‘Liberal’ College Students Suddenly Revolt Against Obamacare-Like Health Fees

[inactive]

Interesting that you name Switzerland as arguably the best...it was on my list also. I lived there for nearly a year, and overall it is a great system. Do you know that Obamacare is modeled after Switzerland's health care system?...or was that the point you were making?
- Switzerland's health care system is a combination of federal and private--the private being highly regulated by the feds
- Switzerland's govt. mandates that everyone has basic insurance--you can pay for additional insurance if you want
- Those that can't afford basic insurance are given a subsidy by the govt.
- Private insurance companies are forbidden from making a profit on the basic insurance, and the prices are regulated by the feds

With some fine tuning of how Obamacare works, including stricter federal regulation of our entire health care system, we'd have exactly what Switzerland has. We're quickly heading in that direction. I'm still not convinced it's the best, but it would be better than what we have.

RugersGR8, which facts are you referring to? If you like Switzerland's health care system, you'd have to be a supporter of Obamacare. Nearly everything that Obamacare does you'll find in Switzerland.

This is the best post in this entire thread. The only other thing worth adding is

Healthcare costs in Switzerland are 11.4% of GDP (2010), comparable to Germany and France (11.6%) and other European countries, but significantly less than in USA (17.6%).

(http://www.bag.admin.ch/themen/krankenversicherung/01156/index.html?lang=en)

That's over a full THIRD reduction in cost bu GDP.

What many fail to realize is that the old system still had a subsidy of health care of the poor, but rather it was through the ridiculously high costs those who actually PAID (via cash or insurance coverage) for those who could not pay, medicare and medicaid programs, prescription drugs that some of where were entirely unaffordable (ever priced chemotherapy medication?), and increased level of care for those who could/did not access primary and preventative care as they should.

 

[dennishoddy]

There are alternatives to government ran health care, and Oklahoma has it.

http://www.surgerycenterok.com/pricing/

Unfortunately the gubberment won't keep their hands out of our health care because they believe we are too stupid to let the free market rule.

Compare the prices in the thread with what insurance pays. A $5000 surgery would cost 5X that if paid with insurance, since the DR's have to pay a staff of a dozen to keep up with gubberment paperwork, and insurance paperwork.

 

[John6185]

I don't agree with forcing people to buy insurance although I insist it is the responsibility of a father to provide for his family. But taxing people for not having insurance is wrong, some can't afford insurance and the young don't need insurance. Obamacare should be throughly reviewed and rewritten to make it more palatable.

 

[Sanford]

Interesting that you name Switzerland as arguably the best...it was on my list also. I lived there for nearly a year, and overall it is a great system. Do you know that Obamacare is modeled after Switzerland's health care system? ...or was that the point you were making?

You mean except for the part where the Swiss Government doesn't pay for it, right? That's the main point I was making ... a successful market-based system without the government footing the bill is not only possible, but performs better than most socialized medicine schemes.

 

[Sanford]

Want to cut US healthcare expenditures? Impose limits on malpractice and malpractice insurance. If the US didn't have such a litigious society, rates could go down.

Or leave it in place and require all punitive damages be paid into a national fund to provide healthcare for the uninsured.

 

[Shadowrider]

Or leave it in place and require all punitive damages be paid into a national fund to provide healthcare for the uninsured.

Tort reform on steroids without tort reform. Brilliant! You just eliminated basically all malpractice suits. The doctors would love that!

 

[Lurker66]

Or leave it in place and require all punitive damages be paid into a national fund to provide healthcare for the uninsured.

Dumb idea but so is PBrambles. Anyone should have the right to sue Doctors who screw up.

 

[TerryMiller]

Tort reform on steroids without tort reform. Brilliant! You just eliminated basically all malpractice suits. The doctors would love that!

Dumb idea but so is PBrambles. Anyone should have the right to sue Doctors who screw up.

He did refer to punitive damages, not compensatory damages. "Injured" parties could still sue but would be limited to what they could get for "pain and suffering." If nothing else, I'd bet that the malpractice insurance would see lower premiums for doctors and lawyers wouldn't be able to get so much money for their efforts. Not to pick on JB Books and a few others here, but anything that would limit lawyers that get more than the patient gets would be a benefit.

Side benefit of tort reform of some kind would probably be lower medical costs, since the doctors wouldn't have to be paying so much. Why else are doctors flocking to states that have passed tort reform, like Texas?

 

[Sanford]

He did refer to punitive damages, not compensatory damages. "Injured" parties could still sue but would be limited to what they could get for "pain and suffering.

Yes - and be fully recompensed for all other "real" damages such as related medical care and lost wages past, present, and future for their projected life span. But the huge monetary awards made to "punish" the (doctor, drug manufacturer, etc.) for wrongdoing should go to benefit the public rather than the individual or their attorneys, etc.

 

[Dave70968]

He did refer to punitive damages, not compensatory damages. "Injured" parties could still sue but would be limited to what they could get for "pain and suffering."

Pain and suffering is a compensatory damage, not a punitive damage.