Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (6883)	6/5/2009 10:03:17 AM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 42652

Do you have any other ideas? Frankly no, I don't. The only thing I see working is the proven Euro model. We could eliminate employer provided health insurance and let a true consumer market slowly work it's magic... but I don't think we have the time and we certainly don't have the political will. How about you? Any other ideas for a drastic cut in cost?

To: i-node who wrote (6883)	6/5/2009 12:45:49 PM
From: skinowski	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

save all this money by spending money on IT. I like IT. It probably already saves money while improving quality. I think everyone should have an electronic med record in some form, probably best web based, which would encapsulate in brief all the relevant information. This can be reviewed and updated (in brief) every time there is a change. The patient would have access to it, and the info would be subject to ongoing updates and corrections. Costs..... I would start with 2 things - 1) Tort reform - Replace malpractice with arbitration for the vast majority of incidents. Patients would still get compensated in appropriate cases, and providers - over time - would begin to breath easier - and stop spending so many billions on covering their collective arses. 2) Massive deregulation. I am yet to witness a situation when people in the community would not have a very adequate feel for the quality of care at their local hospital. Hospitals are quite good at self monitoring and steering away from undesirable practices. The fact that they are micromanaged by HCFA, JCAH, State health departments and many other outfits causes, for the most part, massive waste. They must hire huge armies of people only in order to be able to comply. Cut regulatory expenses by 90%, and you'll save hundreds of billions -- I'll bet, without jeopardizing care.

To: i-node who wrote (6883)	6/5/2009 2:11:08 PM
From: Lane3	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Do you have any other ideas? There are exactly two ways to reduce costs enough to matter. One is to have everyone make the decisions on what they are willing and able to pay for just as they now make decisions on home insurance, movies, and dinner. The other is to ration care to meet some target total cost number. There is no other way. Since politics won't support either of those ways, we will never reduce costs and whatever happens, happens.

To: i-node who wrote (6883)	6/6/2009 7:13:43 PM
From: John Koligman	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42652

"The only answer I've heard has been, "Remove profits from the business of health care". Get rid of those mean old insurance companies who are making all that money, get rid of greedy doctors who spend years getting an education yet are so highly overpaid, get rid of the drug companies who charge too much after having rolled the dice on trying to create some new lifesaving drug." Every time I happen to catch Hannity on Fox he has ginGRINCH on night after night, and he rants on and on about how the government may now limit CEO pay for government owned entities, but when it comes to unionized employees getting hammered, well, 'ol Newt says 'that's how it works'. You seem to be pretty clear that our precious doctors and drug companies should be exempt from these forces (unless they get more) for some reason. Let them take some lumps along with everyone else...