Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Dr. Strangelove]

Sounds like Breitbart is on board

[entropy]

I posted this on FB a yesterday:

My prediction for the future: Our next president will run on a national healthcare platform. Despite the current administrations desire to create a market driven healthcare economy, I think their proposal will create supply side consolidation and less consumer choice. The results will be an acceleration to a "single" payer system with commercial insurance options to avoid the lines or receive certain types of care.

[froot loops]

1. That Breitbart article may be correct but not for the reason they may think.

2. One thing that kind of bugs me about the market economy argument for health care is that is is in no way based on standard procedures on how you shop for things in a market economy. If I'm shopping for a new car, new tires and gallon of milk, you can shop around freely. It's not even close to that in health care, your options are limited and you rarely know the total price before the procedure. When Paul Ryan gets up there and spouts buzzwords, it's all they are.

[Wild Hoss]

I posted this on FB a yesterday:

My prediction for the future: Our next president will run on a national healthcare platform. Despite the current administrations desire to create a market driven healthcare economy, I think their proposal will create supply side consolidation and less consumer choice. The results will be an acceleration to a "single" payer system with commercial insurance options to avoid the lines or receive certain types of care.

Cadillac Care for some, McHealth for the rest. Inevitable.

[Da Geezer]

Regarding health insurance: The Rs should get together with a plan that includes everything that Trump ran on,(multi-state companies, medical savings accounts, tax credits) which, by definition, won't be able to be done by reconciliation. If the Ds block it in the Senate, just run on that issue against the 10 Democrat Senators up in 2018 that are in Trump states. In the meantime, let the ACA implode.

I think it would be beneficial in the long term for the US to move from employer-provided health insurance to patient-provided health ins. If the corporate tax rate is going to be reduced to 20%, I think the deductibility of health insurance benefits should be removed at the corporate level. You have a carrot to go with the stick, and now would be a good time to get that done. It would also be one way to make sure the employees get a "share" of the corporate tax cut. Overall, I think you would see individuals buying a larger part of the total health insurance pie, and corporations buying less.

[iam416]

At some point someone will need to come forward with some shred of evidence of DJT-Russia collusion. Until then.

[Mainevent]

Collusion seems like something that would be very hard to prove with anything other than a smoking gone (recorded conversation, explicit email, reliable witness or two). I wouldn't put it past the jokers that Trump had/has working for him, but I'm not expecting them to come up with anything definitive to show collusion. But the Russia angle needs to be fully investigated, period. Agreed that if the outcome is no proof of Trump collusion, back off that narrative. If anything, that guy and his team have shown they'll give people a new reason to investigate him soon enough.

I think they should continue to press him on conflicts of interest hard though and not let that one go.

[Jeff Buchanan]

.........I think it would be beneficial in the long term for the US to move from employer-provided health insurance to patient-provided health ins. If the corporate tax rate is going to be reduced to 20%, I think the deductibility of health insurance benefits should be removed at the corporate level. You have a carrot to go with the stick, and now would be a good time to get that done. It would also be one way to make sure the employees get a "share" of the corporate tax cut. Overall, I think you would see individuals buying a larger part of the total health insurance pie, and corporations buying less.

There is some sense in this. I'm here waiting to finish up on my 25th patient today. Everyone of them coming in today for free or close to it. The worst offenders/abusers of this free care? Immigrants from countries who at home had to pay to be seen.

Of the 25 I saw, only about 12 or so had chronic illnesses like hypertension or diabetes that need regular monitoring and management. The rest were colds, flu symptoms, back aches and the like. If these people needed to pay the $65 cash pay fee, they'd take Tylenol and an antihistamine and do fine.

I run hot and cold on a single payor national HC system versus pay as you go with some changes to mold a competitive market place v. Some kind of hybrid of these two. Obama Care 2.0 will ultimately fail. I'm of the mind, and so are others, that a complete start over is necessary. The problem with that is resistance from the stake holders, most of them banking big bucks in the awful HC delivery system that is in place now.

[froot loops]

Barbara Mcquade was an excellent US Attorney, it is bad news for the Trump Administration.

[WingsFan]

A friend of mine was under the care of Dr Fata who pumped poisonous chemotherapy drugs into his body for 2 years before he died. McQuade did a great job exposing and prosecuting Dr Fata for his health insurance fraud & poisoning many patients. Also going after the Hip-Hop mayor was her biggest nd best collar, may he enjoy many years to come from his current home.

[Da Geezer]

I run hot and cold on a single payor national HC system versus pay as you go with some changes to mold a competitive market place v. Some kind of hybrid of these two. Obama Care 2.0 will ultimately fail. I'm of the mind, and so are others, that a complete start over is necessary.

Jeff, leaving aside the problems of transitioning to a new system, what do you think would be goals to seek in a complete re-design? As I said, I see the fact that most Americans get their insurance from their employer to be a problem. The "cost" of health insurance, which reflects the cost of health care, is hidden from the actual consumer.

I've also done some thinking about covering pre-existing conditions. I was born with a congenital birth defect in my heart. I had open-heart surgeries in 1958 and 1967. My worry was always that I wouldn't be able to get health insurance. The ACA lets children stay on their parents' insurance until age 26, and that is inexpensive to the overall system. But the idea that after age 26 someone can wait until they actually get sick to buy health insurance and be assured coverage of a pre-existing condition necessitates the individual mandate in order to have a hope of actuarial integrity. I say all persons at age 26 should make a choice, either buy health insurance or not. But if the choice is to not buy, that forfeits forever the individual's right to have pre-existing conditions covered. 26 would be a fair age to force this choice because most have some idea about their job situation by that time. Of course, I feel the individual mandate is the biggest flaw in the ACA because I think there is moral hazard in making citizens buy any product whether or not they want it.

[SeattleLionsFan]

I agree with DaGeezer. If folks make a poor decision at 26 because they are young or cash strapped, they should be condemned to die or poverty due to treatment for a pre-existing condition. It's the only civilized thing to do.

Plus fuck em.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Jeff, leaving aside the problems of transitioning to a new system, what do you think would be goals to seek in a complete re-design?

I'm going to have to put the thoughts I have on this due consideration. I'll try to post something tomorrow.

SLF ...... one of the problems for sensible, well informed folks trying to pin point the exact nature of the issues and full scope of the failing Health Care Delivery system in the US is polarization of positions where one side simply ignores or ridicules the other. Serves no useful purpose, IMO.

[SeattleLionsFan]

Jeff, I don't disagree but, DaGeezer is not looking for reasoned well thought out discussion. He spouts talking points and refuses to engage in critical thinking about these issues. Anyone who wants to discuss issues and exchange ideas, I'm in.

[iam416]

Politically, we have to decide whether health is primarily a product of decion-making or happenstance. It's easy to score anecdotal points both ways. But, in the end I think we tend toward happenstance. And that's why it's such a political nightmare for Rs. Way more people get cancer just because than do because they smoked 3 cartons a day. It sucks to eat the latter cost, but we do it because the former is a very real potential cost for all of us.

The problems for the Ds don't really manifest themselves until we're far into a system that embraces single payer.