Kenneth Blacker: I think you have gone outside the straight jacket of ideological parroting and into original thinking. I respect your suggestion and I appreciate it for its originality.People most in need of health-care coverage, obviously, are those who need it most. People who most need such care need it because of the expenses their care requires. Yet, costly drugs and treatments lead to their being dropped under many plans ("recissions"); others may be covered once, but they cannot continue to get coverage for recurrences or related problems (preexisting conditions). Most insurance companies (which are now allowed to run for profit and therefore have a strong incentive to deny coverage in order to keep more of the premium dollars paid to them) would like to cover the less expensive costs themselves, but they are loathe to take on the risks associated with clients who may become major liabilities. This process of finding healthy people and providing preventive an! d inexpensive care for bronchitis, checkups, and general well care, for example, while weeding out clients who are or may become expensive liabilities is called "cherry-picking."No matter what the tax credit, the chances of people, especially older people not yet eligible for Medicare but afflicted with an underlying condition (earlier bout with cancer, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, liver infections and transplants, MS, MD, cerebral palsy, etc.) would be lucky to get coverage at any price. If they find a company willing to sell them coverage, it will most likely exclude these underlying conditions as preexisting and, even so, the premiums and co-pays will be prohibitive for all but very wealthy clients who might be able to pay for their care out of pocket. Should they begin to incur heavy medical costs, the company will drop them if it thinks it can get away with doing so. (Look up "Wendell Potter," a former CIGNA executive, on Yahoo or Google for inside information ! on how for-profit insurance companies actually work.)How would! your proposal address such eventualities? The problem centers on for-profit care, whether it be care provided by for-profit hospitals, whether it be drugs manufactured by for-profit pharmaceutical companies, and--of course--whether it be coverage provided by for-profit insurance companies, which lack the competition in the market needed to force wider coverage and lower premiums/co-pays.Depending on the State, Medicaid can be severely restricted, as it is in Tennessee. Furthermore, Medicaid requires that the benefiary first spend his entire net worth on his care--save the equity in his main residence.I am sincerely looking forward to your response. You may e-mail me at amoobrasil@hotmail.com if you like....Show more
Moises Rupinski: It's what they do now to a certain extent. Almost half of the uninsured qualify for Medicaid. When an uninsured person comes into a ER, a well run hospital go that route first. This government plan has no interest in cost savings. ! If they did, it would include tort reform and increased competition. This is all about government control.
Lavelle Viveiros: Why should someone be forced (taxed) to pay for other people's health care expenses?Why should someone be rewarded (given a tax credit) for purchasing insurance?In other words, why is socialism, whether it be forced (taxed) or a choice (insurance) your idea of a good health care system?...Show more
Nedra Oltz: I think you are wrong. The government should not be "providing" anything. It only means those in power take tax money, keep some for themselves, and give the remaining tax money to someone else. Medicare fraud is 60 billion dollars a year and the government is letting it happen. The GAO recently uncovered fraud in a program that is supposed to award contracts to disabled veterans. If the government does not control money, there can be no fraud.With Medicaid, it is estimated that about 38% of money allocated goes to recipients. ! The rest goes to run the bureaucracy....Show more
Maria Devenney! : Look what they did with s.o.s and the rest of their programs , they need to clean up the federal debt before they try to waste more trillions
Antwan Schrum: Here within the UK now we have the National Health Service. Many Americans have the incorrect thought than it's run by means of the Government. It is not. It is solely financed by means of the Government. The NHS has its possess board of governers who come to a decision how the price range are break up up among each and every division. When we move to health center we do not need to signal something earlier than we're handled. Treatment comes first above the whole lot else. No charges to pay. If we want cure it charges simply £7 ($10) for each and every batch of remedy which lasts approximately four weeks. If you're unemployed then prescriptions are unfastened. It's been going for 60 years with few disorders. The American healthcare plan goes to fee $one million Trillion over the following 10 years. Split that ! quantity among 2 hundred Million Americans - It is not that a lot whilst you consider approximately it....Show more
No comments:
Post a Comment