the new health care?

[saden1]

Your cynicism is dually noted. One thing I am fairly certain of is that the quality of care for 45 million people without coverage will improve. My employer still has the option of paying our HMO $$$ so I don't see how the quality of care will decrease. Maybe most employers decide to drop their HMO plans and rely on the government?

I guess having uninsured is good for the insured. Less competition is always good for the apex predator. Is anyone working a book titled "Universal Healthcare: Tragedy Waiting to Happen" yet?

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by saden1

Your cynicism is dually noted. One thing I am fairly certain of is that the quality of care for 45 million people without covrage will improve. My employer still has the option of paying our HMO $$$ so I don't see how the quality of care will decrease. Maybe they will all decide to drop their HMO plans and rely on the government. I having uninsured is good for the insured. I suppose less competition is always good for the apex predator.

Is anyone working a book titled "Universal Healthcare: Tragedy Waiting to Happen" yet?

First off take that 45 million and cut that in half and thats closer to the number of people who cannot get or cannot afford health ins.

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by firstdown

First off take that 45 million and cut that in half and thats closer to the number of people who cannot get or cannot afford health ins.

link? and anyway, isn't 22 million people without insurance enough?

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by dmek25

link? and anyway, isn't 22 million people without insurance enough?

22 million is not enough in the big picture to tear apart our complete health care system. I'm too lazy to look up the numbers but in that 45 million that encludes people who loose their coverage for a short period of time, young adults who feel they dont need coverage, people who could afford coverage but decide to buy other things, ect.... Heck, if our goverment cannot run Medicare or Social Security right why do would we want them to run our health care which will be a much larger task? Medicare and Social Security are both in trouble now and have been in the pass so the goverment has had to cut the coverage, raise deductibles, tax SS, etc... and that's the same thing that will happen to goverment provided health coverage. Heck, even with the cuts they have made in those programs both are still in trouble.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by saden1

Your cynicism is dually noted. One thing I am fairly certain of is that the quality of care for 45 million people without coverage will improve. My employer still has the option of paying our HMO $$$ so I don't see how the quality of care will decrease. Maybe most employers decide to drop their HMO plans and rely on the government?

I guess having uninsured is good for the insured. Less competition is always good for the apex predator. Is anyone working a book titled "Universal Healthcare: Tragedy Waiting to Happen" yet?

1. With a national health plan, your employer's HMO coverage will eventually become more expensive. Initially, your quality of care will not decrease. At some point, as more and more people become "uninsured" and rely on the national plan, your employer's HMO become more expensive and he will eventually drop it leaving you with the national plan.

2. In general, and as I have pointed out above, having uninsured is NOT good for the rest of the insurance pool. Rather, having a large number of healthy young people paying for insurance lowers costs for all insureds.

3. I have not said that universal health care is a tragedy, rather, I suggest that to expect, in a nation of 250 million, high quality care at bargain basement prices is unrealistic. Clearly, universal healthcare improves coverage for the uninsured. I merely suggest that for a vast majority of americans, such changes will make their own insurance either more expensive or provide less insurance.

4. Wow!!! I get to be an apex predator?? Cool!! (usually, I am just some middle of the pack herd animal attempting to find todays veggies).

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

1. With a national health plan, your employer's HMO coverage will eventually become more expensive. Initially, your quality of care will not decrease. At some point, as more and more people become "uninsured" and rely on the national plan, your employer's HMO become more expensive and he will eventually drop it leaving you with the national plan.

2. In general, and as I have pointed out above, having uninsured is NOT good for the rest of the insurance pool. Rather, having a large number of healthy young people paying for insurance lowers costs for all insureds.

3. I have not said that universal health care is a tragedy, rather, I suggest that to expect, in a nation of 250 million, high quality care at bargain basement prices is unrealistic. Clearly, universal healthcare improves coverage for the uninsured. I merely suggest that for a vast majority of americans, such changes will make their own insurance either more expensive or provide less insurance.

4. Wow!!! I get to be an apex predator?? Cool!! (usually, I am just some middle of the pack herd animal attempting to find todays veggies).

I think that is probably the case. How have the Cannucks and the Brits faired with similar idea's in mind. From the people I know that live or have lived in those countries, They have it........but it.......ain't great. Hard to see anyone for an appointment....marginal quality. I do not believe as you have stated it can be done "GOOD AND CHEAP". It will require a....shocking financial commitment. And finally "Apex predator"? That's sweet. Wil;l we be seeing you on the next episode of "the Cougar"?