The revised health care bill does what it promises: It fills pockets of the ultra-rich
Whether you are pro- or anti-Trump, you are wise to look at what the revised bill will cause. Even if you don't care about if poor people are able to afford healthcare, and even if you don't care that anyone can get sick at any time, it's worth noting that this bill does one thing really well: It puts money in the pockets of the rich.
http://www.politico.com/interactives/2017/senate-gop-health-care-bill-rich-americans/
Hi and thanks for posting. As somebody that is clearly interested by what's currently happening with healthcare, do you have any thoughts on what might be the best possible way forward for Americans?
I am asking because I love to discover new ideas and assess their impacts, and am simply hoping to learn. THANKS!
Hi! I have a lot of thoughts actually, but it's a complicated and not so easy to solve issue. I'll start with this: I'm not American, and I live in a country with a fairly good healthcare system. It's not perfect, but it has some key points that any healthcaresystem should have.
First, I believe everyone should have healthcare. You can never know when someone falls ill, and medical costs are on a constant rise. While I think there is something to say for a medical savings account, I believe that a system incorporating that will be flawed. You simply can't trust people enough to think everyone will be responsible and save up for medical costs. Also, there's a big population making ends meet as is, and won't be able to put a lot of money in a medical savings account. Not enough to cover major medical costs anyway.
So, everyone on healthcare. It's the only way to reduce huge costs for consumers, and providers know they'll get paid. Also, the only way to keep monthly prices low is to have everyone chip in. I live in a country with mandatory healthcare, so you get a fine if you're not insured. Although this seems weird, I think a country like the US needs some incentive to get people to actually get some insurance. People are egocentric, and will do whats best for their own bankaccount, but the government need to look further, so I think the fine is...fine.
Second, I think Obama was spot on with his minimal requirements for an insurance plan. If Cruz' stupid amendment will get through, insurance companies will have a pricey plan with all the requirements to comply with the amendment, but the cheaper plans will cover much less. Which will cause poor people to still have shitty insurance. Obamas list was very, very conservative, when you compare it with countries with reasonable health care. In my country you have a basic insurance, with requirements set by the government, on which you can add extra insurances. But the basic insurance is the same at every insurance company, and because of market stuff, the prices don't differ all that much. Sure, that means everyone pays for basic insurance which will include stuff you won't need, but it's impossible to make plans for every individual and this way the cost stays low.
I think the system in the US is way too complicated, and Obama was making a good start to shuffle things. I currently pay my insurance company roughly 120 USD per month, for full coverage including dental, and everything you can think of. I also pay certain percentage of my income as tax, which is used for care provided by government (long care home facilities and such). Low income houses get monthly help to cover those costs. I think thát works just fine.
Sorry for the wall of text, I hope it makes some sense. I would advice you to read up on healthcare in countries concidered succesfull on this subject. See this recent assessment.
This was fantastic...thanks for making the effort!
This year, between what I pay in premiums and my wife giving birth, our family will pay out over $20k in medical fees...ouch!
In what I'm assuming is a "single payer" system based on your description, have you experienced any frustrations due to process inefficiencies (long wait times, limited care options, etc.)?
Also, do you think your country's system would benefit from having a "private option" to go along with the existing system, for those with the means and desire to pay out of pocket for increased/additional service if they so choose? This of course would be in addition to their responsibility to pay for the public option as well.
Thanks for the interesting conversation!
No problem, it's nice to be able to talk about this stuff!
My jaw fell on the floor when I read what you're paying in medical fees. It's bizarre that giving birth should cost that much. For reference, that's one of the requirements every insurance company is obligated to cover in the basic plans.
Single payer differs from what we have and is maybe even better, but really hard to accomplish. Here's an article that explains it quite well. The cool thing with our system is that you can make your insurance plan as expensive as you want, and you have to ability to cater it to your wishes. Do you use a lot of dental care? You can opt for an extra insurance above the basic one, to cover those costs. Don't want to get insured for care you don't need? Just get the basic plan, and pay out of pocket for your physical therapy of dentist. You can even lower the cost of your basic plan, if you have the means to pay out of pocket, by raising your own risk excess (this is the amount of money you pay out of pocket when there's a claim made, it's standard to have this at a total of 385 euro per year, but you can raise it so you pay more out of pocket, and less per month).
Hope your baby and partner are doing fine! :)