What would you give up for universal healthcare?

[SezMe]

At least nobody can say that applecorped didn't step up to the plate when all the chips were on the line.

 

[Travis]

Who cares about insurance? I'd much prefer universal health care than universal health care insurance. I see no reason to sponsor corporate welfare for insurance companies.

Yes, that would be ideal. Good luck with it.

 

[Darat]

Who cares about insurance? I'd much prefer universal health care than universal health care insurance. I see no reason to sponsor corporate welfare for insurance companies.

You could find that a universal insurance based UHC could be more effective than a "single payer" UHC. From reading about UHCs other than the UK NHSs I'm of the opinion that a "mixed-payer" system probably offers the best way (i.e. the balance of outcomes v. costs) to ensure good universal health care coverage for everyone.

 

[ddt]

Yep, it's true, and the ironic part is that Bismarck installed it to ward off the influence of the evil socialists back at the time.

(anecdote) And in the 1980s, I heard in private a long-time SED member proudly point out that Germany's UHC scheme was set up by the Iron Chancellor.

Try UHC some time. That means: everybody who can pay for UHC pays for everybody. Including themselves.

And I very much doubt that all of your 300 million citizens pay into your "Socialized Medicine Scheme".

I guess sarge is insured by the Veterans Affairs Health Care scheme, in which case he is right.

 

[Trakar]

You could find that a universal insurance based UHC could be more effective than a "single payer" UHC. From reading about UHCs other than the UK NHSs I'm of the opinion that a "mixed-payer" system probably offers the best way (i.e. the balance of outcomes v. costs) to ensure good universal health care coverage for everyone.

"Single-payer" is, IMO, still health care insurance, not universal, public health care. I'm talking more about government owned and run hospitals and clinics with government employee staff and care-givers. Complete nationalization of the health care system. This doesn't mean that there isn't room for private health care alternatives/supplemental service for those who would rather pay for the service, but it would have a much reduced role and potential.

In other words, rather than basically extending medicare to everyone where you pump federal money into private health care businesses (which is the closest US approximation to a major single-payer healthcare system), I'm talking more about extending VAMC (Veteran's Administration Medical Care) to everyone where there are federal hospitals and clinics in every community.

 

[bookitty]

"Single-payer" is, IMO, still health care insurance, not universal, public health care. I'm talking more about government owned and run hospitals and clinics with government employee staff and care-givers. Complete nationalization of the health care system. This doesn't mean that there isn't room for private health care alternatives/supplemental service for those who would rather pay for the service, but it would have a much reduced role and potential.

In other words, rather than basically extending medicare to everyone where you pump federal money into private health care businesses (which is the closest US approximation to a major single-payer healthcare system), I'm talking more about extending VAMC (Veteran's Administration Medical Care) to everyone where there are federal hospitals and clinics in every community.

Agreed.

 

[sarge]

Rather then respond to all of the asinine assumptions Individually, I'll say to all of them:

I am the beneficiary of the very best health care in the world, and it is delivered to me with virtually no waiting, and it is delivered at almost no cost to me. I even enjoy free prescription medicines and free OTC medicines. So yes, a US UHC scheme will absolutely cost me more and result in reduced access to care for me.

You all assumed that I was referring to the US health care "system". I was not. You also managed to fail to read the part where I said that my personal situation has no bearing on whether a UHC system would be better for most Americans. Indeed, I made not a single statement that a careful reader could have construed as opposing a UHC system for the US.

 

[sarge]

"Single-payer" is, IMO, still health care insurance, not universal, public health care. I'm talking more about government owned and run hospitals and clinics with government employee staff and care-givers. Complete nationalization of the health care system. This doesn't mean that there isn't room for private health care alternatives/supplemental service for those who would rather pay for the service, but it would have a much reduced role and potential.

In other words, rather than basically extending medicare to everyone where you pump federal money into private health care businesses (which is the closest US approximation to a major single-payer healthcare system), I'm talking more about extending VAMC (Veteran's Administration Medical Care) to everyone where there are federal hospitals and clinics in every community.

Pick a better model. The VA system is among the least successful health care delivery systems in the developed world. Suggest you model it after military medical care. Some folks are not aware that Military health care and VA health care are not only not the same, they aren't even similar.

 

[RandFan]

Rather then respond to all of the asinine assumptions Individually, I'll say to all of them:

I am the beneficiary of the very best health care in the world, and it is delivered to me with virtually no waiting, and it is delivered at almost no cost to me. I even enjoy free prescription medicines and free OTC medicines. So yes, a US UHC scheme will absolutely cost me more and result in reduced access to care for me.

You all assumed that I was referring to the US health care "system". I was not. You also managed to fail to read the part where I said that my personal situation has no bearing on whether a UHC system would be better for most Americans. Indeed, I made not a single statement that a careful reader could have construed as opposing a UHC system for the US.

You showed us. Then again, I've no idea what your point is. But thanks for making it.

 

[Frank Newgent]

My wife was in a extremely serious car (actually pickup truck) accident recently. Professional assured us a helicopter Medi-Vac flight from the small town hospital to a real trauma center was needed. How could one reasonably disagree?

Turns out they were correct, her 2nd (cervical) vertebrae was fractured in three places.

And already got a bill from the Medi-Vac company stating I'd need to agree to pay the amount they were asking (in case my auto and health insurance providers contested the amount) before a claim could be filed.

The amount they were billing came in at just over $36,000 for a forty-two mile flight.

I find such to be objectionable.

 

[Eskarina]

I am already the beneficiary of the single greatest health care scheme on the planet, bar none. Any other system will guarantee a decreasing benefit for me.

Evidence? Citation needed.

I am reasonably aware of what constitutes a UHC system. UHC will provide me with longer waits and less effective care at a greater cost than I now enjoy.......guaranteed.

Evidence? Citation needed.

Of course, that alone has no bearing on whether or not a UHC system (any UHC system) would or would not provide a greater ROI for all Americans.

Evidence? Citation needed.

All 300 million Americans fund the US Goverment, even though the half of us that actually pay taxes carry the half that do not.

Even the little babes in their cradles?

And if you roll your eyes at me again, I'll roll them across the floor.*

* not really. It's just something I used to say to my adolescent children when they acted like you did in your post.

Just the facts, please.

 

[Tatyana]

My wife was in a extremely serious car (actually pickup truck) accident recently. Professional assured us a helicopter Medi-Vac flight from the small town hospital to a real trauma center was needed. How could one reasonably disagree?

Turns out they were correct, her 2nd (cervical) vertebrae was fractured in three places.

And already got a bill from the Medi-Vac company stating I'd need to agree to pay the amount they were asking (in case my auto and health insurance providers contested the amount) before a claim could be filed.

The amount they were billing came in at just over $36,000 for a forty-two mile flight.

I find such to be objectionable.

OMG.

 

[AlBell]

I was hit for $1500 for a 50 mile ambulance trip hospital to hospital. Not sure how stuff like this will play-out under ObamaCare assuming it isn't found unconstitutional or repealed.

 

[Trakar]

My wife was in a extremely serious car (actually pickup truck) accident recently. Professional assured us a helicopter Medi-Vac flight from the small town hospital to a real trauma center was needed. How could one reasonably disagree?

Turns out they were correct, her 2nd (cervical) vertebrae was fractured in three places.

And already got a bill from the Medi-Vac company stating I'd need to agree to pay the amount they were asking (in case my auto and health insurance providers contested the amount) before a claim could be filed.

The amount they were billing came in at just over $36,000 for a forty-two mile flight.

I find such to be objectionable.

(my most sincere empathy and sympathy for the situation you and your wife have and are going through!)

That is actually in the "bargain" range for such care (somewhat dependent upon where you live). Special charter helicopter flight service, equipped critical care/ER medical support facilities, 3-4 emergency medicine medical professionals.

I'm loathe to recommend a blog reference but this one is particularly in tune with your concerns.

http://www.medtransportcenter.com/blog/tag/cost-of-air-ambulance-flight/

 

[Trakar]

Pick a better model. The VA system is among the least successful health care delivery systems in the developed world. Suggest you model it after military medical care. Some folks are not aware that Military health care and VA health care are not only not the same, they aren't even similar.

You are very mistaken about VA medical care, and situation between military health care and the VA health care. but given your previous statements this is not surprising.

How Veterans' Hospitals Became the Best in Health Care
http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1376238,00.html

Best Care Anywhere: Why VA Health Care Is Better Than Yours
http://books.google.com/books/about/Best_Care_Anywhere.html?id=Pe9-adfujDgC

Veterans’ Health Care Outscores Private Sector – Again
http://www1.va.gov/opa/pressrel/pressrelease.cfm?id=1069

VA Posts Annual Medical Quality Report
Quality of Care Better than Private-Sector Health Plans
http://www.va.gov/opa/pressrel/pressrelease.cfm?id=2030

Vets Loving Socialized Medicine Show Government Offers Savings
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aLIc5ABThjBk

Veteran’s Health Administration: The Best Value In Healthcare
http://www.himss.org/foundation/docs/rachelmayo.pdf

Or if you prefer professional, peer-reviewed support:

"Comparison of Quality of Care for Patients in the Veterans Health Administration and Patients in a National Sample."
Annuals of Internal Medicine
http://www.annals.org/content/141/12/938.full

...Using the RAND Quality Assessment Tools broad measure of quality of care, we found that adherence to recommended processes of care in 2 VHA regions typically exceeded that in a comparable national sample in 12 communities. These findings persisted when we adjusted the samples for age, number of acute and chronic conditions, and number of outpatient visits and when we examined only processes supported by randomized, controlled trials. In addition, we found that the differences between the VHA and national sample were greatest in processes subject to the VHA performance measurement system...

"Quality and equity of care in the veterans affairs health-care system and in medicare advantage health plans."
Med Care. 2011 Jun;49(6):560-8.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21422951

...CONCLUSIONS: Among persons aged 65 years or older, the VA health-care system significantly outperformed private-sector MA plans and delivered care that was less variable by site, geographic region, and socioeconomic status.

 

[Frank Newgent]

(my most sincere empathy and sympathy for the situation you and your wife have and are going through!)

That is actually in the "bargain" range for such care (somewhat dependent upon where you live). Special charter helicopter flight service, equipped critical care/ER medical support facilities, 3-4 emergency medicine medical professionals.

I'm loathe to recommend a blog reference but this one is particularly in tune with your concerns.

http://www.medtransportcenter.com/blog/tag/cost-of-air-ambulance-flight/

read this in your link:

As of January 30th 2009, a typical air ambulance flight from California to North Carolina now costs around $ 35,000 for the medical jet and medical crew including ground ambulance charges in each city compared to long distance ground costs around $12,000.

From CA to NC vs a 42 mile flight... for a thousand plus more.

2009 vs 2012 it's true. Nevertheless...

 

[kellyb]

I'd give up the Union of the states. And I think the opponents of actual UHC are so crazy it might come down to that if anyone ever proposes actual UHC (as opposed to ObaRomneyCare.)

 

[Trakar]

read this in your link:



From CA to NC vs a 42 mile flight... for a thousand plus more.

2009 vs 2012 it's true. Nevertheless...

Distance isn't an issue as much as the condition of the patient and need to carry crew and equipment to deal with any potential problems.
Also speaking of plane versus helicopter which is the major expense difference, all else being equal.

I'm not arguing that the bill you are facing is trivial or unconcerning, merely that it doesn't sound radically out of line with many other medical procedures and processes routinely ordered and carried out on a daily basis.

 

[Darat]

"Single-payer" is, IMO, still health care insurance, not universal, public health care. I'm talking more about government owned and run hospitals and clinics with government employee staff and care-givers. Complete nationalization of the health care system. This doesn't mean that there isn't room for private health care alternatives/supplemental service for those who would rather pay for the service, but it would have a much reduced role and potential.

In other words, rather than basically extending medicare to everyone where you pump federal money into private health care businesses (which is the closest US approximation to a major single-payer healthcare system), I'm talking more about extending VAMC (Veteran's Administration Medical Care) to everyone where there are federal hospitals and clinics in every community.

I keep coming back to the fact that we know "mix payer" systems do work (i.e. comparable outcomes to the current USA system) and at a lower cost. Is there any such UHC that provides comparable outcomes? If not don't you think it is rather risky to aim for an untested and radical change in health care for the USA?

 

[Trakar]

I keep coming back to the fact that we know "mix payer" systems do work (i.e. comparable outcomes to the current USA system) and at a lower cost. Is there any such UHC that provides comparable outcomes? If not don't you think it is rather risky to aim for an untested and radical change in health care for the USA?

The VA Health Care is practically and functionally a valid example of a UHC model that generally provides superior care and at a lower cost than any comparable insurance based system.

Costs were roughly $48B last year but the number of veteran's eligible for VA care has doubled over the last decade. This $48B covered both research costs and the treatment and care of 84M patient visits last year for an average of about $600 per patient visit in costs. Comparing this to the current commercial medical situation, we have Americans spending about 2 trillion dollars annually on health care with about 800M patient visits annually, which works out to be about $2500/patient visit. Now, these are just rough calculations, and a system designed to handle this load would need to be about ten times larger than the current VA healthcare system and it would it would be in a steady growth state for at least the foreseeable future. But, slashing US healthcare costs by some 76% ($1.5T) while giving free health care to all leaves us all with a lot of benefit even if my rough estimates end up being a bit overly optimistic.