Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
tooth
Trad climber
B.C.
|
|
Americans used to be really good at that kind of thinking and acting. It would be nice to see it make a resurgence/comeback.
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
Mark Westman wrote:
I don't pretend to know what the best system might be,
Currently it's France's healthcare system. The World Health Organization has rated it the top system several times. When you take cost, outcomes, access, etc., it beats the system in the USA hands down. Other systems in Western Europe such as Germany, Switzerland, etc., are right up there.
Mark Westman wrote:
The greater interests of society are not served in any capacity when so many people are unable to afford the care that they need, and when insurance companies serve as a profit-driven middle man to which our congressional leaders (of both parties) are beholden to serving.
Indeed. But don't forget providers in all of this. Americans are getting bilked by insurance companies AND providers.
Healthcare per capita in the USA costs twice as much as countries like France or Germany (and a couple years ago it was 3 times as Japan), and in those countries everyone is covered.
|
|
Robb
Social climber
Cat Box
|
|
Amongst other questions I have, how do we transition to a more effective health care system? Anyone?
|
|
tooth
Trad climber
B.C.
|
|
Outlaw lobbyists in your government as the first step. Until the billionaire parasites have no say, the rest of you have no chance.
|
|
Robb
Social climber
Cat Box
|
|
Last time I checked money and power doesn't outlaw money and power. Seriously, I've heard all the yapping about it for years now, but in realistic terms what change(s) can/should be made for the System to transition?
|
|
Treezypoof
Trad climber
Cyberia
|
|
A good start is not throwing up our hands in defeat.
Voting for someone brave enough to actually tackle the issue.
Then they do the work to assemble the best and brightest to come up with ideas and the courage to implement them.
Like landing a man on the moon or developing a super weapon capable of vaporizing entire populations.
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
Sands Motel , Las Vegas
|
|
What happen to Trump’s bigger , better , cheaper health plan that he promised the American people ?
|
|
Treezypoof
Trad climber
Cyberia
|
|
Someone pointed out that most people don't really have room for a free tanning bed, so he gave up.
Then he fired that person.
|
|
tooth
Trad climber
B.C.
|
|
Well then you’re screwed.
|
|
Robb
Social climber
Cat Box
|
|
"Well then you’re screwed."
Not entirely, at least not yet. We have a mixed system of provision, that is some private (for profit so to speak) and some government. How do we move towards getting more, and better health care to our citizens?
|
|
tooth
Trad climber
B.C.
|
|
You can't move toward a goal unless you define what the end point of that goal looks like.
Moving toward better is a poor plan because almost anything could be a move toward better, even a move that people don't like or that inconveniences people or harms them or leaves them hanging without healthcare or money.
If everyone agrees on and chooses an end goal, then a path or course of action can be chosen and all the actions can be justified. Some people will have to take one for the team and without agreement on a better future, that won't be socially acceptable.
Without an end goal, random actions that can be taken right now, or just started with in the mean time probably won't be very useful or helpful in the big picture as they won't be anything but feel-good moves to garner votes.
|
|
Bad Climber
Trad climber
The Lawless Border Regions
|
|
Thanks, Tooth. Yeah, the insurance middle men/women/trans/bi/non-bi/questioning/gay/lesbian's in control are a huge part of the problem--maybe THE problem, although much blame goes to lawyers and fraudsters as well.
BAd
|
|
tooth
Trad climber
B.C.
|
|
What is the best healthcare plan for a country?
1. Everyone has access to unlimited care and taxes increase proportional to cost? (Socialism?)
2. Safety net care with options for more (Canada and most developed countries)
3. Gov't health savings account which you can use for retirement if you keep yourself healthy and out of accidents, or supplement if you are addicted to twinkies and a sedentary lifestyle.
4. Government mandated participation with middle-men for profit corporations who then pay hospitals (ObamaCare)
In all of it, should insurance companies be involved at all? Need they if the government is paying for this with taxes?
Did I miss any?
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
Sands Motel , Las Vegas
|
|
Not having access to affordable tanning beds is the epitome of death panels .
|
|
Treezypoof
Trad climber
Cyberia
|
|
Well, the potentially assembled think tanks and working groups I was referring to would likely include 0 supertopo posters, myself included.
Folks that are so self consumed and propaganda poisoned that they feel compelled to take jabs at people they don’t understand in totally unrelated discussions will definitely not be helping.
I’m out for today
To be clear, I'm referring to BC's dig at different partner preferances. Trump is always fair game, he brings that on himself, much like Reilly.
Trans queer stuff makes me uncomfortable too to be honest. But I realize they are also real humans that just want to be healthy and happy like the rest of us.
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
|
|
Good posts up there Tooth.
|
|
TLP
climber
|
|
Genuine improvements to the US health care system will happen only if political and ideological considerations are set to the side and there is focus on pragmatic improvements. Even that way, there are two opposite approaches: 1) identify a desired set of future conditions (see immediately above); or 2) identify major flaws and try to remove them one by one. Some combination of these approaches may work. But no matter what, it's really difficult because there is so incredibly much money at stake that some entity or group with trillions of dollars at issue either wants things to stay the same or wants them to change.
Here are some thoughts about approach #2: the whole thing started to go seriously awry when insurance changed from insurance to total health care coverage. Consider auto insurance which you pay a modest amount for and use very rarely or preferably never, and it mostly covers just some unusual event (unusual meaning it happens only once in a few or many years). Maybe it's just a coincidence in time, but if health insurance was truly just insurance against a major injury or illness threatening life or limb, and not something that's involved for every little thing, it would be easier to administer for sure. Not sure how to unwind that, but that's one problem. If you just paid out of pocket for relatively minor stuff, and for those who could not afford even that, some public clinics or something was available, and people could know in advance what things cost, including all the unannounced costs, it would be better. Yes, I mean a two tier system but we already have a two or three tier system, this would not be functionally very different.
On the other side, it is proven not to work well - meaning that just about everyone hates it - that hospitals must provide emergency care to anyone that walks in off the street. This is incredibly economically inefficient and bad for every single party involved: those walk-ins, the hospital, the insurance companies, and the public who ultimately pay for EVERYTHING. There needs to be a way that walk-ins for conditions that would not otherwise merit emergency room attention can be rerouted to some other appropriate care methodology.
And as many posters have noted, the listed costs are truly absurd. A partial solution to this has begun, in the requirement that hospitals make their charges known, but as it stands right now it is just barely baby steps on a journey across the cosmos. Cost control is a major point. The only way a supposedly "free market" competitive system for anything works is if you have semi-informed consumers and multiple alternatives. We don't have either right now.
Flame away!
|
|
Bad Climber
Trad climber
The Lawless Border Regions
|
|
To clarify, I was just spoofing on political correctness. If I say "middle men," which is the default expression, I've left out women, but now, of course, that's being too binary, sooooo....I decided to hit all (most?) of the bases. We live in complicated times. Face Book, for example, has taken to using the plural "their" in all singular references, which drives me, frankly, a bit over the edge. Since we can no longer say "He is going to the park," because that would presume gender identity, we must now write, "They is going to the park," if we want to stay singular. If we keep the subject/noun relationship standard, which has all sorts of value, we would have to write, "They are going to the park," and suddenly confusion reigns.
Sorry, back to your regularly scheduled healthcare discussion....
BAd
|
|
Treezypoof
Trad climber
Cyberia
|
|
Roger that. I apologize for misinterpreting your intentions.
Like I said, it's hard for me to understand also.
|
|
i-b-goB
Social climber
Nutty
|
|
|
Mar 10, 2019 - 08:06am PT
|
Single payer death care, will turn into the fast food style health care with minimum wage doctors. It will end up that if you have something bad and need a major procedure,
you will get your appointment for nine months later and when that date arrives they will have to cancel!
Those who push this on us should have to use it themselves and not get their elite care!
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!