About Universal Health Care.

[Ravy]

Keeping individual plans out of the discussion, I think Edwards made a good point about Universal vs Non-Universal being the same argument we have been making about privatizing Social Security. Some people in a privatized Social Security will lose it all, and the taxpayers will end up supporting them somehow.

Making it universal (mandating that everyone has it vs. elective) is bound to make it health care coverage cheaper because a) more people will be covered, and b) the hospitals will not have to charge everyone more to make up for the people that have to have health care but not being able to pay for it when they are not covered.

We should strive to find a way.

[fenriswolf]

1. single payer universal health care. the only way.

[Ravy]

4. I don't think it has to be single payer.

It would be nice, but I don't think we can do that yet. I would be in strong hopes of not-for-profits to get involved and really driving the costs down, gaining market share, and leading towards a single payer system in the future.

[hedgehog]

9. I'm for single payer, but I think we will get there by evolution, not revolution. nt

[amborin]

2. yes

[hedgehog]

3. I'd like to see some proof that people who can afford it will not

purchase health insurance.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

5. I'd like to see some proof that people who cannot afford it

will GET health insurance.

[hedgehog]

11. That's where you have to read the fine print of every plan and

make a judgment.


What I like about Obama's plan is that it includes several proposals to cut costs such as coordination of care, paperless records, working on preventing exposure to lead and mercury, cutting the cost of malpractice insurance* besides the more direct attacks on costs such as negotiating with drug companies for bulk rates etc.



* We hear all the time about this or that outlandish award in a malpractice case. The truth is, the rates for malpractice insurance track the performance of the stock market, not the level of awards. When the insurance companies don't make money on other investments, they jack the rates that doctors have to pay. Guess who has to pay the doctors?

[Ravy]

12. I like any idea to cut the costs.

But the fact is, Obama's plan would even be cheaper if everyone had coverage.

[Ravy]

6. The point is that everyone has to be covered.

If your point is that everyone will buy it anyway, then what is the problem with making it mandatory?

[hedgehog]

8. Hmmm... I wonder what the cost is for the bureaucracy to make sure

everyone is covered?

[Ravy]

10. I am not sure.

I wouldn't think it would be too much of a burden. Like, they require proof of insurance to get driver's licenses and plate renewals in many states.

You raise a point, for sure.

[patrice]

7. There's also the point that less-than-universal will not be able to sustain itself financially.

I get Obama's point about getting the cost down, so everyone will buy it voluntarily, but I'm certain he's wrong about "everyone". All kinds of people will take their chances without it almost no matter how cheap it is, until something happens to them and then that will drive the costs up anyway.