You want these folks running your healthcare too?

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/2643785
They already do run healthcare - it is called Medicare, and it is far more efficiently run than private insurance plans.
hmmm, ok care to expound on your pie in the sky claim...
 

stdreb27

Active Member
still amazed that fox news is biased, but nothing else is...
And yet they still have higher viewship than any of the other cable news network. And many times combined.
 

cowfishrule

Active Member
like what, Clinton News Network ?
God forbid you see anything positive about a republican on there.
and lets not even start to discuss the print media (ny times, etc)
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/2643785
..- it is called Medicare, and it is far more efficiently run than private insurance plans.
That, seriously, has got to be in the top 5 most outragous and inaccurate claims ever posted in the Aquarium.
 

salty blues

Active Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/2643785
They already do run healthcare - it is called Medicare, and it is far more efficiently run than private insurance plans.
Gimme a break. The money wasted on the fraud in the system far surpasses the money that actually goes for medical care.
 

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/2644797
Sure- take a look at the % of $ that goes ,into care vs overhead. Medicare returns much more into care.
ok, I'm not sure what you're getting at, unless you're talking about money put into the government vs care put out, vs money put into an insurance system vs care put out. There is no way that number is going to work. For a couple reasons. Mainly Medicare isn't solvent. That is like saying Amtrack is more efficient than southwest airlines. Unless you mean something else.
 

geridoc

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2644057
hmmm, ok care to expound on your pie in the sky claim...
Don't confuse size (the Medicare Program spends a huge sum of $), with efficiency. The cost per participant has risen faster in private insurance than in medicare . Then there's the issue of choice. while the right persists in warning that the "gumment" will tell you what doctor to use, in fact medicare does no such thing-it is the HMO's that do this while determining which patients get which treatments.
 

geridoc

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2644939
ok, I'm not sure what you're getting at, unless you're talking about money put into the government vs care put out, vs money put into an insurance system vs care put out. There is no way that number is going to work. For a couple reasons. Mainly Medicare isn't solvent. That is like saying Amtrack is more efficient than southwest airlines. Unless you mean something else.
what I mean is that Medicare spends (I recall) more than 90 cents of every dollar on care, VS. HMO's, that spend below 80 cents of each dollar on actual medical care. BTW- those numbers are approximate since I don't have the current numbers home with me .
 

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/2645224
what I mean is that Medicare spends (I recall) more than 90 cents of every dollar on care, VS. HMO's, that spend below 80 cents of each dollar on actual medical care. BTW- those numbers are approximate since I don't have the current numbers home with me .
That is a somewhat valid point, the question is does the 10% cover the overhead that medicare incurs...
90% of money could be going into the actual care of the patient, but (as with all government programs it seems) and extra 30% could be needed for the administration of the program. I don't know. Just pointing this out.
 

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/2645215
Don't confuse size (the Medicare Program spends a huge sum of $), with efficiency. The cost per participant has risen faster in private insurance than in medicare . Then there's the issue of choice. while the right persists in warning that the "gumment" will tell you what doctor to use, in fact medicare does no such thing-it is the HMO's that do this while determining which patients get which treatments.

Originally Posted by GeriDoc

http:///forum/post/2645224
what I mean is that Medicare spends (I recall) more than 90 cents of every dollar on care, VS. HMO's, that spend below 80 cents of each dollar on actual medical care. BTW- those numbers are approximate since I don't have the current numbers home with me .
That being said, I don't like insurance either, my whole contention is that medical insurance is a scale model of government control on a market, (essentially a mini-government) They on a smaller level fix prices, collect premiums (taxes), and redistribute wealth from non-users to users. And because of that we've do have rapidly increasing costs associated with that. (along with some other stuff that really does increase costs on the doctors side) But we've had a scale model, you think it doesn't work, that doesn't mean we should ramp it into a full blown single payer government provided health care system.
And that isn't getting into the government telling me what I have to do for the health of my own body.
 

reefraff

Active Member
If the medicare system is so great why do the vast majority of medicare receipients opt into the health plans offered by PRIVATE insurance companies (United Health Care, Kaiser etc.) ?
 

geridoc

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2645271
If the medicare system is so great why do the vast majority of medicare receipients opt into the health plans offered by PRIVATE insurance companies (United Health Care, Kaiser etc.) ?
That would be a very good question, if only the premise were correct. Actually, the overwhelming majority of recipients choose traditional medicare. There is a good discussion of the differences, advantages and disadvantages of each choice here http://www.medicareadvocacy.org/FAQ_ManagedCare.htm
 

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2645271
If the medicare system is so great why do the vast majority of medicare receipients opt into the health plans offered by PRIVATE insurance companies (United Health Care, Kaiser etc.) ?

Originally Posted by GeriDoc

http:///forum/post/2645323
That would be a very good question, if only the premise were correct. Actually, the overwhelming majority of recipients choose traditional medicare. There is a good discussion of the differences, advantages and disadvantages of each choice here http://www.medicareadvocacy.org/FAQ_ManagedCare.htm
You guys should probably site your sources...
 
Top