Is the US HC system finally toast?

[Anonymous]

Health care is not "unaffordable". It's expensive, which is different. People often choose to go without insurance, or with low value insurance, because at the time they make those elections they are not consuming health care and prefer to spend their money on other things. That's understandably tempting, but also foolish. People need to prioritize health insurance when they choose among employment options, and when they budget for expenses. Too many people do neither, and then expect "others" to pick up the costs if they later need care.

Medicaid addresses the truly impoverished and indigent disabled; Medicare addresses the elderly. Others are expected to provide for themselves, which is not really unreasonable. It does, however, require a mindset of self-sufficiency and prudent prioritizing of health insurance expenses and saving for emergencies over discretionary lifestyle choices, and many people lack the necessary discipline and foresight to do that.

[Anonymous]

Two obvious things we need to do first:

1) close the country, kick out the people who shouldn’t be here (at least who arrived in the past 5 years) and make it clear there will be no handouts to non-citizens ever (in law)

2) change the preexisting condition requirements to remove things that people choose to get. No coverage for obesity related conditions unless they have a thyroid or other underlying medical condition; no coverage for smokers or alcoholics, etc.

Then we can start talking about possible solutions.

[Anonymous]

We will see, but I have two appointments coming up, and I have a feeling the doctor (or np, or pa) will see one and help.
And they’ll see the other, which I believe needs an endocrinologist, and I think they will do nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe a public plan for catastrophic health care. Stroke, heart attack, cancer, etc.

Everything else you pay out of pocket.

But these catastrophic health events happen more frequently and with greater severity when people skip their preventative care visits. It’s generally cheaper to publicly fund preventative care so that less catastrophic care is necessary.

Catastrophic care plans frequently fund preventive care so as to avoid larger payouts.
However, most of these plans were outlawed when Obamacare passed.

Because they were worthless. It just gave you the fake veneer of "insurance" while not covering pre-existing conditions, low lifetime max caps (eg, $100K), and way too many out-of-network doctors and hospitals.

When you need catastrophic care, how are you going to ensure the ambulance takes you to the one hospital that accepts your "catastrophic care plan"? If you're on vacation and need to be airlifted, do you know which hospital is in-network with your plan? The ambulance takes you to the closest facility with capacity.

It's fake insurance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We will see, but I have two appointments coming up, and I have a feeling the doctor (or np, or pa) will see one and help.
And they’ll see the other, which I believe needs an endocrinologist, and I think they will do nothing.

The first is my dd, she lost her period w intense exercise. I believe and hope they will help her.
But me? Weight gain, bloating, signs of cushings, I will be too nebulous and they will tell me to lose weight

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe a public plan for catastrophic health care. Stroke, heart attack, cancer, etc.

Everything else you pay out of pocket.

But these catastrophic health events happen more frequently and with greater severity when people skip their preventative care visits. It’s generally cheaper to publicly fund preventative care so that less catastrophic care is necessary.

Catastrophic care plans frequently fund preventive care so as to avoid larger payouts.
However, most of these plans were outlawed when Obamacare passed.

Because they were worthless. It just gave you the fake veneer of "insurance" while not covering pre-existing conditions, low lifetime max caps (eg, $100K), and way too many out-of-network doctors and hospitals.

When you need catastrophic care, how are you going to ensure the ambulance takes you to the one hospital that accepts your "catastrophic care plan"? If you're on vacation and need to be airlifted, do you know which hospital is in-network with your plan? The ambulance takes you to the closest facility with capacity.

It's fake insurance.

Somehow I don't think this catastrophic insurance will be there for me. Just a feeling, kind of like I don't think the high deductible is there for me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Health care is not "unaffordable". It's expensive, which is different. People often choose to go without insurance, or with low value insurance, because at the time they make those elections they are not consuming health care and prefer to spend their money on other things. That's understandably tempting, but also foolish. People need to prioritize health insurance when they choose among employment options, and when they budget for expenses. Too many people do neither, and then expect "others" to pick up the costs if they later need care.

Medicaid addresses the truly impoverished and indigent disabled; Medicare addresses the elderly. Others are expected to provide for themselves, which is not really unreasonable. It does, however, require a mindset of self-sufficiency and prudent prioritizing of health insurance expenses and saving for emergencies over discretionary lifestyle choices, and many people lack the necessary discipline and foresight to do that.

this is exactly it, in america we have the freedom to make our own choices and if you choose not to pay monthly for health insurance that's your business. However on the flip side we shouldn't bail people out if they made that choice. Let the free market happen, in fact, I would love to be charged less because our family is healthy and takes care of ourselves and doesn't use the hospital except for true emergencies like a broken bone, etc, that happens once every few years but beuricrats have passed laws not allowing sliding scales for lifestyle and health issues. Why should an obese person pay the same as a non obese person?

[Anonymous]

It would be cheaper to take away the requirements for insurance plans on what must be covered, and on people on what they must purchase, and then give premium support for preexisting conditions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Two obvious things we need to do first:

1) close the country, kick out the people who shouldn’t be here (at least who arrived in the past 5 years) and make it clear there will be no handouts to non-citizens ever (in law)

2) change the preexisting condition requirements to remove things that people choose to get. No coverage for obesity related conditions unless they have a thyroid or other underlying medical condition; no coverage for smokers or alcoholics, etc.

Then we can start talking about possible solutions.

1.) non-citizens do not get hand-outs
2.) insurers will argue all diseases are from poor choices.

[Anonymous]

Since Trump has decided the U.S. government is taking stakes in American businesses, why not have HHS set the maximum costs allowable for procedures, treatments, medicine etc? (Like Japan’s HC system)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The solution is easy. Just let every American have the same plan members of Congress have.

problem solved.

Or just do what other countries have been doing. I suppose it might mean higher taxes for the wealthy though...

And higher taxes for the middle class.

No. We don’t need more taxes on w2 earners. W2 earners pay more than their fair share. The ultra-wealthy need to pay taxes. Did you see the article in the NYT today about the loophole that allows people like Scott Bessent to avoid Medicare taxes? Let’s get rid of those loopholes. Billionaires need to pay taxes. That’s what we the people need to demand that “higher taxes” means

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Health care is not "unaffordable". It's expensive, which is different. People often choose to go without insurance, or with low value insurance, because at the time they make those elections they are not consuming health care and prefer to spend their money on other things. That's understandably tempting, but also foolish. People need to prioritize health insurance when they choose among employment options, and when they budget for expenses. Too many people do neither, and then expect "others" to pick up the costs if they later need care.

Medicaid addresses the truly impoverished and indigent disabled; Medicare addresses the elderly. Others are expected to provide for themselves, which is not really unreasonable. It does, however, require a mindset of self-sufficiency and prudent prioritizing of health insurance expenses and saving for emergencies over discretionary lifestyle choices, and many people lack the necessary discipline and foresight to do that.

71% of Americans are now living paycheck to paycheck. You might be making enough to set money aside for medical emergencies but most Americans aren't. Life in total is unaffordable for most Americans and most are just winging it to get by.

[Anonymous]

How about forcing all health insurance companies to be non-profit, like BCBS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Health care is not "unaffordable". It's expensive, which is different. People often choose to go without insurance, or with low value insurance, because at the time they make those elections they are not consuming health care and prefer to spend their money on other things. That's understandably tempting, but also foolish. People need to prioritize health insurance when they choose among employment options, and when they budget for expenses. Too many people do neither, and then expect "others" to pick up the costs if they later need care.

Medicaid addresses the truly impoverished and indigent disabled; Medicare addresses the elderly. Others are expected to provide for themselves, which is not really unreasonable. It does, however, require a mindset of self-sufficiency and prudent prioritizing of health insurance expenses and saving for emergencies over discretionary lifestyle choices, and many people lack the necessary discipline and foresight to do that.

17% of every dollar spent in this country goes to health care. The highest percentage in the world. That, by definition, is unaffordable.

Do not attempt to change my mind on this. YOU WILL NOT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The solution is easy. Just let every American have the same plan members of Congress have.

problem solved.

Or just do what other countries have been doing. I suppose it might mean higher taxes for the wealthy though...

And higher taxes for the middle class.

No. We don’t need more taxes on w2 earners. W2 earners pay more than their fair share. The ultra-wealthy need to pay taxes. Did you see the article in the NYT today about the loophole that allows people like Scott Bessent to avoid Medicare taxes? Let’s get rid of those loopholes. Billionaires need to pay taxes. That’s what we the people need to demand that “higher taxes” means

Looking at taxes in Europe, the middle class pays much higher taxes than here. People seem to think everything is paid for by taxing the rich.