Great points Shannon! This would be a really hard system to implement fairly.
(Glad to see that gasoline can be included 
!)
Would you prefer an insurance company that is mostly interested in making a profit for its shareholders, rather than providing the most comprehensive coverage possible, and that may be selling your medical informationto third parties so they can send you spam about diabetic socks and footwear, low carb foods, and other potential products that we could purchase?
I donāt like the idea of government in this business. But I like even less the āwasteā in the health āinsuranceā business coming from redundant overheads across providers, shareholder returns and executive compensation. I also do not like the fact that I can be turned down for coverage because I am going to be too expensive for a profit-oriented business to cover.
So, what about the so-called life-style choices, like smoking, alcohol abuse, obesity? Letās increase the taxes on cigarettes, booze and fast food. Have those taxes go directly to the health insurance program. Yes, those taxes are regressive, hitting the poorest classes hardest, but the behavior is a choice. Plus, if raising the price of a pack of cigarettes by another 50% causes half the smokers to decide to quit, I think we have all just come out ahead ā over the long term, health care costs will decrease, lost work days will decrease, and the smokers will have more money to live on.
If a particular behavior is going to cause increased health risks or the likelihood of higher health costs that are going to be borne by the population as a whole, letās tax the behavior. And that includes, for example, sky-diving and bungee jumping, if there is a risk of expensive injury with them.
What we have now does not work, except for the shareholders of the insurance companies and their executives. Everyone should be entitled to coverage and, since it is not going to be provided by the industry, it needs to be provided by the government. And, if the government covers everyone, the risk is spread around to all. So is the cost, but there are ways to address certain behaviors.
At the rate of all other prices Iāve already gone bankruped so the idea of a nationlized health care really appeals to me. I know though that our lovely Medicare insurance isnāt what I want to rely on but right now itās what I MUST rely on.
I have an older friend from New Zealand whose sister was diagnosed with brain cancer years ago. She was treated. She lived many many years to a ripe old age. Do you know how much she paid in total for all of her treatment? $5. Enough said.
We are behind the rest of the world in the coverage of our citizens. Surely there is at least one nationalized system we could look to without the propagandizers telling us āoh, but youād have to wait for a doctor or not be able to choose your own doctor.ā Anyone ever been to an ER and pushed into a supply closet on your stretcher while they tended to other patients? Anyone ever wait three hours to see a doctor for a regular appointment? Anyone ever not been able to see a doc because they werenāt on your insurance? Because I have! And I live in America - the land of the (not) free (healthcare). What are we so proud of about our system here? I know someone who had a claim denied for not getting pre-authorization for an ambulance ride. Your first call should be 911. Not āour menu options have changedā¦ā
And now you can use Google Health to keep up with all of your personal medical history. Hmmā¦
Our health care system makes me sick how so many people are given such a difficult time for basic needs. Our government gives so many grants for medical research with our taxes, which includes the space program- however when the most advanced equipment/newest medications are available - only thoose who can afford to pay out of pocket along with private health insurance plans gets to benefit. It is indeed a complicated mess.
MelissaBL Yes to all the above more than once on the Dr approval thing! I really HATE that one b/c I have to go to my Endo who is not approved on the Medicare Part D insurance who will refer me to a specilist then after 3 or 4 hours of waiting I finally get to see them only after finding out that my insurance donāt cover them! And your so right Tammy! It is a really complicated mess out there! Back when I had a private insurance or paid out the nose all the time I could get to any Dr almost at anytime. Now not so true!!! Another thing I have noticed in the Drs offices is that if your doing the Medicare thingy yoiu 9 out of 10 times are the last person called back! You should set in a dr office and see how many older ppl are sitting in those unconfortable chairs waiting to be called back! I have seen at a neroligist young football players get called back when an elderly person with a walker was last!!! I thought Drs had to take an oath about seeing ppl if they could not afford them! What happened to our simple be kind to others attitude???
Agreed.
" Anyone ever wait three hours to see a doctor for a regular appointment?" - No, never. All been seen for my scheduled appointments.
āAnyone ever been to an ER and pushed into a supply closet on your stretcher while they tended to other patients?ā - A lot of the people I saw waiting in the ER has simple things like āhigh-feverā, āstomach upsetā.
āAnyone ever not been able to see a doc because they werenāt on your insurance?ā ā Why not just see the doctor that your network?. You want to pick and choose doctors but then what? What if that doctors chooses not to participate with that insurer because the insurer does not pay on time or gives the doctor a hassle? Iāve dropped insurance plans when my doctor of choice no longer takes that insurance. Itās you choice.
Forcing those who have more to help those who have less is neither democratic nor in the best interest of anyone. No one has the right to the fruits of my labour. No one. If I donāt want to share then I should not be forced to.
I am sorry to split hairs, but my questions were intended to point out that the arguments made against socialized medicine are often some of the problems we already deal with in the privatized system. I just wanted to say that not everyone enjoys the same freedom or accessibility that our ādemocratizedā system champions.
And in defense of myself, because I feel a little cornered, my experiences are just as valid as yours. I am thankful that not everyone suffers under our current system. I am self-employed, so just āchoosingā a different insurance plan is not a freedom Iāve ever enjoyed. In Texas, we are lucky enough to have a high-risk state-funded insurance plan for people with conditions like Type I DM or HIV, but it is more expensive than Cobra plans, so I personally opted out. Iāve felt punished for my choice of career. I had assumed that I could get private insurance. Iām turned down again and again.
As for the ER, as a car accident victim in a large city like Dallas, I understand that they got to me as quickly as they could and am thankful for the care I received. But I did have to wait - the feared waiting that the pro-privatized warn us about Canadian hospitals and the like. And yes, some people come to the ER with non-critical issues, but some of those issues might have been prevented with conservative care approaches that a universal system could possibly prevent.
My only point was not that socialized would be perfect and privatized is the devil. My point was that we are quick to dismiss other systems because they might cause the flaws that already exist in our current one. I just want more consideration before we dismiss something that could be better.
I thought we were all in agreement that a totally-govāt-run system would be a bad thing and the privatized system we have fails to provide for everyone as well as it should/could. I appreciate an open dialogue, but the conversation is starting to get a little heated. I meant no hyperbole. My experiences were genuine.
Shannon, you present excellent arguments against something I firmly believe in. I respect that. It comes down to whether you believe it is the responsibility of the taxpayers to pay for the health of their brethren. I do. Others donāt. We may never - as a huge group of people discussing the topic - come to a consensus on this. I just know that someone makes a financial decision about the kind of care my family and I may receive. And thatās tough to swallow. So Iām unlikely to change my mind - even after I experienced some poor socialized implementation during a medical emergency on a trip in the Czech Republic.
My father is a firefighter/paramedic - a city employee. People forget that police and fire are essentially socialized programs. Each city government provides these basic public services. They enjoy a living salary, respect in the community (well, fire more than police in some cases), and provide for the people in their communities. No one waits to be seen by the fire department (within reason). Itās a well-run public system and funded through our taxes. Innovations are made, technology is updated, and the people are excellently trained - through our taxes. I see that and then I see the medical world and I have questions. Does that make me an ingrate? I donāt know. Does it make me a communist? Donāt think so. I would feel that it was worth my tax dollars more so than many of the systems I pay into already. So thatās why I believe what I believe.
Since no one replied to my data search. I re-emphasize the point:
The USA spends more GOVERNMENT money on health care than most other countries.
So, while I get people just not liking the government and not wanting to pay for other peopleās health care, I do not buy the argument that you would have to pay MORE taxes for nationalized health care than you do now. Itās just that the tax dollars could be put to MUCH better use.
I bet if you calculate what you spend on health insurance, deductibles, and all health related expenses and add that to your taxes, the amount is higher than the tax you would pay in most European countries. I know that it is true for me.
Judith,
Thatās a good idea! Your so right a good goverment would be nice but we have to deal with what weāve got. But the Small, Medium or Large deal is a really good idea. Some folks just canāt arrord to have diabetes here now!
I know I was probably the main one who started the heated trend but I just canāt afford the prices of insurance for myself and like you Iāve been turned down with the private sector alot of times. My hubby has just suffered his 3rd heart attack and if you have a preexisting condition the prices are higher IF you can get insurance and as I have had happen to all of my family excluding my youngest right nowā¦ Weāve all been turned down for insuranceā¦Yes I could have bought it on my kids when they were young but I couldnāt afford to and now itās a little too late! Iām really sorry if my opinion got everybody else mad about the goverment but itās just my opinionā¦I didnāt ask for TYpe 1 and got it anywayā¦neither did my oldest who is also TYpe 1. Itās just lifeā¦We have to deal with whatever is handed to us.
How can a diabetic NOT have a passionate opinion about how healthcare should be handled? I donāt think you have to apologize for adding heat to the debate, Doris. When you add all of the hundreds of personal factors and experiences we each bring to this dialogueā¦thereās going to be heat. Every person is informed by their own unique perspective, and we shouldnāt be surprised by disagreement. There are over 3400 members here and that means 3400 opinions.
What I want to avoid in the future is the kind of light flame war that I keep seeming to get myself involved in. Though usually not easily bruised, itās easier in the online community to be an anonymous voice and itās more difficult to read peopleās tones, as we all know. I have to admit that I keep feeling hurt by some of the passionate responses in these forums - from whether one should have a glucagon Rx to whether we should eat low-carb to who should pay for our healthcare. My husband told me to remember that weāre each coming here for support and to visit only the discussions where I leave feeling better, not the ones where I feel righteous anger or self-doubt.
So, whether we make statements that ā ā ā ā each other off or not, I just want to take a moment to remind everyone, as Kerri wrote recently for her dLife column, that YDMV - your diabetes may vary. As may your experiences, your opinions, and your politics. And we should be okay with that. Until someone appoints the tudiabetes community to shape public policy about healthcare, we should remember that all opinions are coming from well-meaning people. We have the right to vote for representatives who share our values and to become advocates for a better system. We all agree on that.
Thank you MelissaDL I have my own oppions and those are mine! I donāt mean to ā ā ā ā off the others but I know That I can craw under ppl skin!!! Itās my own opinion not everybody elses and thatās that!
I once sat in a waiting room all night for chest pains. I had insurance and since the pains started at eleven oclock at night I didnāt have any other option. I found out a couple of weeks later that the doctor that was assigned to me in the ER was not in my network. I paid out of pocket on that one.
I usually wait 30 to 40 minutes after my scheduled appointment time to see a doctor - this applies to the variety of doctors that I have seen in my city. I always arrive at least fifteen minutes early for my appointments.
I think the quality of care you get has a lot to do with where you live. Orlando isnāt so hot with their ER or doctor wait times. Khurt, what you are expierencing isnāt the norm for a lot of people.
Iām the one who asked about the current govt. spending statistics. I agree with Kristen here. Our govt. is already spending a fortune on healthcare; we just arenāt seeing very good results. I also agree that if you add up all your copays and deductibles plus what youāre paying to the insurance co through your employer or on your own, then you probably would come out ahead if we had nationalized healthcare instead of behind.
ā¦and no, food stamps should not be allowed to be used on soda and junk food. Buying processed junk-food and fast-food is NOT less expensive than buying fresh food; itās just less expensive than buying high-quality processed food (aka ready-to-eat.) Healthy eating is possible on a small budget; it just takes planning and cooking.
I live in a former communist country. Now, in Hungary, there is completely free choice of doctors. When people think back to days when they were restricted in their choice of doctors, they think back to communism.
This whole in-network, out-network business doesnāt make sense to me. I donāt see how it matches a supposedly āfree market modelā. The US system is NOT based on free market. We do not let competition drive down prices-- not for insurance, not for drugs, not for any health expenses. We have a system where the people profiting from the drugs have significant control over prices and political power as well (i.e. lobby etc).
Melissa shared with us some very bad experiences. These were real events, not hypothetical questions. Even if you yourself have not experienced such things, I think that it is important to recognize that these things DO happen.
The questions that we are addressing here is what kind of reform do we need to change that.
So far (in this surprisingly peaceful discussion), we have not debated WHETHER or not the US system needs reform. Even Shannon and I can very clearly agree on that 
What we see differently is HOW that reform should be done and what should be the result.
Would anyone argue that the US system does not need reform?
(Khurt, I am curious about your thoughts on this!)