General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHealth Care vs Health Insurance
To me this is very simple. Healthcare, like medicare simply provide healthcare to those who need it. Health insurance simply takes your money, then decides whether or not to give you healthcare. If they decide not to, then Dollar Bill Maquire can buy another mansion in the Caymans or Burmuda or whatever he wants. That is it in a nutshell IMHO.
Mika
(17,751 posts)Their health care systems are insurance based. Difference is that they are regulated, not for profit entities.
litlbilly
(2,227 posts)it would work. I am simply pointing out how it works/doesn't work here.
Mika
(17,751 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)of the bills without you buying supplemental insurance.
litlbilly
(2,227 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)If profit motive in financing were the problem, BCBS would have solved this in the 1950s.
Rider3
(919 posts)Yes, indeed. You nailed it.
scscholar
(2,902 posts)Why are you exaggerating to defend health insurance? Their rules are setup so that by default they pay nothing until you're bankrupted. Of course then, they will still stick you with 20% which will sink you further into debt. Even if medical care in the US saves your life, you're still dead.
litlbilly
(2,227 posts)profit based healthcare IMO is almost as bad as profit based prisons.
litlbilly
(2,227 posts)medicare to make it seem like its actual medicare, its not, it is for profit, period.
gwheezie
(3,580 posts)And you have to meet criteria like any other insurance to get the bill.paid. there are regulations, Medicare can and does decertify you for some care. It doesn't cover everything. I used to do Medicare certifications for hospital reimbursements.
With aca we got a bunch more regulations although I fully support what has been done. The focus is reimbursing quality of care and lots of prevention. I'm more familiar with the inpatient end of it.
litlbilly
(2,227 posts)litlbilly
(2,227 posts)gwheezie
(3,580 posts)Because neither is about healthcare but how to get the bill paid.
litlbilly
(2,227 posts)litlbilly
(2,227 posts)gwheezie
(3,580 posts)1st I believe mcare for all would be a good start but in order to improve actual health care, we need to train more providers which I think can nicely tie into college tuition. We do currently have a program that pays for doctors, nurse practitioners and physicians assistant who contract to work in under served areas. Most are rural. That kind of program should be greatly expanded. Mcare also does not pay for essential care like dental and vision. There are so many limitations on criteria for outpatient services. Also including in a mcare for all program would be expansion into many more clinics. Increase in home care services. Available services in public places, like schools, libraries, post offices, bus stations, employers I could go on.
You seem to want to have an argument about payment and cost, I am focused on actual health care. That is where the cost will decrease by decreasing the number of sick people. But that is a side benefit, the real benefit is to society.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)It's not noticeably cheaper or better than the for-profit policies.