Atomic City Talk

At this point I must admit I can not endorse the Republican health care plan (if they have a health care plan)...I am not saying I am for national health care but I am concerned about people like my friend who is a hard working American but can not get insurance coverage - caught in the middle, and she can not go to the ER for this either...Call me a conservative with compassion in this area...I am willing to pay more in taxes if it means everyone has access to the same care as I do...

Most of us who have coverage at work are only a layoff away from not having coverage but assuming we keep working health care coverage is the highest employee expense other than salaries...That cost is increasing about 10% per year...

So I am open to hearing more from both sides but I am not smart enough to give a break down of the McCain plan...I hope someone else is...In no way am I knocking the level of care and services that we have today, for those who have medical care...

I have looked at Obama's proposal and as stated on his website I believe has some merit...I believe it only proposes to cover people who are not now (sort of like TN Care but with cost controls) and also permits portability...If you have coverage at work you can keep it...I am not sure I understand his plan thoroughly...My concerns would be that the system would go beyond the level of national affordability and would people in the middle still be able to get coverage without having to sale their homes, etc... My other concern is will health care be rationed?

Obama's Plan to Cover Uninsured Americans: Obama will make available a new national health plan to all Americans, including the self-employed and small businesses, to buy affordable health coverage that is similar to the plan available to members of Congress. The Obama plan will have the following features:
Guaranteed eligibility. No American will be turned away from any insurance plan because of illness or pre-existing conditions.

Comprehensive benefits. The benefit package will be similar to that offered through Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), the plan members of Congress have. The plan will cover all essential medical services, including preventive, maternity and mental health care.

Affordable premiums, co-pays and deductibles.

Subsidies. Individuals and families who do not qualify for Medicaid or SCHIP but still need financial assistance will receive an income-related federal subsidy to buy into the new public plan or purchase a private health care plan.
Simplified paperwork and reined in health costs.

Easy enrollment. The new public plan will be simple to enroll in and provide ready access to coverage.

Portability and choice. Participants in the new public plan and the National Health Insurance Exchange (see below) will be able to move from job to job without changing or jeopardizing their health care coverage.

Quality and efficiency. Participating insurance companies in the new public program will be required to report data to ensure that standards for quality, health information technology and administration are being met.

So I am open to finding out more...

I agree that it seems to be a good start for solving this important issue. I think that another reason for moving quickly toward universal coverage is that it will relieve businesses who pay more for health insurance than they should. This will help them compete in the global marketplace. Small businesses will also have their employees covered and costs of absences and lost productivity for illness and injury will be reduced.

"You really think that companies will continue to fund health care if we have universal?"

Uh, no. That's what universal coverage means, AW. You don't have to be a company employee to be covered if there is universal coverage.

It's working for all the other industrialized nations on the planet. Meanwhile, their currencies are kicking the dollar's butt. And their health care costs per capita are only a fraction of ours.

All we have to do is give up the welfare to the insurance industry.

"My contention is that many employers will drop any contribution to health care coverage when and if universal kicks in."

Exactly. You are so keen on disagreeing with me that you can't even tell when we're saying the same thing! Get a grip, AW.

"The reason our country's health care costs are so high is that we provide the best care - by far!"

Actually, this is not supported by data.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0505/p02s01-uspo.html
http://dll.umaine.edu/ble/U.S.%20HCweb.pdf

"We have the highest number of fat asses in the world and we have a large portion of our society that smokes, drinks, does illegal drugs, and that results in increased health care.

We have the highest infant mortality rate:

http://dll.umaine.edu/ble/U.S.%20HCweb.pdf

US infants are doing drugs, smoking and have fat asses?

"Please tell us how much of our health care costs could be prevented by healthy lifestyle choices."

A large fraction, not doubt. A large fraction of the health care costs of all countries could be prevented by healthy lifestyle choices. Did you have a point?

"The other reason is that all of us are paying for the 15-25 million illegals that are very unhealthy as a group and are currently getting their health care at our expense."

Link please. And lets see the data, not some propaganda link. There is not an atom of evidence that health care outcome statistics are significantly affected by illegals.


BTW, AW, I completely agree with you that most Americans would require far less health care if they would take more responsibility for themselves: keep BMI under 25, don't smoke, drink only in moderation, don't drink and drive, use sunscreen, excercise regularly, have regular checkups (pap smears, mammograms, colonoscopy), check blood pressure. I ride with a local cardiologist; his patients are completely refractory to his advice to lose weight, change their diet and start exercising.

But given the reality of our fellow citizens, I fail to see why having the most expensive health care system in the world that rations care by ability to pay is the best solution. Other countries do better. We can, too.

Surely you realize that infant mortality rate comparisons are "fixed".

Do please show how the study I cited was "fixed." Take your time.

"And you should realize that many of our infant deaths are due to drug/alcohol/tobacco use by the mother."

And many more have nothing to do with these things. And all of these children are deserving of the best care possible. And our current healthcare delivery system, which rations healthcare based on ability to pay, does not supply this care. In other countries, moms also abuse drugs, alcohol and tobacco, and they manage to have a lower infant mortality rate.

"We allow "sicker" higher risk babies to be born while others kill them prior to birth"

Interesting. Cite, please.

"we have more minority mothers which have a much higher mortality"

Heh. Because minority mothers are over-represented among the uninsured. Thanks for making my point.

"we have many, many births to illegals who have little prenatal care and just "drop in" for birth"

What fraction of health care costs are attibutable to this? Cite (with actual data) please.

"and we count all of them while other countries do not count infant deaths if they don't live a certain amount of time."

Got a cite for that, AW?

"We also spend huge amounts to try and save patients at the end of their lives where others just let them die."

LOL! Got a cite for that, AW?

"Or, maybe our medical education system in this country produces crappier doctors?"

Got a cite for that, AW?

"The obvious political bent to your cited study was to justify universal care so the intent was to make our system look bad."

Do please point out the flaws in the study. By the way, a "flaw" in a technical study is not defined as "a result that diverges from your preconceived notions."

"I don't see a lot of people going abroad to get that great health care those other countries have"

Well, lets see, AW. It costs money to travel to another country. Then, when you are there, you have to pay for a place to live (just like in the states). And of course, when you need health care, you aren't in the mood to travel and find lodging in another country.

Now, people like me who have good health insurance paid for by my employer that I seldom use. But if you are among the 40+million Americans who lack health insurance, you aren't gonna be in a good position to travel to and stay in another country. All the Canadians I know like their health care system. Most Canadians, when polled, prefer their system.

"I, for one, would rather be treated here than anywhere else - you may have a different opinion."

Heh. So this really is all about you, eh, AW?

AW, Americans have listed health care among their top concerns. Not your, heath care. Health care in general.

When you get a chance, look up the word "solipsistic."

This is confusing. Aren't Latinos minorities in this country? Or is "minorities" some kind of code word for you?

Well we have a local anecdote were an individual became unemployed and it affected his judgment on the conservative hate he had been subjected to.

The role of being unemployed is complex but it clearly is a factor.

I doubt that you can justify that unless you include career criminals has having good jobs.

Apparently his wife was a former member of that church.

The addition I made was that his ex-wife was a former member of that church. That makes it seem to me to be even more tragic.