When people espouse a position of Nationalized Health Care do they consider the cost?
Question:
Answer:
Cost is a major consideration in universal health care. Depending on the type of plan that is instituted the costs will vary. Right now the administrative costs of our current system are helping to make US health care at least 40% more expensive than health care in any other industrialized country. A single payer plan would save tens of billions of dollars but it would put the insurance companies out of business.
Health care costs have grown faster than wages for years. Employers are trying to find ways to save on the costs of health insurance premiums and lower their expenses. Many Americans have no coverage and they burden the system with costly emergency room visits. Also, our health statistics are poor in comparison to other industrialized countries. The system is not getting any better and it needs to be addressed realistically.
Yes, costs might increase but it is our health that we’re talking about. I can’t think of a better area in which to spend some money.
When people support a pre-emptive strike, do they consider the cost?
Yes it's those same people.any coincidence they're liberal socialists?
"nationalized anything" goes totally against what America is based on.
Nationalized Health Care will be a disaster. There is nothing that the Federal Government does that is efficient. It will be just another ineffective disaster that will empower future politicians to keep straight. All of which will fail.
our current system is inefficient, there are too many middle people getting rich off of the health care system that contribute little
What do the pitfalls of juggling debt and personal finance in todays society have to do with reducing the cost of healthcare by eliminating the insurance industry? You seem to be comparing apples to oranges.
Our current healthcare system is broken. I don't think people want to see their income taxes double in order to get free health care, but at the same time, something does need to change.
While employed by a temp agency, I worked for a week at a hospital's administration office. Every single employee had a $1,200 Humanscale chair (with about 10 brand new ones sitting in an unused office) and $400 Humanscale keyboard trays, unused (but new) LCD monitors and other computer equipment piled up in an empty cubicle. One assistant for every two mid-level managers. On-site employee "Welness Coaches"...for the administration staff (I'm sure they have them for the doctors/nurses, but these ones were for the administrative people only).
My only thought was...'this is where my money goes?'
No they don't. They simply have no idea.
Sure we do. We pay 15% of our GDP in health care costs. That's 40% more than the next closest country. All of that for less coverage and lesser health statistics. Much of the extra goes to wasteful administrative expenses that other countries don't have to deal with.
You should be asking the question:
Do people defending the current system consider the costs?
I agree that the last six years has shown us a presidency that can keep its pants on, but they put them on backwards.
It used to be that we ran things pretty well, we can again as soon as we get competent people back in with the good of the people of the United State first and foremost in their interests instead of the insurance companies and the drug companies and the big businesses that have sopped up the corporate welfare in the past six years.
I heard the same naysayers when Medicare was initiated, and Medicaid too, it didn't happen, Businesses would actually welcome the change as they wouldn't either have to pay their workers to be able to afford insurance or pay for it themselves as a benefit, and a healthy workforce is important.
Health care done in an organized and efficient manner would be wonderful, if other countries especially France can do it surely we are just as competent. The present system is broke and it must be fixed, sticking your head in the sand and yelling about bogeymen won't work anymore, we have seen what the insurance companies want and its added profits not giving heath care to those who pay for it.
Wake up, for heavens sake, we are already paying for it for other people, we have a right to see that money is spend wisely and we are getting what we already pay for.
If would be far cheaper than the current extortionate insurance premiums paid (if you can afford it) for no health cover.
I know I do - the current system is too costly for 47 million Americans, and many of the people who CAN pay insurance premiums find out when they file a claim that medical insurance does not always equal medical coverage. Those people who are not covered, inadequately covered, and/or simply paying too much for coverage are all victims of the insurance and pharmaceutical companies' lobbies - and costs are still rising faster than the average American's income. A national system styled after those in Europe and Canada would do the job cheaper and more efficiently.
More Questions & Answers...