Health Care Debate

[lhoward]

What I look for as a solution in Obama's health care proposal is a promise that other families will not have to lose their home and/or life's savings just because you are never fully insured, even with insurance coverage. The Republicans are completely missing this with their plan that would offer tax credits for families to purchase insurance. This seems to be against everything they've been talking about as of late when it comes to the bailout; this would merely be a huge government sponsored payout to the insurance companies. As well, what would keep costs low in this plan? It would be nice to see a plan that actually benefits the people instead of big business.

Read Full Article http://thebreadwinner.the-amt.com/index.php?/The-Breadwinner-Blog/Government-and-Policy-Blog/Health-Care-Debate.html

[Stampever]

First of all, Obama doesn't have a health care proposal.  He has a few talking points from which the Congress has drafted a series of proposals.  The lack of any real guideline from the President has caused confusion and frustration in fellow party members in Congress (as was reported today).

Next, "We need A to avoid B" is not a very good argument.  Who is to say that even under whatever version of the Congressional legislation is passed that someone will still rack up high medical bills and lose their home?  Unless you go 100% pure government run medical coverage, the risk of severe financial hardship will exist, especially if the person impacted has lived beyond their means and never planned for an emergency (this can happen to rich and poor people alike).

Lastly, all of these bills fail to deal with the real problems behind medical insurance.  The lack of competition, oversight, and ever-increasing doctor costs associated with education and legal defense are being glossed over by simply expanding Medicare.  Medicare in its current form is insolvent.  Do you think expanding it will some how make it cost effective?  Of course not.

All of the proposals right now will lead to higher taxes for everyone and/or a decrease in the quality of care provided.  Neither Republicans nor Democrats have a practical approach to the issue.

[opebo]

...Medicare in its current form is insolvent. 

Really?  Are you sure about that?  What about my father - he's an old and he sucks thousands out of it every month.  I'd say that's anecdotal evidence that it is not insolvent.

[Person Man]

First of all, legal defense wouldn't be as much as an issue as it is today if the medical profession was more self-policing.  Secondly, how would you deal with "competition" and "oversight" (see earlier part of post)? If it was that easy, we could simply prosecute insurance companies for violating federal and state anti-trust laws concerning the restraint of commerce. It appears that many policy producers get into the insurance business simply because of the fact that they are not affected by changes in the market....and because demand can be artificially manipulated so easy, it would appear prudent to conclude that normal market forces do not apply to health care delivery and as such, we need to do what we can to minimize the effects of these cartels without causing more pain than what is morally warranted in the interim.