The Healthcare Mess and the Plan

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

EndSong

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
414
Reaction score
3
The current American Healthcare system is riddled with problems.

Doctors seem to work increasingly long hours for decreasing pay and gratitude.

There are 40 million uninsured Americans. 30% of all healthcare expenditures are paid by 5% of the population.

The baby boomer generation will soon be retiring, requiring more healthcare.

Americans spend increasingly more on healthcare than any other first world nation, yet our average health is among the poorest.

The looming shortage of physicians, particularly those in primary care.

The rising cost of healthcare that outpaces inflation.

And there are still large gaps in healthcare, particularly among the minority and rural populations.

Most of us know this. We hear it time and time again in Pre-health societies, particularly so-called Progressive Pre-Health Student Organizations. But what I hear very little about solutions. How can we fix American healthcare?

1) "Nationalized Health Care" This is the most common answer that I've heard. But of course countries with this system have had problems. Think about Britain where doctors choose to only take the healthiest of patients and exclude others on the basis of family history, or the long waiting lines for surgical treatment.

First off, when talking about Nationalized Health Care, one of the biggest problems in modern American Healthcare are the huge administrative costs. That's partially why costs are increasing. Government is, well, known for large, ineffectual, administrative bureaucracies. Think about the DMV. Ore better yet, the 70 some odd plans for senior medicare. Could American government be stream-lined enough to handle this function?

Secondly, many other countries with single-payer plans have A) higher taxes (40-50%) and B) considerably smaller populations. This makes the single-payer system a question of logistics. Will Americans take to higher taxes? People in California practically revolted as they saw gas rise up a few cents. Can we create a good, stream-lined system to provide universal care to 250 million?

2) Alternatively, what about a Free Market approach? With increasing competition, prices in almost every other market goes down, performance improves and consumers get a better product.

For example, the car market. Once American cars dominated the market in the country. That market dominance is now greatly reduced by the presence of Japanese cars.

Most Americans are not mechanical engineers and don't have great detailed knowledge of how cars work or what makes cars the best. In a similar respect, most Americans are not health workers and don't know that much about how the body works.

Yet, through the existence of idependent agencies (such as Consumer Reports), consumers can easily learn which type of car is best for them. So, why can't there be a Hyundai for health field? Something cheap, reliable and gets the job done.

Currently, its hard to find out how good your doctor is unless he tells you he performed blank procedures of blank-thousand patients. In the same respect, you never hear of people switching healthcare plans like do banks, cell phone plans etc. Perhaps a true free market is what is needed?

Thoughts?
 
I don't believe free market will work because of the nature of healthcare:
Healthcare is expensive and a requirement. therefore, healthy people will end up with low rates, and sick people with high rates. If I was an insurance company, I would just insure healthy people. Easy money. Chronically ill people would be segregrated, and charged large amounts. They would have no choice but to pay, or die. Literally, a case of your money or your life.

Also, while governemnts are ineffecient, they are not greedy. Look at Enron. A healthcare corporation could easily cheat the system to raise prices. "Hmm lets send less doctors to this wealthy area and then we can charge whatever we want..ha ha ha!". A govt organization is accountable to the public, while privates are accountable only to investors.

I have thought a lot about this, and I think the best way to lower health care costs is to make it locally controlled and governmentally overseen (kinda like a Fire or Police dept), and partially funded by taxes. The rest of funding would be from Health Care Savings Accounts (like a retirement account) and all money spent would be tax deductible. That way, people who spend the most can save the most. Its by no means a perfect system, but the best I could come up with without a glaring problem. Feel free to shoot it up, I like solving problems.

edited for sp. doh!
 
While I whole heartedly believe in free markets in most walks of economic life, it's not a natural solution to health care.
A truly free market would not allow government to pay for the care of a critically ill infant of uninsured parents. It would not allow the community, in the form of government, to provide clean water to prevent infectious disease. It wouldn't allow NIH funding of basic research in the public domain.
In short the market isn't some kind of diety. It is a tool. A tool that is often powerful, efficient, liberating & fair.
A free market in health care, creates an enormous dead loss in the form of insurance "competition" & administrative overhead.
 
The government already oversees control costs for medicare. Many of these community service hospitals are in such bad shape b/c the government pays less than cost sometimes for procedures. It also pays for 60% of the entire US health care, so I don't know how partially funding it solves anything and why people continue to have this idea that we have a "free market system". I think cutting the bureacracy and curbing wasteful spending are starts to solving the problem. Health Saving Accounts are by no means going to solve anything and really create new problems by themselves.
 
Top