Government Run Healthcare, The right way.

[Demetrius]

Looking at today's political landscape, the question of whether or not healthcare will fall into a government run system is almost a foregone conclusion. If this is going to happen, what would be the right way to do it? This is not a political discussion, it is a discussion on the actual application of the system.

Please leave political rants out.

It seems to me that in order for the government to take over an industry they will have to buy out the current businesses unless there is some legal loophole that will avoid it. In a perfect world, I would prefer to see the government buy out the hospitals themselves and cut out the middleman bureaucracy of the insurance companies, they simply would no longer be needed except as an optional supplemental function (such as Aflac). This would allow for the medical profession to remain competitive and cut down on the additional tax burden. Obviously each hospital would need to have an increased bureaucratic department and those in turn would report to a regional and national level bureau, but a whole cost loss area would be eliminated, whole at the same time crating new jobs for the people displaced by the insurance shift.

[Ryanderman]

I don't like the idea of government run hospitals, because I see that only adding to the existing inefficiency and poor service there. You've ever been to the DMV (or whatever the kids are calling it in your state)? It'd be like that, but with more bleeding. Of course, most hospitals aren't exactly the picture of efficiency and excellent care now, but that's also do in large part to the existing beuracratic and HMO mess. Which would in large part be eliminated with complete government sponsored health care.

I think the best way to run government health care, if it is as you say inevitable, would be to let the hospitals continue to run as private businesses, with the goal of making a profit. The difference would be that they would never have to turn anyone away, as the government will guarantee to pay.
We wouldn't have to worry as much about substandard care, because there'd be no motive for it. Sure it'd save the hospital money, but if the government will foot the bill, it wouldn't be a problem. And to make sure, the government could create an oversight department. Maybe one agent in each hospital, or a few for each region, to ensure that care is provided to everyone, up to set standards, and that hospitals aren't overcharging or defrauding the government.

Or maybe that's too optimistic.

[POS Industries]

Ryanderman's idea is pretty much the easiest and best way to go about it. The hospitals themselves are run the same as they've always been but with the bills being paid through tax dollars rather than out of pocket or through private insurance companies. The competitive market element would still exist, in that if a doctor's service is poor and patients are unhappy with the service, then business will be lost to another doctor.

The only real necessity here is that everyone in the United States be guaranteed health care, and the simpler the system the less expensive and more effective it will be. Unfortunately, the question is whether the government could implement such a program without centering it around a crippling bureaucracy that will ruin the whole thing, and I don't know if that's possible with the way politics are done in this country at the moment.

[Xaeta]

Actually I can forsee the government assuming control by buying out most of the medical industries in the United States, leaving LARGER insurance and medical industries alone to save the capitalism of the United States. Anyway, when they buy most of the subsidiaries, they will then implement the new healthcare system, and leave the larger insurance industries as assistance to people who need special needs as far as medical is concerned (something like a SERIOUSLY EXPENSIVE TRANSPLANT, etc).
From there, it will be a balance between the government holding and taking care of normal to very serious medical aid, and goes to insurance companies for the most extreme medical cares.

At least, at the moment that's the way I see it....

[Sky Warrior Bob]

I wouldn't honestly care if the Government ran health care or not, if the drug companies & the hospitals were charging us reasonably, instead of what they are. American drugs cost something like 300% more than most other countries, and as insurance is starting to pay for those drugs, the price is only going up.

Also, medical bills keep going up, because the prices keep getting increased. Partially based on suits, but its also just because the hospitals can get more money from insurances.

In short, were becoming a country where its just impossible to get any health care without any insurance, and that's plain wrong.

I'm not for removing suits against hospitals, but I think there should be set rules on how much a person can claim, that doesn't waiver from state to state. However, on the flip side, I don't think hospitals should be allowed to pass the buck onto the patients. I don't care if their insurance premiums go up, we shouldn't have to pay for it.

However, additionally I think Hospitals should be given far more leeway in getting premiums to go down. As long as they can show that they've actually changed the situation that caused the problem in the first place.

And there needs to be a lot more standardization in what insurance can get away with paying & not paying.

However, reducing insurance prices to more reasonable levels is no bad thing either. And needs to badly happen.

SWB

[Fifthfiend]

You've ever been to the DMV (or whatever the kids are calling it in your state)? It'd be like that, but with more bleeding.

The DMV here in CA took like 30 minutes for me to swap my Maryland license for a California one. And that included the 20 minutes it took to take the test. And they got me registered to vote! The staff was helpful, friendly and courteous the entire time I was there. Most of my experiences in Maryland with as they call it the MVA were pretty similar.

I mean I've always heard the whole "DMV = nadir of awful bureaucracy" thing but honestly that's never at all been my experience with any such organization.

IIRC there was a really long wait in Maryland if you walked in and wanted to take the driver's license in-car exam but if you called ahead and made an appointment you could go right through.

[Ryanderman]

You're fotunate then. The one near me is a nightmare.

I guess it's more acurate to say that not all government run institutions are enefficient messes. But the nature of government tends to lend itself to such places. In the private industry, the need to make a profit and retain customers often provides an incentive for businesses to provide expedient and quality service. Whereas in government, there is no profit motive, and often no need to retain customers as people are all too often obligated to come back. It gives those working at such places more opportunity to be lazy jerks.

Obviously it's not universal. Human nature being what it is, places in both categories differ depending on who works there, who's in charge, and on what incentives there are to treat customers well. In the event of government run or sponsored health care, I'd be much more comfortable with a hospital that maintains the profit motive to one that gets funding no matter how they operate.

[Odjn]

Originally Posted by Ryanderman

You're fotunate then. The one near me is a nightmare.

I guess it's more acurate to say that not all government run institutions are enefficient messes. But the nature of government tends to lend itself to such places. In the private industry, the need to make a profit and retain customers often provides an incentive for businesses to provide expedient and quality service.

Our health care is completely shot. It's overpriced, only affordable by those with insurance. There's been several instances where individuals are turned out despite needing emergency treatment. Whether you can pay or not determines which hospital you go to, often a lesser one.

The drug lobby in America is among the most powerful ones and even with some of the purported reform it has a great deal of political power. Probably more power than the people who use it's services. The goals of said lobby is to make it easier for what the drug companies do, which is keep drugs prescription and patented so the price remains overly high. Health insurance companies themselves (while also extremely imperfect) find the American treatment methods overcostly. They will send you to Thailand, India, or another country and even put you up in a hotel with a little spending money for a few days longer for a mini vacation. They have outsourced our health care.

There's also the moral ramifications. If you're going to make a profit, you can't give every patient the best treatment available. Sometimes you can't give them even above average treatment unless you break the rules and endanger your job. Patients will die because of this, not because of the quality of the treatment but because they simply can't afford it without decent insurance they may not be able to afford. If they have a lethal condition, you may as well euthanize them if they're willing because you'll be doing the same thing as not treating them, except it'd be more painful and protracted the first way. It's a pretty poor situation that even when you get critical and necessary treatment with no insurance, you have such a high bill you'll be working on it for a tremendous amount of time. A family friend who had heart surgery 20 years ago is still finishing it up.

[Ryanderman]

I think you misunderstood the point me my post. It started with assuming universal government sponsored health care and then went from there. Most of the problems you bring up wouldn't be as much of an issue. See my first post in this thread.

[Ryanderman]

I think you misunderstood the point me my post. It started with assuming universal government sponsored health care and then went from there. Most of the problems you bring up wouldn't be as much of an issue. See my first post in this thread.