of the systems that are already in place (Medicare and Medicaid) and also figure out how to pay for it.

There will still be people who will not want to spend the money for insurance, but there is a way to address that problem too.  I belong to an HMO that has all of their own clinics and hospitals, or contract with private hospitals in areas where they don't have their own.  You must be a member to be able to use their fascilities.  You can't just walk in and demand to be taken care of if you aren't a member.

Insurance companies should be able to offer some very reasonable insurance policies for people who only want to have catastrophic coverage with fairly high deductibles.  I absolutely disagree with the analogy of state government requiring insurance as they do for drivers.  Drivers are forced to buy liability insurance--not comprehensive.  In a free country you should have the right to put youself in jeopardy, but not your victims.