cricket_usa Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 Healthcare in the hands of the government is not the solution. Big HMOs? Government idea. Fail. Tax subsidies on Employer-based health coverage? Government idea. Fail. The big behemoth just got bigger with PPACA - we just created a monster HMO - the federal government. Any law that excluded defensive-medicine reform (tort reform) and cost reductions at the front-end of medical care is not worth the paper it was written on. Am I saying that the pre-PPACA system worked? No. But PPACA is not the answer. The excrement will hit the blades in 2014. http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2011/08/10/obamacare-bombshell-did-the-government-underestimate-the-costs-of-ppacas-exchanges-by-hundreds-of-billions/ So what is the solution for people who don't have insurance and cant afford one and can't qualify for medicare?
Brainfade Posted December 19, 2011 Author Posted December 19, 2011 The key question/trend CA is not the (mis)use of Government help(or dole). The bigger question to me is whether people are turning against each other?? Of late looks like US is looking at beginning of its end, similar to Europe. No its not pessmist in me but the us versus them discussions that I have seen aplenty growing up in India. Perhaps related, or maybe not, what is your take on the huge gap in salary/wages between say that of Cop/Firemen/Teacher..heck even College Professor these days with say even an IT guy these days (forget Bankers, Financial geeks etc). Whats your opinion on somebody maintaining law and order or saving lives making a fraction of what folks like me do an daily basis? :om::om: Here's how I summarized it to my wife yesterday: "Each side points to the worst offenders on the other side to make their point." Of course, I am uncomfortable with the idea that teachers, police officers and soldiers don't make as much as an IT professional. But, I do not want the government setting limits on what an IT professional can make. On the other hand, teachers and other government workers have more job security, life time pension benefits and health insurance coverage. It is a trade-off. Let's assume for a moment that teachers must be paid more so they will be motivated to do a better job. The question is - where should the money come from? Some people will say "increase taxes, increase the education budget, pay the teachers more, it is a noble profession." But, I beg to differ. As an educator, I have also seen massive administrative wastage in the public school system - bloated inept administration with little or no accountability. Teachers who come in with zeal and work extremely hard, but get disillusioned quickly because there is no incentive to perform - teachers get promoted by seniority not performance. The unions have hijacked the system to where a teacher cannot be fired unless he/she is convicted of an egregious crime. Do we really want to pump more money into this system? Is more money always the answer? Can't we come up with a reform plan to cut waste and pay teachers more within the same budgetary constraints? I would zealously support a plan that would pay teachers more at the front-end, provide performance-based incentives, but cut their future permanent benefits. I am also tired of hearing the union-backed message: "he/she is anti-education or anti-teacher because he advocates cutting the education budget."
Brainfade Posted December 19, 2011 Author Posted December 19, 2011 So what is the solution for people who don't have insurance and cant afford one and can't qualify for medicare? Medicare or Medicaid?
cricket_usa Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 you know not everyone qualifies for medicare and medicaid.
cricket_usa Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 They way you are against Govt in healthcare, I thought you had a better solution.
Lurker Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 Let's assume for a moment that teachers must be paid more so they will be motivated to do a better job. The question is - where should the money come from? Some people will say "increase taxes, increase the education budget, pay the teachers more, it is a noble profession." But, I beg to differ. As an educator, I have also seen massive administrative wastage in the public school system - bloated inept administration with little or no accountability. Teachers who come in with zeal and work extremely hard, but get disillusioned quickly because there is no incentive to perform - teachers get promoted by seniority not performance. The unions have hijacked the system to where a teacher cannot be fired unless he/she is convicted of an egregious crime. Do we really want to pump more money into this system? Is more money always the answer? Can't we come up with a reform plan to cut waste and pay teachers more within the same budgetary constraints? So really it is not about Government or market, but people who are working for these entities? Does it not boil down to that??
Brainfade Posted December 19, 2011 Author Posted December 19, 2011 you know not everyone qualifies for medicare and medicaid. You said Medicare. I asked if you meant Medicaid. Do you know the difference? One is age-based. One is income-based.
cricket_usa Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 Yes sir I know, medicare is age based and medicaid is income based. But I am still waiting for a solution for some one who don't qualify for both.
cricket_usa Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 OK going for a jog now. Hope CA post some solution instead of just saying how things won't just because its run by the Govt.
Brainfade Posted December 19, 2011 Author Posted December 19, 2011 They way you are against Govt in healthcare' date=' I thought you had a better solution.[/quote'] Make care more affordable with: tort reform, less dependence on defensive medicine and Make insurance more accessible and affordable by: phasing out employer-based health care, providing premium support incentives for the *individual* market making the insurance plan more portable and not job- or govt-dependent (therefore no pre-existing exclusions), open up the insurance free-market to provide nationwide choices in both Medicare and under-65 plans. End the $300+ billion subsidy for employer-provided insurance. Bottom line: I want choices and liberty over centralized, over-regulated government run schemes. Medicare - govt run - fail. SS - govt run - fail. We don't need for the United States Federal HMO to take over health care .... and fail. Sorry for the scattered writing ... again, I have explained my views in fuller sentences over the years. If you have the patience (and time), you may dig them up. http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj31n1/cj31n1-2.pdf I know you're looking for a 140-character healthcare solution to fit your attention span, but read the above 50-page pdf link on market-based healthcare reforms. Edit: BTW, I am not at your beck and call. So cut the "I am waiting for your solutions" cattle-excrement.
Brainfade Posted December 19, 2011 Author Posted December 19, 2011 So really it is not about Government or market' date=' but people who are working for these entities? Does it not boil down to that??[/quote'] But, doesn't the system that encourages mediocrity influence the people working in it? With taxpayer money to spend comes power. With power comes corruption and greed.
Lurker Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 But' date=' [b']doesn't the system that encourages mediocrity influence the people working in it? With taxpayer money to spend comes power. With power comes corruption and greed. With mediocre pay packages do you expect exceptional people CA? If a person makes 80K starting salary as IT against 30K as a teacher what stream do you think he would move into? And where do you think the more mediocre will end up?
Brainfade Posted December 19, 2011 Author Posted December 19, 2011 With mediocre pay packages do you expect exceptional people CA? If a person makes 80K starting salary as IT against 30K as a teacher what stream do you think he would move into? And where do you think the more mediocre will end up? I agree - to attract talent, pay a teacher on par with an IT professional ...say $ 60 K (it *is* a 9-month job), but cut his life-time pension benefits (do IT professionals get that?). Give him performance-based incentives so he can constantly improve. Ditch the seniority-based, automatic promotions. Ditch the union-backed no-fire policy. Recall, I did agree that teachers need to be paid more, but front-load it. Just slash the back-end expenses and the admin. waste in the education system. A different (and better) way to skin the cat.
Lurker Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 I agree - to attract talent' date= pay a teacher on par with an IT professional ...say $ 60 K (it *is* a 9-month job), but cut his life-time pension benefits (do IT professionals get that?). Give him performance-based incentives so he can constantly improve. Ditch the seniority-based, automatic promotions. Ditch the union-backed no-fire policy. Recall, I did agree that teachers need to be paid more, but front-load it. Just slash the back-end expenses and the admin. waste in the education system. A different (and better) way to skin the cat. Why not the other way around? Cut the IT guy's job down to 60K and give him pension? We all need money when we are older, why does a 25 year old need 75K? In less than a decade, or two tops, you have yuppies (like me) making 80K easy, buying houses, car, stuff that they really dont need. Where do you think the whole iPhone/iPad generation started?? Do we really need a Beamer by 35? On the other hand a Post Office chap who worked for 40 years gets shafted for the only thing he was working for? His pension? I am not against money at all. I can even understand yuppes starting at say 45 K and making 6 figures by when they are 40 (just a number). How can you have a 25 year old make twice the money to a cop/teacher and complain about pension CA? That does not seem correct, does it? xxx
jairamesh Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 The biggest welfare countries have the lowest inequality in wealth amongst it's population. The US has the worst welfare program amongst the developed world in terms of support it offers to it's poor, which is further exasperated by having one of the highest income inequality amongst the developed countries and even worse than India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. US has many plus points, but is a poor template for a more equal and just economic society. This article borders on Republican propaganda.
cricket_usa Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 So you think, if you unregulate the insurance industry, the free market will bring the price down? As soon as the govt removes its slimy hands of the poor insurance companies, they will get their act together and forget their profit motives and bring the price down? Keep dreaming. Your free market charges me 100$ for a Tylenol and 1000$ per day for a crappy hospital stay. So if you think freemarket will sort everything out, if thats the case why don't we outsource our military to private companies like Blackwater? I am sure they'll do a great job at the fraction of the price. How about gov run tricare? You say medicare is failure, but one of the teabagger disagrees, have you seen the sign "keep your govt hands of my medicare"? Conservatives have the habit of over simplifying everything, they believe somehow market will solve everything. I don't think people's life should be trusted to greedy corporates. P.S. I do have attention span of more than 140 words.
Brainfade Posted December 19, 2011 Author Posted December 19, 2011 So you think, if you unregulate the insurance industry, the free market will bring the price down? As soon as the govt removes its slimy hands of the poor insurance companies, they will get their act together and forget their profit motives and bring the price down? Keep dreaming. Your free market charges me 100$ for a Tylenol and 1000$ per day for a crappy hospital stay. So if you think freemarket will sort everything out, if thats the case why don't we outsource our military to private companies like Blackwater? I am sure they'll do a great job at the fraction of the price. How about gov run tricare? You say medicare is failure, but one of the teabagger disagrees, have you seen the sign "keep your govt hands of my medicare"? Conservatives have the habit of over simplifying everything, they believe somehow market will solve everything. I don't think people's life should be trusted to greedy corporates. P.S. I do have attention span of more than 140 words. I disagree with the Tea Partier. Medicare is broken and needs to be reformed. Second, no one is calling for a completely unregulated market. I urge you to read the pdf that I linked and see if you can respond sans the name-calling and blanket criticism of conservatives. There is a place for government. It is not in RUNNING the health insurance industry. Tricare is run as part of the defense budget by the military for the military. I am not sure what that has to with our discussion.
cricket_usa Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 Military=Govt Tricare = Govt run health care for Military, so if they are able to do a good job in that they sure can do it for pvt sector. I am not saying that govt should be running all the health care. Give people a CHOICE, if they want to get into govt run scheme let them do that but if they want to keep their pvt insurance let them do that. I havent called any one names, you are the one who said ridiculed my attention span.
Recommended Posts