Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsTuesday, June 9, 2009
Health Re: Basic Health Rates Going Up
Posted by Eli Sanders on Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 10:00 AM
Reacting to the news yesterday that Washington State, in response to its severe budget shortfall, is raising the premiums for Basic Health (translation: letting market forces push working poor people off the program rather than making state officials do the dirty work), Slog commenter Stupid White Man imagined the internal monologue of a young Basic Healther now forced to choose between higher healthcare premiums and drinks—and choosing the latter:
"If I am a young, healthy hipster who took a dead-end part-time job so I could have more time for my music, I might well decide I'd rather spend the extra $50/month on drinks."
And then Stupid White Man continues, offering his hopes in the face of these cutbacks:
I can't wait til they get forced into an insurance program by Obama and have to actually PAY for their insurance. They're gonna squeal like piggies when 20% of their barista/waiter/dipshit-at-kinkos income is taken away to pay for mandated health insurance.Seriously, I've met these morons. They think universal coverage means they won't have to pay.
Ah, the "get a real job and stop suckling at the government tit" argument. Slog commenter COMTE put the opposing view—"either way, we're all going to pay for it in the end"—rather nicely:
Of course this means all those people who now will no longer have ANY health insurance will overcrowd the only options left open to them for medical care, namely free clinics & emergency rooms. One of the reasons our health care costs are so high as it is is because those of us paying for insurance have to subsidize individuals with no insurance who end up utilizing the MOST EXPENSIVE form of health service, which just happen to be hospital E.R.'s - which many don't go to until they're so sick that less expensive preventative care options are no longer viable.This is what my grandpa used to call "penny wise and pound foolish"; too many people thinking "those poor people don't deserve health coverage", while failing to realize these people are already getting coverage at the highest possible cost, that they themselves are paying for regardless. So, the question really should be addressed as: if the insurance companies are going to soak the people who pay in order to cover the people who don't anyway, doesn't it make sense to get those non-payers connected to pro-active, preventative services that cost less, instead of continuing with the current broken system?
1
Thank you COMTE, yes. Also, having a public service will force private services to compete with it, driving down costs for EVERYONE. Everybody wins unless you have a stake in an HMO and then you're a bastard whose karma will come around anyhow.
2
These two comments together make a pretty persuasive case for mandated health insurance, something Obama resisted in the campaign. Stupid White Man is right that there are idiots out there who won't want to pay for health insurance under any circumstances. And as COMTE points out, those people are going to cost the taxpayer more to care for. The system won't work without mandates.
3
Oh no, no mandates, didn't you read the extensive debate by the Obamaphiles telling us we can't go for mandates?
IMHO we need Democrats who will
1. assert the need for single payer
2. organize, challenge and take out any democrats who don't support it
Because this hodgepodge thing they are devising doesn't seem to have any precedent in the real world.
What exactly is the value added by insurance companies who compete based on cherrypicking the most healthy and/or denying the most valid claims?
IMHO we need Democrats who will
1. assert the need for single payer
2. organize, challenge and take out any democrats who don't support it
Because this hodgepodge thing they are devising doesn't seem to have any precedent in the real world.
What exactly is the value added by insurance companies who compete based on cherrypicking the most healthy and/or denying the most valid claims?
4
According to the New England Journal of Medicine (yes... I'm sure I'm about to be told its a partisan right wing publication that no reasonable person would reference as a credible source):
"Sweeping statements about the cost-saving potential of prevention, however, are overreaching. Studies have concluded that preventing illness can in some cases save money but in other cases can add to health care costs."
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full…
"Sweeping statements about the cost-saving potential of prevention, however, are overreaching. Studies have concluded that preventing illness can in some cases save money but in other cases can add to health care costs."
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full…
5
It would be nice if some group or group(s) would step up to raise money to help people pay the increased rates. I know I would consider kicking in 25 bucks a month to help someone keep their coverage.
Then it would be nice if the legislature had done its fucking job and raised taxes so that would be unnecessary.
Then it would be nice if the legislature had done its fucking job and raised taxes so that would be unnecessary.
6
Please, stop spouting bullshit about prevention.
Here's a list of life expectancy by nation from Wiki with expectancy for all men women whatever with a star I put in where I believe they have nationalized socialized communistic health care:
Macau ( PRC) 84.379 81.36 87.45
Andorra 82.67 80.35 85.14
*Japan 82.07 78.73 85.59
*Singapore 81.89 79.29 84.68
San Marino 81.88 78.43 85.64
Hong Kong ( PRC) 81.77 79.07 84.69
*Gibraltar ( UK)[4] 80.9 78.5 83.3
* (supe communistic woo hoo!)France (metropolitan) 80.87 77.68 84.23
*Switzerland 80.62 77.75 83.63
* (the archetypical communist!) Sweden 80.63 78.39 83
*Australia 80.62 77.8 83.59
*Iceland 80.43 78.33 82.62
* (guess that crap about long lines is just crap right?) Canada 80.34 76.98 83.86
*Italy 79.94 77.01 83.07
Monaco 79.82 75.99 83.85
Liechtenstein 79.81 76.24 83.4
* Spain 79.78 76.46 83.32
* Norway 79.78 76.46 83.32
* Israel 79.78 76.46 83.32
(?) Greece 79.38 76.85 82.06
* Austria 79.21 76.32 82.26
* Malta 79.15 76.95 81.47
* Netherlands 79.11 76.52 81.82
(?) South Korea 79.10 78.10 80.10
* Luxembourg 79.03 75.76 82.52
* New Zealand 78.96 75.97 82.08
* Germany 78.95 75.96 82.11
* Belgium 78.92 75.75 82.24
* (OMG socialist! long lines!) United Kingdom 78.7 76.23 81.3
* European Union 78.7 75.6 82
* Finland 78.66 75.15 82.31
(?) Jordan 78.55 76.04 81.22
(?) Puerto Rico ( US) 78.54 74.6 82.67
Bosnia and Herzegovina 78.17 74.57 82.03
* Bermuda ( UK) 78.13 76 80.29
* Saint Helena ( UK) 78.09 75.19 81.15
United States 78.06
Ok so we're 30th from the top; and most with greater life expectancy than the USA have socialized commie national health insurance; and the ones that don't maybe they do, I just am not aware of the situation in Macau etc.; so please @4 stop spouting the baloney that it doesn't work, ok?
More...
Here's a list of life expectancy by nation from Wiki with expectancy for all men women whatever with a star I put in where I believe they have nationalized socialized communistic health care:
Macau ( PRC) 84.379 81.36 87.45
Andorra 82.67 80.35 85.14
*Japan 82.07 78.73 85.59
*Singapore 81.89 79.29 84.68
San Marino 81.88 78.43 85.64
Hong Kong ( PRC) 81.77 79.07 84.69
*Gibraltar ( UK)[4] 80.9 78.5 83.3
* (supe communistic woo hoo!)France (metropolitan) 80.87 77.68 84.23
*Switzerland 80.62 77.75 83.63
* (the archetypical communist!) Sweden 80.63 78.39 83
*Australia 80.62 77.8 83.59
*Iceland 80.43 78.33 82.62
* (guess that crap about long lines is just crap right?) Canada 80.34 76.98 83.86
*Italy 79.94 77.01 83.07
Monaco 79.82 75.99 83.85
Liechtenstein 79.81 76.24 83.4
* Spain 79.78 76.46 83.32
* Norway 79.78 76.46 83.32
* Israel 79.78 76.46 83.32
(?) Greece 79.38 76.85 82.06
* Austria 79.21 76.32 82.26
* Malta 79.15 76.95 81.47
* Netherlands 79.11 76.52 81.82
(?) South Korea 79.10 78.10 80.10
* Luxembourg 79.03 75.76 82.52
* New Zealand 78.96 75.97 82.08
* Germany 78.95 75.96 82.11
* Belgium 78.92 75.75 82.24
* (OMG socialist! long lines!) United Kingdom 78.7 76.23 81.3
* European Union 78.7 75.6 82
* Finland 78.66 75.15 82.31
(?) Jordan 78.55 76.04 81.22
(?) Puerto Rico ( US) 78.54 74.6 82.67
Bosnia and Herzegovina 78.17 74.57 82.03
* Bermuda ( UK) 78.13 76 80.29
* Saint Helena ( UK) 78.09 75.19 81.15
United States 78.06
Ok so we're 30th from the top; and most with greater life expectancy than the USA have socialized commie national health insurance; and the ones that don't maybe they do, I just am not aware of the situation in Macau etc.; so please @4 stop spouting the baloney that it doesn't work, ok?
7
@4: "Preventative Medicine" is a pretty broad spectrum. There are kinds that work (exercise and diet) and kinds that don't (full body scans for healthy people). But no one can argue persuasively that waiting for illnesses to get so acute that patients end up in the ER is more cost effective than letting people see a doctor when they feel ill.
8
@6 - Dude, seriously, get a blog or something. Nobody's going to try and make sense of that copy-paste mess "from Wiki" with a star "where [you] believe (!) they have [social] health care".
9
@4 - Did you read the article that you linked to? The point of that article was that cost-savings comes from preventative care in targeted groups like the obese, tobacco users, drug users, AND PEOPLE WITHOUT REGULAR ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE.
Fuck.
Fuck.
10
We'd need more than universal coverage to eliminate expensive ER visits by folks who didn't seek timely care. We'd also need less provider rationing - more ARNPs or other first-tier providers. Right now one huge barrier to seeking prompt care is the difficulty in finding a provider to see when you need to.
For many people the hassle factor of seeing a provider is high enough that they won't bother until they are really sick. Simply covering more costs won't change that situation.
For many people the hassle factor of seeing a provider is high enough that they won't bother until they are really sick. Simply covering more costs won't change that situation.
11
That racist piece of shit should be ridiculed off of Slog, not put on the front page. Is that the first "Stupid White Man" comment you've ever read or something?
12
It's funny (i.e. sad) how the rightwing cost talking point (preventative care is allegedly more expensive than care for disease) totally removes HUMAN BEINGS from the equation. Even though the talking point is false (because preventative care costs less than treating avoidable diseases), it doesn't matter as much as making sure that HUMAN BEINGS have long, healthy lives. Paying a bit more to do that would be the neighborly thing to do; except, you'll pay less to be neighborly in the end.
13
@6
I did not say it might or might not prolong life (but there could be lots of other factors at play in the numbers you reference) just that it does not save money, which was the thrust of the slog entry.
I did not say it might or might not prolong life (but there could be lots of other factors at play in the numbers you reference) just that it does not save money, which was the thrust of the slog entry.
14
@12
Then build that case. Not that it will cut costs.
@9
Universal health care is by nature the opposite of targeted.
Then build that case. Not that it will cut costs.
@9
Universal health care is by nature the opposite of targeted.
15
4 is right - preventive medicine does not always save money. It depends on the illness. But much of the savings will not come from prevention. We're not talking about prevention vs. treatment of an established illness. We're talking about national, socialized medicine and whether or not it saves money.
The U.S. currently spends $3724/yr/person on healthcare, but France spends only $2125/yr/person and Japan only $1759 and they both beat us in length of quality life years. How do they do it? The cost savings come, yes, from some prevention, but also from efficiency of paperwork, smarter care, more neonatal care and shit like that.
So WTF are we waiting for?
The U.S. currently spends $3724/yr/person on healthcare, but France spends only $2125/yr/person and Japan only $1759 and they both beat us in length of quality life years. How do they do it? The cost savings come, yes, from some prevention, but also from efficiency of paperwork, smarter care, more neonatal care and shit like that.
So WTF are we waiting for?
16
I disagree that raising the rates is a way to 'throw people off' without having to cut rolls. Raising the rate gives people the opportunity to find a way to pay the extra money, like side jobs or maybe under the table washing dishes. I know it's not great, but there are ways to get some extra money (while not glamorous) that would keep people on rather than just telling them they can't get insurance. Sure, there are those people who won't be able to get the extra money and be disqualified, and that sucks. But all in all, for such a bad situation I think this is the best way to try and handle it (short of raising taxes to cover the shortfall).
But I think it is disingenuous of the Stranger to totally write off this method since there will be more people able to afford the price increase then people who can't.
But I think it is disingenuous of the Stranger to totally write off this method since there will be more people able to afford the price increase then people who can't.
17
w7ngman's right: if Stupid White Man has ever contributed anything intelligent or useful to Slog, it's news to me.
18
@ You_Gotta_be_kidding_me: The saving for universal healthcare, the largest, is in administration. Right now, administrative costs for healthcare run at about 30%. That is mainly because there are so many different providers, and paperwork, and doctors spend an large amount of time collecting from these companies. When you have 1 form, 1 place for payment, 1 type of insurance it makes it completely streamlined. Imagine, if you will, a company where 30% of their overhead is for admin assistants, front desk people, and people who FILE. How profitable would that be? That business would sink. But because it's fucking healthcare, we all just pay it. Because we have to. Because the human condition is always going to lead to sickness and death. Always.
There have been studies (I am at work, so Google them on your own) that say if they could even cut admin costs to 15%, that savings would cover all the uninsured Americans. So sure, some of the savings are from preventative medicine, but the bulk is through a streamlined process in the business model of healthcare.
There have been studies (I am at work, so Google them on your own) that say if they could even cut admin costs to 15%, that savings would cover all the uninsured Americans. So sure, some of the savings are from preventative medicine, but the bulk is through a streamlined process in the business model of healthcare.
19
The United States spends 50 to 100% more on administration than single payer systems. By lowering these administrative costs the United States would have the ability to provide universal health care, increase benefits and still save money.
20
The first comment quoted is not by Stupid White Man. It's in quotation marks because Stupid White Man was quoting it from another commenter.
21
@13
look here's the point. There is a proven, tested model in the world. It's called single payer or nationalized health care or if you're a GOPster "socialism," whatever.
It's pretty well demonstrated that it leads to:
1. longer life. A pretty good proxy for better outcomes in general.
2. Lower cost.
and
3. Greater equity.
Meanwhile, all the nations that have it are doing just fine economically.
So my point to you is stop quibbling about some journal study that proves the entirely banal point that "some prevention costs more, some costs less" and get on board with what we know works.
@8
shutup.
If you can't see the facts in front of your face too bad for you.
Those starts are where I'm pretty darn sure they got the socialistic national health care. There are lots of tiny jurisdictions there on that list where I'm not sure so I did you the courtesy of dialing back on the certainty level. If you don't appreciate it fuck off.
What are YOU doing to move our nation forward btw?
Unlike most posts on most sites, that list is a buncha facts. There are so many people acting like there's some kind of issue or debate as to whether the single payer works or not. right here in the usa we got democrats and Obama backing off single payer when the experience of the whole world is:
it works.
And instead of some lame journal article that list there is a pretty succinct fact check that proves it. And instead of whining that someone respected you enough to provide facts -- oh forget it asshole.
You got a better idea for health care, tell us, otherwise shut the flying fuck up.
More...
look here's the point. There is a proven, tested model in the world. It's called single payer or nationalized health care or if you're a GOPster "socialism," whatever.
It's pretty well demonstrated that it leads to:
1. longer life. A pretty good proxy for better outcomes in general.
2. Lower cost.
and
3. Greater equity.
Meanwhile, all the nations that have it are doing just fine economically.
So my point to you is stop quibbling about some journal study that proves the entirely banal point that "some prevention costs more, some costs less" and get on board with what we know works.
@8
shutup.
If you can't see the facts in front of your face too bad for you.
Those starts are where I'm pretty darn sure they got the socialistic national health care. There are lots of tiny jurisdictions there on that list where I'm not sure so I did you the courtesy of dialing back on the certainty level. If you don't appreciate it fuck off.
What are YOU doing to move our nation forward btw?
Unlike most posts on most sites, that list is a buncha facts. There are so many people acting like there's some kind of issue or debate as to whether the single payer works or not. right here in the usa we got democrats and Obama backing off single payer when the experience of the whole world is:
it works.
And instead of some lame journal article that list there is a pretty succinct fact check that proves it. And instead of whining that someone respected you enough to provide facts -- oh forget it asshole.
You got a better idea for health care, tell us, otherwise shut the flying fuck up.
22
Single payer nationalized health care.
Insist on it.
Demand it be the first choice.
Except no imitations that line the pockets of CEOs who hate America.
Insist on it.
Demand it be the first choice.
Except no imitations that line the pockets of CEOs who hate America.
23
@14 - "Universal health care" means EVERYONE IS COVERED. "Targeted health care" is what we have now - treating the sick, dying, and those who can afford it.
Prevention plays into health care by educating people about their health and disease prevention and getting providers to provide treatment for disease quickly.
Learn to fucking read.
Prevention plays into health care by educating people about their health and disease prevention and getting providers to provide treatment for disease quickly.
Learn to fucking read.
24
Sounds great!
Now.
Just tell me how we decide who gets what treatment when.
Oh.
And how we will pay for it.
Now.
Just tell me how we decide who gets what treatment when.
Oh.
And how we will pay for it.
25
@24) You decide you get which treatment when. And you're able to see any doctor you choose, unlike the current system where you have to go within your HMO's circle of crap.
The government just pays the bill.
Where do we get it? At large, we'll be spending about as much (or less) than we do now on coverage. Typically, the rich will pay a bit more, and the poor will pay a bit less.
It just makes common sense.
The government just pays the bill.
Where do we get it? At large, we'll be spending about as much (or less) than we do now on coverage. Typically, the rich will pay a bit more, and the poor will pay a bit less.
It just makes common sense.
26
"The government just pays the bill."
Wow, what a moron.
I just want to remind the under 30 hipster barista dipshits that they, too, will have to pay. No more free lunch. You can guarantee there will be a new line to your pay checks with this cost being deducted. People like me, with plans that cost $12k a year? We'll be paying less. That's why I support universal coverage.
Reminds me of the time I had to listen to the hipsterette dipshitess fresh back from Italy talk about getting drunk, cracking her head open and getting 20 stitches.
What amazed her the most?
"It was free!"
Well no, dipshit, it wasn't free. Because you were too cheap to get $100 worth of travel insurance some ordinary Italian worker paid your bills.
The problem with hipster dipshits is that their mommies and daddies have been paying their bills so long they don't realize that not everything is free in life.
Wow, what a moron.
I just want to remind the under 30 hipster barista dipshits that they, too, will have to pay. No more free lunch. You can guarantee there will be a new line to your pay checks with this cost being deducted. People like me, with plans that cost $12k a year? We'll be paying less. That's why I support universal coverage.
Reminds me of the time I had to listen to the hipsterette dipshitess fresh back from Italy talk about getting drunk, cracking her head open and getting 20 stitches.
What amazed her the most?
"It was free!"
Well no, dipshit, it wasn't free. Because you were too cheap to get $100 worth of travel insurance some ordinary Italian worker paid your bills.
The problem with hipster dipshits is that their mommies and daddies have been paying their bills so long they don't realize that not everything is free in life.
27
"The government just pays the bill."
Wow, what a moron.
I just want to remind the under 30 hipster barista dipshits that they, too, will have to pay. No more free lunch. You can guarantee there will be a new line to your pay checks with this cost being deducted. People like me, with plans that cost $12k a year? We'll be paying less. That's why I support universal coverage.
Reminds me of the time I had to listen to the hipsterette dipshitess fresh back from Italy talk about getting drunk, cracking her head open and getting 20 stitches.
What amazed her the most?
"It was free!"
Well no, dipshit, it wasn't free. Because you were too cheap to get $100 worth of travel insurance some ordinary Italian worker paid your bills.
The problem with hipster dipshits is that their mommies and daddies have been paying their bills so long they don't realize that not everything is free in life.
Wow, what a moron.
I just want to remind the under 30 hipster barista dipshits that they, too, will have to pay. No more free lunch. You can guarantee there will be a new line to your pay checks with this cost being deducted. People like me, with plans that cost $12k a year? We'll be paying less. That's why I support universal coverage.
Reminds me of the time I had to listen to the hipsterette dipshitess fresh back from Italy talk about getting drunk, cracking her head open and getting 20 stitches.
What amazed her the most?
"It was free!"
Well no, dipshit, it wasn't free. Because you were too cheap to get $100 worth of travel insurance some ordinary Italian worker paid your bills.
The problem with hipster dipshits is that their mommies and daddies have been paying their bills so long they don't realize that not everything is free in life.
29
...just like every other government program.
What's not to like? What could possibly go wrong?
Well that does it, I'm a convert! A true believer now!!
O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah!
O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah!
What's not to like? What could possibly go wrong?
Well that does it, I'm a convert! A true believer now!!
O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah!
O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah! O-Bah-Mah!
30
Socialized health care does not have the burden of making a profit. Capitalist Health care, in it's endless, and madated by law, quest to grow profits every year will work constantly to provide less while charging more. Duh.
@29 Pretending the people you are arguing with are idiots that are brainwashed, won't win you any converts to your side. Try talking like a grown up, if you can. Maybe, if you make a semi-rational point, people will pay attention.
If the tens of millions of working poor in this country all of the sudden went out and got 'real jobs', our society would collapse. There would be no one working in our grocery stores, no one to sell clothes, no one to keep security, no one to check you into a hotel. These people are underpaid and they are contributing more to our society than the madmen on Wall Street that are working to tear the country down for their personal profit. So why don't you Right-Wingers out there think that these people should be able to go to the doctor when they are sick?
@29 Pretending the people you are arguing with are idiots that are brainwashed, won't win you any converts to your side. Try talking like a grown up, if you can. Maybe, if you make a semi-rational point, people will pay attention.
If the tens of millions of working poor in this country all of the sudden went out and got 'real jobs', our society would collapse. There would be no one working in our grocery stores, no one to sell clothes, no one to keep security, no one to check you into a hotel. These people are underpaid and they are contributing more to our society than the madmen on Wall Street that are working to tear the country down for their personal profit. So why don't you Right-Wingers out there think that these people should be able to go to the doctor when they are sick?
32
@31:
Yes. And we promise to make you look fabulous -
- right before we put you up against the wall.
Yes. And we promise to make you look fabulous -
- right before we put you up against the wall.
33
@30
"Socialized health care does not have the burden of making a profit."
I'm anxious to see how you plan to increase the volume of medical service available to the extent required to meet every citizen's demand immediately while maintaining quality once you eliminate the profit incentive. It may be challenging to find enough Doctors and Nurses who are uninterested in profiting from the services they provide.
"Socialized health care does not have the burden of making a profit."
I'm anxious to see how you plan to increase the volume of medical service available to the extent required to meet every citizen's demand immediately while maintaining quality once you eliminate the profit incentive. It may be challenging to find enough Doctors and Nurses who are uninterested in profiting from the services they provide.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Pill The Homos! by Dan Savage
-
Dear Huffington Post... by Dan Savage
-
Because Guns Make Us More Safer by Goldy
-
The Rick Santorum Rally in Tacoma Probably Could Have Gone Better by Paul Constant
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
Because Guns Make Us Safer by Goldy
-
Gay Kids Are Still Killing Themselves by Dan Savage
-
Gregoire: "This is signed!" by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (33) RSS