itsyourworld_changeit asked: Health Spending Exceeded Record $2 Trillion in 2006
By ROBERT PEAR
Published: January 8, 2008
WASHINGTON — National health spending soared above $2 trillion for the first time in 2006 and has nearly doubled in the last decade, amounting to an average of $7,000 a person, the government reported on Monday.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/us/08health.html?ex=1200546000&en=44bd69a4dc9d5007&ei=5070&emc=eta1
Our system is Broken, HR 676 is the FIX!!
Will you support HR 676?
Check out some of the tremendous benefits that NHI will bring and see what you think:
Every citizen of the US will be covered from birth to death.
No more pre-existing conditions to be excluded from coverage.
No more expensive deductibles or co-pays.
All prescription medications will be covered.
All dental and eye care will be included.
Mental health and substance abuse care will be fully covered.
Long term and nursing home services will be included.
You will always choose your your own doctors and
hospitals.
Costs of coverage will be assessed on a sliding scale basis.
Tremendously simplified system of medical administration
Total portability – your coverage not tied to any job or location.
Existing Medicare benefits for those over 65 will remain the same or be vastly improved in many cases.
To begin with, it is NOT “Socialized Medicine”, far from it in fact. Also, it does not mean that our medical system will be taken over by the government and run like the post office as many of our opposition friends would mistakenly have you believe.
Basically, House Resolution (H.R.) 676, the “New Expanded Medicare” bill now in sub-committee in the House of Representatives simply creates a new and far more functional “single payer” method of paying for medical services while leaving the medical system itself completely alone and intact. This will eliminate the hundreds of complicated and redundant payment plans currently imposed on the system by private “for profit” health insurance companies and save literally BILLIONS of dollars every year by eliminating such wasteful duplication. This will allow your doctors offices and hospitals to function much more efficiently and serve your needs much more effectively as well. Just imagine what a huge benefit this
will be!
Taxes: We all know that nothing of any real value is ever free, but if you think of the taxes that will be required to support national health insurance as simply a lower cost alternative to the staggering private health insurance premiums that most of us already have to pay but which will be totally eliminated under the new system, then it becomes immediately clear that this could be a really good deal after all!
The real irony is that this new system will be a lot less expensive and provide much better services than the largely dysfunctional system currently in place and still leave us with the best health care system in the entire world, only with the New Medicare… it will be even better!
Don’t be put off by all of the misleading and often inaccurate rhetoric that you so often hear about changing our system. For example uninformed critics will ask “Do you really want your medical decisions made by some government bureaucrat in Washington?” Well, the truth is that with NHI, just about every medical decision will be made privately by you and your doctor. But ironically, under the current system, many medical decisions about what’s best for you are now being made by some corporate bureaucrat working for a private insurance company whose main concern is making larger profits by denying your claims. How exactly does that work out to be better for you??
Change is indeed often a very scary thing to most people, but when the need is so great and the proposed changes are so much better than the status quo, maybe changing to a NHI system in the USA is something that we can all think about supporting, whether you are a moderate, liberal or conservative, after giving it a lot of careful study and thought. Please call your congressperson and let them know what you think. They really need to hear from you.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
https://forms.house.gov/wyr/welcome.shtml
http://www.house.gov/conyers/news_hr676.htm
http://www.house.gov/conyers/news_hr676_1.htm
http://www.house.gov/conyers/news_hr676_2.htm
Even IF the cost of UHC reached $1 Trillion per year, we’d still be SAVING ourselves $1 Trillion per year.
Myths on Universal Health Care
By Dr. Marcia Angell, Past Editor New England Journal of Medicine February 4, 2003. Washington D.C.
Myth #1: We can’t afford a national health care system, and if we try it, we will have to ration care. My answer is that we can’t afford not to have a national health care system. A single-payer system would be far more efficient, since it would eliminate excess administrative costs, profits, cost-shifting and unnecessary duplication. Furthermore, it would permit the establishment of an overall budget and the fair and rational distribution of resources. We should remember that we now pay for health care in multiple ways – through our paychecks, the prices of goods and services, taxes at all levels of government, and out-of-pocket. It makes more sense to pay just once.
Myth #2: Innovative technologies would be scarce under a single-payer system, we would have long waiting lists for operations and procedures, and in general, medical care would be threadbare and less available. This misconception is based on the fact that there are indeed waits for elective procedures in some countries with national health systems, such as the U. K. and Canada. But that’s because they spend far less on health care than we do. (The U. K. spends about a third of what we do per person.) If they were to put the same amount of money as we do into their systems, there would be no waits and all their citizens would have immediate access to all the care they need. For them, the problem is not the system; it’s the money. For us, it’s not the money; it’s the system
Myth #3: A single-payer system amounts to socialized medicine, which would subject doctors and other providers to onerous, bureaucratic regulations. But in fact, although a national program would be publicly funded, providers would not work for the government. That’s currently the case with Medicare, which is publicly funded, but privately delivered. As for onerous regulations, nothing could be more onerous both to patients and providers than the multiple, intrusive regulations imposed on them by the private insurance industry. Indeed, many doctors who once opposed a single-payer system are now coming to see it as a far preferable option.
Myth #4: Claims the government can’t do anything right. Some Americans like to say that, without thinking of all the ways in which government functions very well indeed, and without considering the alternatives. I would not want to see, for example, the NIH, the National Park Service, or the IRS privatized. We should remember that the government is elected by the public and we are responsible for it. An investor-owned insurance company reports to its owners, not to the public.