Obamacare: Cheaper than you think

If you want to reduce health care costs start by reducing the cost to doctors and hospitals. According to AMA in 2007 there were 921,900 physicians in the USA who pay an annual average of $150,000 in medical malpractice insurance. While this adds up to $138 billion in cost there was only $3.7 billion paid out in claims according to the Kaiser Family Statehealthfacts.org. Where did the other $135 billion go? Attorneys?

I find it outrageous that President Obama wants to control doctors salaries but leave untouched attorneys. If you control doctors salaries then you need to control all of the other portions of costs that go into medical malpractice.

No I am not a doctor. Just an individual who has done some financial digging.

First no one has the right to tell my love one they should just go to a corner and die, second members of congress have exempted themselves from their own health care plan for a reason, third member of congress are wealthy enough to pay for health care for everyone so lets tap their wealth and third if anyone needs to lose a few pounds it's our porky representatives.

comment by tim That is why they are 3rd world countries. Socialism works only until you run out of other peoples money.

And capitalism works until all your money flows to the rich and you have no more left to buy what they are selling. Why aren't people spending, because they don't have any money. How does anyone expect working citizens to get more money so they can spend it without some kind of intervention. Unless you can convince the rich to start spending their money on products made here and not putting their money into other businesses, that will fail anyways then what should we do.

Oh ya the first income tax was brought in by the republican party by the way..

And Peter raises and interesting question. Although it is appropriate for individuals to help one another, is it ethical/moral to force someone to pay for anothers care? The greatest at risk minority in this country is the indiviual.

Americans don't want health reform. They want something simple. Why can't you order a la carte insurance. ie office visits and disaster coverage. 30 year olds don't need heart bypass coverage and 50 year old don't need IVF coverage. At least let people purchase coverage across state lines like we do with term life insurance. This would give your more choice and more competition w/o any cost to gov't.

The ONLY way to start controlling costs is to put the person receiving the service in charge of paying by either a higher deductible or paying a percent instead of a flat copay. Everything else can come after that. Patients who pay $10 for an office visit or an MRI don't care about costs but they would if they had a role in the decision. Never doubt the benefits of personal responsibility.

There is a bigger issue here. We have too many people using the Emergency Room as a free clinic, as they have no healthcare and they are here illegally. I really needed the ER one evening due to a dog bite, but there were so many people there with colds and coughing, I did not have time to wait and treated myself at home.

If we would allow the illegal immigrants to become US citizens, they could file tax returns and pay taxes for hospital care and education. If we let them pay their fair share, we might not need a bail out from a government hand out. We need to close the borders and stop treating people in our hospitals and giving their children free education to people that don't belong here legally. If they really want to become an American, let them and accept their tax income to help our great nation.

If Americans were to love their neighbors they wouldn't be so much concerned about some of their pennies going into providing coverage for others. Everyone in this country minds his/her business without giving a damn what is happening to the next door neighbor, infact they don't even care to know who lives next door….what a society!!!! We prefer to have perfect health care for our families and watch the next door neighbor die of a little sickness because he couldn't afford health insurance…and then we go out to save the rest of the world from their problems?

A third-party payer system, where neither the seller nor the buyer care about the price, can logically be expected to encourage higher prices.

This is just common sense people. Health "insurance" (which should really be called just coverage because it's nothing like insurance), is the problem, not the solution.

For those who poopoo the fear that competition will be destroyed…what happens when you throw in a third party that has a limitless supply of funds (or at thinks and acts like it does)? How can other insurers compete with that?

Does anyone remember what was said about Amtrak when the government took it over?

How many different providers of passenger rail service are there?

Thinking. It's the new black.

Government run health care is the VA. Very scary!

Everyone has health care in the U.S. but not everyone has insurance. The numbers reported of those without health care include illegals and many people already elgible for government programs but are too lazy to sign up. Many others prioritize differently and do not choose to sign up for employer sponsored care. That is their free choice to make and they are free to spend the money on whatever they like.

We are all going to be taxed beyond reality to pay for obamacare and it is a means of wealth redistribution by making those who work hard pay for those who do not. But this should not be a surprise since an apparent majority voted for socialism this past election. Well, socialism is what we are going to get. Welcome to the USSA!

I'd like to know what kind of insurance the Congress/Senate have that the taxpayers pay for and how much they pay into it (probably nothing).

A public plan will cause business to drop their health coverages for employees–I work in this area and businesses are already talking about this— the private companies will go out of business because they cannot compete with the subsidized government plan—-this leaves us with a government run health care system between me and my doctor and also means less care will be approved for older people– that is what happens in these kind of systems—what a way to control social security costs–what a way to reduce health care costs—deny treatment in the last 15% of life when most costs are incurred by just letting the old folks die.

If the government cannot contain the cost increases and fraud in the current Medicare and Medicade programs, what makes anyone think they will do a better job with a vastly larger government bureaucracy?

Let's talk some facts. Currently healthcare in the United States costs 18% of the 14 trillion dollar gross national product. That's a little better than 2.5 trillion dollars a year, not ten years. In fact, Health care costs almost twice as much per capita in the U.S. than in the next highest country. There are 50 million people in the U.S. without health insurance and many more under insured. Many of these people get their care from locla public health districts, public and charitable hospitals, often in the emergency room. These costs are passed on to the cost of medicare, medicaid and private insurance to some degree. In surance comapnies spend up to 19% of premiums on administrative costs in addition to a profit margin of at least 10%, all to try and stop paying benefits. Because of this, doctors and hospitals have to hire many people to try and thread the maze of hundreds, (as many as 1500), different policies thus roughly matching the 19%, in order to get your bill paid. In opposition, Medicare's administrative costs are about 3.5% and the Veteran's administration does it for about 0.5%. Drugs cost from one third to 75% more in the U.S. than in Canada or Mexico for the same drugs, manufacured by the same companies.

Two things are clear. One is that the private sector has been a miserable failure in healthcare. The other is that enough money is already beind spent on healthcare to cover every person in the United States. Just like in every other industrial country in the world, 38 of who have much better healthcare outcomes than we do at half he price. Lastly, I am degreed in economics and there is not now, nor has there ever been free markets.

Hey fellow PRODUCERS….. Google:

THIDWICK – The big hearted Moose

Read the story!

Join Me 'Shed your antlers'

SWEEET!

Hey fellow PRODUCERS…… Just let them do it! Open the Commie/ Socialism flood gates full on!

Stop fighting:

relax!……. BRING IT ON!

let AmeriKa collapse in on itself: We are just about there…..

let's prove once and for all and see if Commie/ Socialism works….

After the collapse, the Government can go back to providing BASIC governmental services…..

Get out from under all of the touchy feeely 'Momma make it better' government programs……

AmeriKA is the TITANIC you will NOT stop the sinking …it's done deal…

WAY to many people on the Government DOLE!!!

PRODUCERS are VASTLY out numbered in AmeriKA!!!

Come Join me on the top Deck of the TITANIC, enjoy a Brandy & Cigar:

Watch all of the free entertainment watching people on the Government DOLE, run all over the ship going NUTZ when the MASSIVE cutbacks happen…like California???

SWEEEEEEEEEET!

I myself have cut back no less than 80 % I am 54 and semi retired out of total debt,

just work a day or two now a week, No point in exerting myself…… only to be made a fool of paying more than HALF of what I make in TAXES supporting the TITANIC!

Join me CUT BACK on your labors…

STOP producing let it SINK! Producers will be fine! we are Survivors!

THE REAL WORLD OF HEALTHCARE REFORM:
facts: *GOOD THING 70% OF AMERICANS ARE INSURED TODAY.
*39% of the uninsured are in 5 states, Florida,Texas,New Mexico,Arizona, and California. All of these state are entry points for immigrants.
*21% (9.7mm) of the uninsured are NOT CITIZENS!!!!!!!
* 14mm are eligible for an EXISTING program but HAVE NOT enrolled!!!! Do thery not want to do the paper work or wait in line???
* 9.1mm have a houshold income of at LEAST $75K per year and do NOT buy insurnace!!!

The real task should be to insure the 20mm people who fall through the crack because they make too much money to qualify for Medicade but not ENOUGH money to pay for health insurance!!!

HOW DO WE FIX IT:
1) Tort reform capping what the lawyers can receive in any award at 5%…. that might STOP much of the TV advertizing and ambulance chasing. Doctors are human and will make mistakes but TODAY everyone of them practice defensive medicine which adds to the cost of health care… BIG TIME!!! LETS STOP THIS and REDUCE cost…..
2) Set up more "Free" clinics in every city and staff them retired physicians who would be willing to practice 1 or 2 days a week if the GOVERMENT would pay for their malpractice insurance!!!!!!!!
3) Any city with a population of 500,000 or greater make the "NOT FOR PROFIT" hospital pay INCOME TAX just like the "FOR PROFIT" hospitals do… put that money into the state Medicade program!!!!!!!!!! Do NOT PUT IT IN THE GENERAL FUNDS ACCOUNT!!!!!!!!!!
4) Create a NATIONAL CERTIFICATE OF NEED for hospital system to open a NEW hospital/surgery center!! As populations move to the suburbs every hospital system FEELS they MUST build NEW hospitals to make sure they capture those patients before some other system opens a hospital!!! Do you think that might COST the health care system not only MONEY but add to the nursing shortage?????? Can we NOT drive 10-15 to get to a hospital in the large metro areas?????
5) How many MRI's or open heart programs does a city (metro area) of less than 2mm NEED???????? In my area with 4 hospital systems and 3 400 bed plus hospitals feel they all need to have one!!!!!!! The NOT FOR PROFIT hosptial systems DO NOT SHARE WELL….. if they did we would be able to REDUCE the cost of health care!!!!!
6) Allow the 20mm who fall through the crack move into the Medicade syatem!!!!
7) TODAY we DO NOT have enogh physicians and nurses to add 46-50mm new people into the health acre system if if we have a single payor system or offer a goverment option…. THE GOVERMENT SEEM TO NOT UNDERSTAND WITHOUT THE DOCTORS THEY HAVE NO SYSTEM!!!! Many Physicians today are NOT accepting new Medicade patients becausde the Medicade system in most states pays so LOW…. We are now seeing Physicians also doing this with Medicare patients…And the president is "TALKING" about REDUCING the reinbursment for both systems to pay for his version of health care!!!!!!
STOP the use of the ER by the uninsured for visits that could be done in "free" clinics or community health clinics. If these people are on any type of state or federal program then charge them back and REDUCE what they are receing until the bill is satisfied!!!!!! This would slow down the MOST expensive way for people to receive routine health care…

THERE IS A LOT MORE COMMON SENCE WAYS TO REDUCE HEALTH CARE COST AND PROVIDE COVERAGE TO THE UNINSURED WHO REALY NEED IT IF "our" congressional leaders operated in the real world…….

Anyone who has lived in Europe can tell you…. IT'S WORTH IT! France is the best example. Everyone's just freaking out about BIG Government. Get over it.

Sure is nice of CNN to pitch for Obama's healthcare plan. "Cheaper Than You Think." Gimme a break – seems that could be said of certain news organizations too. No question that CNN and ABC have proven to be cheap dates for this Administration.

A government run health care system is the way to go. They did such a fabulous job with public housing, public transportation, public schools, and, of course, public toilets. The government always gets everything right. Seriously, I can't believe that anyone could actually believe that government is gonna get this right.

I think most americans agree that our goverment is wasteful in spending. We're deep in debt,and politicians are still spending on unnessesary junk. Health care for all americans should be afforable for all.What i don't understand about america people, who have freedom of speech,a constitution,bill of rights, don't ever make politicans answers for the wrongs they do.Most just gripe and carry on, fight among democrates and republicans,which neither party seems concern for the working american people. AMERICANS need to stand up for their rights….QUIT GRIPING AND DO IT!its hard for the minority of people like me to write our congress and tell them what we think is wrong.We don't need a goverment control health care.WE need laws to protect the uninsured and people with pre-existing conditions to have affordable health care. Instead of the almighty dollar thinking politicans , which most need to be fired from their jobs that they can't do.ITs all about money instead of peoples health. Drug companies are making big profits, with uninsured americans pay for with their lives.

We have to do more then keeping our current system. I am a physician and own a small clinic which which have 6 employees. We have basic problems of the cost of for delivering our healthcare using the current ER system for the uninsured and cost of healthcare overall because we are living longer. The cost of an ER visit is at least 10x more than an average doctor's visit because the ER have to cover themselves from being sue by ordering every test possible (we should limit malpractice law suits for indigent care given in the ER.) The uninsured does not come from only the illegal immigrants but from the unemmployed and from many employee who work for small businesses. My office for example, we can not afford to buy insurance for our employees because the cost is too much. We need to have a required but affordable health insurance similar to the liability insurance that we have for our automobile (Texas) The insurance should be for the basics only. Why do we have to have insurance for our car but not our health? One can chose to insure more if one can afford it. For examples, the basic plan should only cover for generic medications, limits on studies and basic preventive care. The insurance companies on the other hand is doing very good on limiting the cost healthcare by limiting what they pay the hospitals, the drug companies, the physicians, and etc. Who is profitable in this bad economy? The insurance companies by covering less lives, higher premium to employers, lower benefits to insurer, and reduced reembursements to healthcare workers. The insurance companies does not want to cover for the old and the disabled because they can leave it to the tax payers/medicare to worry about. Over the last 20 years, starting salaries for primary care physician has not increased year to year to matches the rate of inflation.

"I have one question for those who dont want gov’t subsidized health system. When did it become okay for healtcare [sic] to become a for profit industry?? Why is the most important field to mankind completely for profit? This is utterly ridiculous!"

By this logic, the government should also own and operate our entire food production and delivery system. After all, if it's a basic necessity for life, there should be no profit by anyone along the way. Right?

"It amazing why so many believe a gov’t sponsored healthcare plan will not work in the United States. Explain how this is achievable by many 3rd world countries but not possible in the leading industrialized nation on this planet."

That is why they are 3rd world countries. Socialism works only until you run out of other peoples money.

I love it when people imply that the reason Social Security and Medicare going broke in the future is due to earlier generations not paying their fair share. The real reason they are going broke is because politicians over the past 60 years have expanded the entitlements. Go back to the original entitlements of these programs, intended as a social safety net and not a comprehensive pension and health plan, then the result would be surpluses well beyond traditional actuarial boundaries.

Ah to be 26 again and have all the answers…

Adamm will be a conservative in a few years and start to understand things once he gets married, gets a job, and has kids….it is then when your vision about things tends to get very clear.

Point 1: go back to history class—it was the Democrat controlled congress that chose to rob the Social Security fund and put it into the general fund….and then to tax the benefits it pays out on top of it. And then the Dems that decided to pay out SS benefits to people who haven't paid into the system. This is business 101 here at any local community college–you can't pay out more than you take in.

Point 2: You want to see gov't run healthcare at its finest? Try accompanying my father or my uncle, both wounded Vietnam Vets, to the VA Hospital. It will make your heart break how the VA treats our warriors. Why would I want that type of care for me or my family under this new plan? If the gov't wants to start "fixing" something, try fixing what they already are running into the toilet.

Point 3: the quality of our healthcare??—even if you don't have insurance you can walk into any ER and receive the finest care of anywhere in the world. Maybe it isn't free, but it is second to none. (and it IS paid for by people with Health Insurance already—why do you think the prices are jacked up so much???)

Point 4: the 46 million uninsured number is bogus….that point has been proven. Close the border, keep the immigrants who work hard and do the right things, boot out the convicts and cop-killers (and yes, Officer Henry Canales, Houston PD, was killed last week by an illegal immigrant) and gang members….and we can shave down the # of illegals getting healthcare in that total number as well. Take out the young folks who have jobs but choose to not get insuarance and you can drive that down by another 10 Mill.

It amazing why so many believe a gov't sponsored healthcare plan will not work in the United States. Explain how this is achievable by many 3rd world countries but not possible in the leading industrialized nation on this planet.

The problem with letting the uninsured continue to get that service at the Hospital is that they enter the Health care system in the most exspensive place they could, the emergency room, therefore the cost of that gets past on to the rest of us. There has to be a more cost effiecent way to adminster the care.

"Addam, VW this is the most consise and enlightening comments I have ever read from an American on healthcare."

Beam me up Scotty.

Keep it simple, people. our government is not efficient at anything. people come to America because its the best care anywhere…do you really believe people flock to Cuba for care like in the movie sicko? the one thing no one talks about when saying the rest of the world "works" with health care for everyone is the taxes. the best example is in England where they ALL pay well in excess of 50% in taxes and are STILL going broke. I lived there for two years, with the taxes and their system and I wouldn't have it even if it was free. The care is poor and expensive. their sales tax is 17.5% – if you can pass that in the 50 states, maybe you can get healthcare for everyone! Til then, I vote NO, NO, and NO!

"Okay children… please add up all the above unfunded liabilities of the US Government.

…$106.4 trillion. Wonderful… you sure are a smart class."

Exactly Mark. Now we want to add another huge unfunded entitlement program to the system in the form of national healthcare. But the social security trust fund has their part covered, right? Please, somebody give me a labotomy while I can still get coverage.

or "health" care for that matter :~)

most Americans are not interested in funding helath care for the illegal immigrants…..sorry, plan fails

Addam,

Honestly, I've seen those figures so many times in editorials (in print and online) and on television that they are now permanently ingrained.

The bottom line is that the uninsured number is completely bogus.

You can get care in a hospital no matter what. You do not need any of the information you quoted. It's just not the truth.

You talk a lot about government running things well and private industry not doing so well. You've quoted your age, so I know you're more likely to be liberal than conservative. You've made a couple of sweeping generalizations based on one or two examples. You've attacked capitalism because we are in a downturn right now and your 401(k) is not doing well. So, you're shortsighted, like most other people. If you knew anything about investing, you'd know that the market's decline is GREAT for a 26 year old. You say that Social Security and Medicare "seem" great, but don't mention their mismanagement by the government, which seems to be common knowledge by now. You've never heard the numbers I quoted? I guess it's because you're not informed. If you were, a lot of your questions would be answered.

I have two questions about the plan.

Are Medical professionals going to be required to accept "Obamacare"?

Is "Obamacare" going to reduce payment rates (control) instead of negotiating rates?

If either question is yes, aren't we talking about a mandate and not competition?

The unfunded liability for Social Security is $17.5 trillion.

The unfunded liability for Part A of Medicare is $36.4 trillion.

The unfunded liability for Part B of Medicare is $37 trillion.

The unfunded liability for Part D of Medicare is $15.5 trillion.

Okay children… please add up all the above unfunded liabilities of the US Government.

…$106.4 trillion. Wonderful… you sure are a smart class.

Now children, let me throw in a little something for extra credit…

If the total net worth of our country is only $51.5 trillion, what are you left with?

*The numbers above are taken directly from a report issued every May by the Trustees for Social Security and Medicare. You may google that organization's name to get a copy of the 240-page report and 12-page synopsis.

It helps to do your homework…

Wow Adam! Your numbers are way out of whack. Over half of those coined "uninsured" were uninsured for part of 2009. That includes me and my wife, as we graduated from school and were uninsured for a month before we started our jobs.

And Im not sure why you think the military is run well. Just ask a lot of our soldiers (including my brother) who are overseas with sub-par equipment and body armor.

You're supporting your argument with a lot of blanket statements and bogus statistics that just don't make any sense.

Dear Mary in Tucson, AZl – If it's so great in Canada, why are you still here?

To the woman in costa rica that said she gets 100% insurance for $25 a month, and the system works there, I don't think I would want my appendix taken out in COsta Rica or any other surgery for that matter.

@ Bob, Laramie, Wyoming

Local governments are fair superior in efficiently governing themselves and don't operate with trillion dolar deficits.

@William Sullivan, Heredia Costa Rica:
There is nothing in this world that would make me pay $25 per month for Costa Rican government run healthcare.

The economy of scale argues for a public health care system. Private health care has run its course and is far too expensive. Some form of government run health care exists in most modern countries, and it works just fine. Get over the notion that nothing the government does works. Private delivery has been a failure and like it or not, the result is that millions of uninsured use emergency facilities when they really could be treated more efficiently elsewhere if it was available.

As for those who don't want to subsidize people who are unhealthy because of lifestyle choices, I agree that we shouldn't. What better way than having the government end subsidies to tobacco and any other industry that promotes unhealthy lifestyles? As for our diets, the government can easily use taxation to get producers incentivized to change the content of what they sell. Produce wholesome food, and lower taxes. Produce crap and processed foods, and see higher taxes. Since producers pass it along to consumers anyway the government manipulated market will respond and healthier choices will result. Some unhealthy choices will remain (excessive alcohol consumption for example), but let the consumer pay through the nose for making those choices.

"The post office can’t compete like a private company because it has to serve EVERYONE and has mandates on how it has to operate. And people are using the internet now and not mailing things. It can’t close post offices or let people go at a drop of a hat, it has to keep the same level of service no matter the realities. How many billions did your precious private financial sector lose last year? Yeah private industry seems to be doing real great right now, that’s why my 401K and IRA are tanked right now."

The post office announced today it is closing 3200 offices and might curtail the days of the week it will deliver mail. So much for "service". They are still losing BILLIONS. The reason that your 401K tanked was because your GOVERNMENT decided to change some important financial system regulatory laws during the Clinton administration. A Democratic President and a Rebulican/Democratic Congress. The private sector works within the rules you give them. Those rules were laxed because of huge campaign contributions to all of our politicians. If you want to blame someone, blame the people that have done a great job of convincing you to blame everyone else. Or better yet, get informed.

Adam in WV, where on earth did you get YOUR info?? SS is an awful system that we've all paid too much into and will never see a dime of. Medicare is even worse and has cost us much more than was projected at it's launch. And it sucks. And as far as "paying your fair share." Does that mean you would support and flat tax as opposed to the un-fair progressive tax system we are currently in? Because if you are part of the 45% of Americans currently not paying a dime in income tax, I would appreciate it if you did so I could get MY fair share back!!!!

Pure propaganda…I'm sure they said the same things about Medicare and Medicaid, but we still haven't figured out how to pay for them. Why would we even be talking about covering more people when we haven't funded existing program liabilities nor shown any ability to control costs?

If everyone wants state-provided healthcare, then let the states provide it. Massachusetts already does. The last thing we need is another huge unaccountable DC bureaucracy running a one-size-fits-all national plan. The national, public option is simply the trojan horse towards nationalizing the entire health care system. There can be no private competition with the feds. No private company has the resources to rack up endless deficits and remain in business the way the federal government can.

Meanwhile, the private sector has already figured out how to control health care costs without any federal intervention:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124476804026308603.html

Don't fall for another DC boondoogle – we can't afford any more scams.

I would give more credit to Obama's plan if it provided coverage for more than 1/3 of the currently uninsured. Supporting a plan that will give coverage to 10 to 15 million out of 47 million people is like using a bandaid in place of stitches on the surface things might look better but the scar is much deeper and never goes away.

"As someone said, don’t let the opposition define your arguments, don’t let the odd disgruntled, and probably well off Canadian tell you about their “wait” (a factor related to urgency)…Isn’t it better, in any case, to have to wait (you don’t if it’s urgent) than to NEVER receive treatment?"

My wife works at a hospital as a social worker. Trust me, they cannot refuse treatment to anyone. It is against the law. You last statement is simply not true. As for your healthcare in Canada all I can say I grew up in a border town with Ontario and a lot of the Canadian doctors and nurses are working in the U.S. I used to see a lot of Canadians crossing the border to our hostpitals for treatment that they could not get in Canada. If your system is so great, why do they come to America? It's called rationing.

I wonder if any arrangement is feasible. It seems that any plan for universal coverage will unleash an avalanche of health care demands that will overwhelm the resources of the medical profession. These resources should be left for those who are seriously ill. We should rely more on med techs, nurses, etc. People could provide for much of their own care if infomation was available in the right form and more drugs were available over-the-counter. The health care industry needs to be made to lower a lot of the barriers presently in place, on the pretense of protecting us, but are really there to protect their profits.

"You know an American system will always include private insurances, so if you don’t like the gov’t plan, you’ll still get to buy private insurance."

Classic. I am sorry to say that you have bought into the "myth" of government run healthcare. Unfortunately there are millions more of the "uniformed" in this country to go around. Here is the scenario. If I am a company that offers healthcare to my workers, why in the world would I continue to do so if there is a government run option? Let's see, my company is going to pay taxes to fund a government run program and still offer a private plan for their employees also (at an additonal cost)Why, because I feel like spending addtional money in a recession that I don't have? NOT! You will have no private plans, that is the governments objective. To control it all. They just want to tell you there will be private plans to sell the plan under the false pretext of "competition". Obviously you believe it. Wake up!

Stop it. All of you who think insurance companies want to keep us under their thumbs – to protect their profits. I don't work for one, but know a lot about the industry. I'll point out two things: Health Insurance is NOT highly profitable. Health Insurance is regional and risk is pooled by region because states regulate it. Premiums have risen because costs of risen and risk has increased (yes, unhealthy lifestyles are part of the problem). Second, the problem is the COST which has many, many causes, not the least of which is hyper-complex regulation from federal down to local governments. Would a single-payer system cut those costs by streamlining the administration? Maybe, but the root causes of the increases in costs are not purely administrative. And on a side note, the US free-market system has subsidized the socialized systems of other countries for decades. Canada benefits from the massive prices we US residents pay for prescription drugs. WE pay the R&D costs so that Canada and France and Sweden and the UK can have it on the cheap (relatively). Many of you might comment that the US spends SO much on the military whereas the enlightened European governments do not spend nearly so much. Lest we all forget, the US has protected Europe since the end of WW II and this has allowed countries there to concentrate on other things, like socialized health care. The whole world has benefited from the US economic engine in similar fashion. US capitalism and the wealth it generated created the tax base that socialist countries could tap to fund all their enlightened progressiveness. Reality is this: no government creates wealth. No system that doesn't create wealth can bring people out of poverty. Any system that cannot bring people out of poverty cannot provide for their health care. The more our government takes away from the source of wealth, the less able the system is to lift anyone out of poverty and into conditions where they can work to sustain their own health. Any government take over of the health industry in the US would cut off a huge portion of the wealth needed to do this. We can't all be takers, some have to be givers, even among countries. The US is the biggest giver in the world.

Just think for a second about this math:

Medical Costs = Doctor Costs + Insurance Costs + Pharmacy Costs

Each of the costs is associated with a business. The primary goal in running a business is to turn a profit. Each of these businesses are VERY profitable. The only way to control the cost of the health care is to control the amount of the profit the health care vendors are allowed to extract from the market.

Please don't talk about a free market in health care. There is no competitive pressure in this particular market so all economic theories are not applicable here. In addition to that the health care is not a commodity.

The only way to reform a health care is to create a competitive pressure in the market and you do it by either increasing the supply of the health care or by rationing the amount of the profits that can be extracted so the existing providers are forced to compete in the world of the ever shrinking profits. I want to emphasize that I am talking about rationing the profits and not the health care.

Increasing the supply sounds like an easy solution but in practice is almost impossible to achieve. Rationing the profits is difficult but possible.

Unfortunately all "reforms" proposals are just talking about throwing more money at the problem and considering that the problem of the health care is the excessive profits this can only be described as an attempt to put out a fire with a gasoline.

Addam, VW this is the most consise and enlightening comments I have ever read from an American on healthcare. You are right on the money, and when we include all government officials, and elected officials in having to be covered by universal healthcare we have made it. Companies costs will decrease, more companies will be worldwide competitive, and we don't saddle our companies with costs their competitors don't have.

Like the Auto companies who had to pay for healthcare for workers and retires, they could not compete and went bankrupt. Foreigh car companies do not pay health care to retires nor workers, as they are covered via insurance before universal healthcare.

Our overseas competitors do not pay healthcare, the universal healthcare systems take care of that, and the people pay vis taxes. Yes our taxes are high, based on our low salaries, and when Americans hear about European tax rates, they say: "see that is what happen with universal healthcare". Stor a while. European salaries are much higher than US salaries, and even include 5-6 weeks yearly vacation, paid. Would you rather pay the 10% tax in the US on a minimum wage of $7.35/hour, or 33% on a minimum wage of $25/hour? I only ask. The latter is the Danish minimum wage. And it is in additon to free healthcare and free university education. Thanks Addam VW for some real good reasoning.

Consider this; Over the years the "not for profit" healthcare companies were bought out by the "for profit" companies. This was to eliminate the competition as the "not for profit" companies are not beholden to shareholders, nor CEO's and upper mgmnt. that get millions in bonuses and stock options. A govmnt. program would offer that much needed REAL competition lacking in the system now. If you think there are any real efficiencies in the existing HC industry now, wait and see how much they'll wring out of their bloated system once they realize profits are shrinking and they can't routinely raise the rates anymore.

Hey being a pharmacist, while your raking over the pharmaceutical companies why don't you look at the rediculous ads for drugs on TV, the game playing with extended release versions and the PBMs that do little but add cost to the system. Look at PBMs

Why can't we just institute tort reform, give individuals the same tax benefits corporations get for medical insurance and allow me to pick a insurance plan that is FREE from state mandates and give me the freedom to pick the plan that best benefits my situation? OR…we could let Obama just 'give us pain medication to avoid an expensive procedure.'
Why would anyone willingly give away their liberty for government control of their healthcare? Absolutely befuddling.

Phil in Memphis,

Your tax dollars already go to "deadbeats," Medicare, Medicaid, to name a few. And way to go on being a big person and refusing to help all the less fortunate just because you got some losers in your family. Vast majority of people without insurance are hard working, to think anything other than that shows your true colors.

People, turn off FOX News, seriously. There is nothing good that comes from anything on that channel. Same with MSNBC. Stop letting people tell you how to think!!! Read your local paper, not the OP-ED columns. Watch actual news, not hate and fear mongers.

Josh in AL. Where do you get your numbers??? 45% are without for less than four months. I bet you there are 20 million jobs easy that don't offer any health care, have you ever been to a fast food restaurant??

Here's my numbers,

75% of people who are uninsured are poor, unemployed, or lower middle class

10 million undocumented workers are counted in any reputable study and is just thrown into the mix in whatever it is that your reading to get muddy the waters and make you not want to pay for their medical care, which you wouldn't! You'd have to have some type of ID and prove to be a citizen or LEGAL resident alien to get care.

And what has the government ran correctly? Social Security seems to pay 50 million checks a month with little problems, what private company can say the same?

Medicare seems to pay bills correctly and not have too many problems, people seem to be satisfied with it when they are actually on it and not 35 years old and just ranting about it because they watch Hannity.

Every conservative seems to love the military, government runs that, does OK with it, other than some issues with unaccounted for billions in Iraq. But the actual management of the military is excellent.

The post office can't compete like a private company because it has to serve EVERYONE and has mandates on how it has to operate. And people are using the internet now and not mailing things. It can't close post offices or let people go at a drop of a hat, it has to keep the same level of service no matter the realities. How many billions did your precious private financial sector lose last year? Yeah private industry seems to be doing real great right now, that's why my 401K and IRA are tanked right now.

Some people reading this might say "Yeah but Social Security and Medicare are going broke." Yeah in the future they are looking at funding problems, but if politicians had raised taxes very slightly back in the 70s and 80s when the tax rates of Social Security and Medicare were ridiculously low, maybe we'd be better off today. But no one wants to raise taxes because they might be voted out. So someone like me, 26, is going to have to pay a lot more taxes than you 50 somethings because I'll have to be paying catch up taxes to get everything back in order so you can actually retire, have some income in retirement, and be able to see a doctor.

I'm fine with paying for things, including a single payer system, but you guys should have been paying your fair share for years, and 27% isn't your fair share.

Why does everyone think that by providing more health care coverage that people will actually participate in living healthier lives? They will also not stop going to an ER for the minor ailments. I believe using a commonsense approach to a cultural problem is like being stuck in the sand with your wheels spinning. I have worked the ER's and know that a great many people will not follow the rules. They also do not have driver's licenses or have car insurance but still drive their cars to the ER.

You folks need to read this article BEFORE you start pointing fingers at insurance companies. The biggest COST in the system is doctors and hospitals NOT insurance companies. Reducing the waste(cost) in the system would be the first step in providing coverage for people that are uninsured.

Article -> http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/06/01/090601fa_fact_gawande

I will absolutely NOT subsidize, fat people, smokers, sunbathers, alcoholics, illegal immigrants, and/or any other self inflicted wounds.

The path to lowering costs is preventative care. If you are under 30 and cant run a 7 minute mile, all the problems that visit you later in life are not my problem, they are YOURS. Just die. I dont care.

First, there is no evil plot by the international community to ruin America. So the WHO ranking whether you believe it or not is independent and accurate. Go back to school and learn something.

Second, the first thing about insurance pools you need to know is the larger the pool the lower the costs because on average more people are healthy than sick. That's why large businesses pay less per employee than small businesses. If everyone were insured through a single payer plan, doctors, hospitals, any medical provider would automatically get their money. The providers wouldn't have to hire people to bill, wouldn't have to send to collection agencies, and wouldn't have to write off unpaid services rendered and raise their prices to the people that do pay to recoup the money.

I read an article that medical bills are the leading cause of bankruptcy. So when Joe Doe gets sick and runs up a $75,000 medical bill and also happens to have a house payment and a car payment and credit card payments. All those unrelated companies could end up losing money because of medical bills, which then in turn those losses get passed onto to the people who do pay yet again.

Car insurance, home owners insurance include the cost of covering health care costs in the event of an accident. If single payer was in place, insurance companies would need to pull that cost out of your premium.

We pay taxes right now to insure poor familes (Medicaid), to insure the elderly and disabled (Medicare), to insure poor children (CHIPS), and to insure the military and their families (VA and CHAMPAS). Those costs are already built into the taxes we pay now and would help offset any tax increase to pay for a single payer system. It also is built into much of the state taxes you pay as the state funds these as well.

So here's my pitch. Single Payer system, everyone is insured, no out of pocket expenses. Work with states to lower tax rates to offset the savings they would have due to no longer having to offer Medicaid and other health insurance subsidies. Raise federal taxes to cover the cost of the program. Require private insurance companies to remove the cost of health care from their premiums. Require businesses to pay a "healthy worker" tax of $50.00 or $100.00 a pay check per employee to help offset federal tax increases. This would take a huge burden off of small businesses and large corporations alike and make them more competitive.

The argument against this is the cost and a beauracrat between you and your doctor. Insurance companies often get between you and a doctor and you have to chose from a list of pre-approved doctors in a lot of situations. Medicare has an operating cost of 1-3%. Most insurance companies have in the neighborhood of 20%. That's money they spend just to process claims and in some cases figure out ways to deny care. If you think this system works, your blissfully ignorant.

I was in Niagara Falls, Canada in February last year and picked up a newspaper with an article about people finding doctors.

There was much frustration among folks looking for a primary doctor. There weren't enough doctors for the population. When a doctor could be found, there was an interview process that took place in which the doctor could reject the applicant.

Mike V. Said

"Bottom line: When has the government EVER done anything correctly."

The running water in my house is provided by a utility run by my local government. That's always worked fine. I think we need to see health care as an essential utility like water or electricity instead of as a consumer good like buying a new car.

The government, by its nature, cannot possible manage health care any better than it manages delivering mail or performing any other services.

Government – at the Federal level – is "good," at three things:

maintaining a military, the best in the world

collecting taxes

perpetuating itself

Further, I would have fewer objections to ObamaCare if in fact the system was SELF-supporting. It will not be. It will be funded by governmental theft from those who are productive – transferring that value to those who are not.

It is time to restore fairness and balance to our tax code – everyone should pay income taxes if they earn income, period.

Right now, my working family of three is supporting at LEAST three drones (long after the queen has mated).

50% of the folks in America who work pay NO or NEGATIVE income taxes and relatively little in payroll taxes.

This inequity most end.

No REPRESENTATION without TAXATION!!!

Two things need to be done for any significant success: Realign the rewards and offer every player a chance to compete in a free market.

First, realign the reward for HEALTH CARE not restricting access to it. Our current system gives a fiduciary responsibility to insurers to LIMIT care and no reason to worry about anyone's care past the age of 65 (why no one has preventative care). We need a system the emphasizes CARE, not profit, as it does now.

Second, every player should be in the game. The public option will cut costs more than any other factor and needs to be a part of the plan. Medicare can negotiate better pricing and has proven itself remarkably efficient when compared to private insurance. Insurers fear this because it will drive out profits and force them to deliver at optimal rates….and that's exactly why we need this. Any plan without a public option is half-baked.

Let see, unfunded liabilities (promised benefits in excess of assets) of the current medicare system covering only a small portion of our population is already $86 TRILLION. That is TRILLION with a "T". That amount is 6 times the size of the total GNP! If we do nothing more in this country, the current medicare program will still bankrupt us.

And there are those below that try to hold that program up as a SUCCESS?? Sure, why not. Let us expand that program to everyone!!! Crazy.

I am covered by "Universal Health Care"
as well as my family.
Coverage is complete, 100 percent.
The monthly payment for this is
25 dollars. I am completely satisfied
with my coverage.
If it can work here, it can work in the U.S.

Americans are just nuts… there is no other way to put it. Every other country in the western world has some form of gov't health care plan and they work. There has been soo much reported on people being dropped when they really need care, I can't understand why people think this will never happen to them. Every person, including the healthest, will one day get sick and die. We need to KNOW we are covered. Someone actually posted a comment that we shouldn't care about the uninsured. What kind of a country are we? Every other industrialized nation cares for its citizens, why can't we? Further, what is the fear? You know an American system will always include private insurances, so if you don't like the gov't plan, you'll still get to buy private insurance. People act like they are some how supperior because they have a good insurance plan. It's like being proud for being born cute. I work freelance in the entertainment biz, make a lot of money but buy my own insurance. I live in fear of anything serious happening and being dropped, loosing my home and going bankrupt. It's just crazy. Americans have been brainwashed by the insurance companies that private insurance is the only way. It's not.

I agree with Alex's opinion that we are looking at the symptoms more than the root causes. But I don't think the unique root cause is that we live in a society of lazy people (that is in part a symptom too). The core issues are a society that we increasingly see ourselves as entitled to the very best healthcare without any particular responsibility to pay for it. This ironically is what is driving up costs and actually lowering the number of insured people.

Refer to the following for some additional thoughts.
http://www.geocities.com/mcorazao/health_care_crisis.pdf

Currently, in our country all health care is paid for. However, it is paid for in a very inefficient manner thus adding a great deal of administrative cost.
Most working Americans currently pay for several "health care policies, a private employer sponsored plan – salary, Medicare – a tax, Workers comp – salary, auto insurance (yes a large portion of health care is auto trauma related, state Medicaid – a tax, state/federal health care assurance – another tax.
As a country of citizens we should self insure (as do most employers). All of these health care costs outlined can then be combined into one neatly administered, cost saving package. Private insurance companies will still be employed to administer the various health care plans and offer supplimental plans. Incentives must also be re-aligned for physicians. They must move from fee for service (insentivised to perform procedures) to health care and wellness promotion (they currently are not reimbursed for this).

As a Canadian living in the US, I'm baffled and offended by the disparaging comments made AGAINST our health care system. I lived in Canada for over forty years, NEVER had to wait for any medically necessary treatment (once, I got into an MRI machine within an hour of my doctor suspecting something serious). You pay about 40$ a month per person, and NEVER see a piece of paper. You can chose your own doctor, or specialist and this low fee doesn't increase with age (last increase of a few dollars was about 15 years ago). No one is excluced. No one is left out to dry. No one loses their home…

Conservatives, Republicans and people of that bent, simply LIE or choose to believe in lies. Now, here, I pay half my monthly income towards an health care system that raises my fees as I get older and could cut off whatever part of a treatment they deem "too" expensive. Given that 45% of American bankrupcies are due to grotesquely high medical bills, I should think SOMETHING has to be done – don't you all?

As someone said, don't let the opposition define your arguments, don't let the odd disgruntled, and probably well off Canadian tell you about their "wait" (a factor related to urgency)…Isn't it better, in any case, to have to wait (you don't if it's urgent) than to NEVER receive treatment?

PN,

My point is that the uninsured can get care. I wasn't even talking about insurance.

The ER will bill people when they visit. Very true. That does not mean that the bill will get PAID.

I grew up in Canada and never waited for any procedure. In fact, virtually every part of the process was faster. No filling out forms or records, just show my ID and everything is taken care of.
The only "waits" I've seen are from those that need organ transplants and that only has to do with the fact that Canada has about 11% of the population of the U.S. – it has zero to do with how medical expenses are treated! (I can't even begin to express how stupid that argument is).
If the plan we have now in the U.S. is so great, we wouldn't be discussing this. Costs are double what the next highest country's health care plan expends, and the return is the worst of all industrialized nations. You don't pay twice as much for a car that is the worst the industry has to offer, so why would you do it with healthcare? The costs of the uninsured, under-insured and penalties of not using preventative treatment are far more than this system is able to contain. We all pay for it because of this ridiculous assumption that somehow a business is going to look after our own personal interests better than we are! When you can walk into a doctor's office, show your ID and go in and see the doctor and do it for less cost than what we have now, I doubt there will be nearly the type of resistance we're seeing to a system of health care that is long overdue here.

I suspect that the people who are reacting so violently against the idea of reform have health insurance and have relatively high socio-economic status.

Anyway, I'm sure there are plenty of not quite so controversial ways to reduce costs (e.g,getting rid of the redundant paperwork).

Perhaps, the easiest way to see who is right on this issue (public vs. private insurence) is simply to requier that the proposed government run "public option" be fiscally self-sufficient.

I noticed some absurd comments in this thread.
"The very small number of people who CANNOT get health insurance (including illegal immigrants) can just walk into an ER and say “treat me”; the hospital is legally obligated to treat them."
—- ER is not the place to get primary care services, and the ER will bill you as much as they can.

"And to the guy that said the US healthcare system is ranked #34 by the World Health Organization…let’s keep in mind who runs the WHO." — May I ask you, who runs the healthcare industry in U.S ?– Medical insurance / pharmaceutical companies and health care consultants like you who benefit immensly at the expense of the sick. We have disease care program not a health care program. that is why we are ranked 34 the in the world according to WHO, not because who runs the W.H.O. Nice try. !!

"Bottom line: When has the government EVER done anything correctly. PLEASE don’t use the post office as an example. There are many days that mail is not delivered to us as it is suppose to be."

Why don't we use the post office as an example? Here is a government organization that is being subsidized with billions of our dollars to stay afloat. They just announced the closing of 3200 offices nationwide and they are thinking of cutting the mail delivery days. Everything they do could be done cheaper and more efficiently if we contracted their services out to the private sector. End of story.

Making better choices and living healthier lives is great, but it DOES NOT improve the problem of rising health care costs. In fact, it makes it worse. It's actually less costly to treat someone that dies young from an obesity related heart issue than to treat all of the things that will come up when someone lives a long life. I'm not advocating unhealthy living- but it's simply not true that healthy living will reduce health care costs.

All the arguments against national health care are advanced by the insurance industry.

They say "you don't want a government bureaucracy between you and your doctor" but what we have now is a private, for-profit bureaucracy between us and our doctors.

They say "it will lead to rationing of care" but they do that now, with recissions. As soon as someone is really sick, their policy gets canceled. Insurance companies can even do it retroactively and refuse to pay bills you thought were covered.

My greatest fear about this health care debate is that we'll end up with the worst of both worlds: no public plan, just forcing people to buy insurance from the existing marketplace, with no additional regulation of insurers that forces them to cover everyone even when they actually get sick and no competition to mitigate prices.

The insurance industry is the biggest problem in our health care system, but employers are also part of the problem. They keep shifting costs to insured workers, but they use insurance to control employees. Just about everyone I know has stayed in a crappy job at some time or another, because they could get health insurance.

Why is the entire health care debate about the 40 to 50 million so-called uninsured Americans? That represents only about 15% of the population. Why should 15% of the population drive the entire debate? What about the 85% of us who play by the rules and watch our health care costs skyrocket every year? Shouldn't the focus be on bringing costs down for us? You know, the ones who actually go to work every day? The fact is that many of these "uninsured" people will never buy health insurance no matter how easy the government makes it for them. They will simply go to the ER, get their treatment, and never pay up. Make health insurance mandatory like car insurance. That will increase competition and drive costs down for the 85% of us (that's a majority in case you were wondering) that pay the way for everyone else!

The waits are not made up. I have dual citizenship between the US and Canada. Healthcare there is a nightmare, and it makes taxes there rediculous.

I get all my care ehre in the US because quality is far superior and I can get appointments when I want them. Anybody want to know why I am a dual citizen? I'm US born, but I'm a healthcare consultant that was hired to help audit some healthcare facilities in Toronto. I pursued the dual citizenship because it's required for my job.

My best friend in Canada is also a doctor I met 5 years ago when auditting a hopsital. He's been trying to get his American citizenship so he can practice in the US. In fact, he's been hired by my company because his practice started losing money under Canada's government system.

It's a nightmare up there, trust me.

And to the guy that said the US healthcare system is ranked #34 by the World Health Organization…let's keep in mind who runs the WHO. It's run by European Union bureaucrats who promote a liberal, progressive agenda of government-run healthcare. That's like saying OPEC supports a rise in oil prices. They base their rankings on findings from political groups. Rediculous.

B Strauss.
Actually the US ranks 37th according to the WHO survey. And France does rank #1. The funny thing is you look at the industrialized nations that rank ahead of us and none of them have the obesity and heart problems this country has. You put all these fat, 400+ lb people on a diet, reduce the obesity and heart disease rates, educate people to eat at home and not Mickey-Ds, and perhaps medical costs would come down.

Healthcare doesn't need a socialized option from Obama and Company, it needs common sense to prevail.

Why are some people on here ready to bash a government run health care? Let's keep an open mind here. It does work in other industrialized countries in keeping the cost of health care in check. We love to go to other countries and run democracy down their throats, even though we ourselves DO NOT live in a democracy. And in a lot of cases, it doesn't work. Why not try ideas (that actually works) from other industrialized countries? I do agree that we need more details than what they're telling.

Here's the problem: we're treating symptoms and not root causes of problems.

Once we move on from blaming hospitals for high costs, health insurance companies from high premiums, and doctors for excess tests, what are we left with? That's right, we're left with a society that needs to lose weight, stop smoking, reduce stress levels, and eat healthier foods.

Why, you ask? Well, if people are in better shape, we're going to have a need for fewer medications, fewer trips to the doctor, fewer surgeries, etc. The lower the amount of usage on a plan, the lower the follow-up costs. The fewer doctor visits we make, the less tests that will be ordered. The fewer surgeries we need, the lower the pay-out costs for insurance companies will be. The fewer surgeries there are, the fewer chances for malpractice there will be.

It's a win-win-win, but there isn't a politician who is willing to take that step and tell all of us we need to be part of the solution, rather than asking for someone to come and save us.

Put down the cheeseburger and cigarette, hit the treadmill, and enjoy your life!

let capitalism run it's course? Rick P are you kdding me? what we have here is not capitalism, it's some sort of weird non capitalistic enterprise between the health insurance companies and the medical profession. i am in an HSA. it's one of the better ones out there and i am paying throught the nose. you are fine if nothing happens to you or someone in your family, but if something does, look out. and enough with lowering taxes. that did not work under bush/cheney and it will not work with this. i don't know the answer to fix this, but the HSA and lower taxes is not the answer.

The author clearly seems a biased liberal. The public health care plan is dubbed as 'progressive' while most people will call it 'radical'. The author liberally quotes from a liberal economic think tank without providing a counter from a conservative think tank. Money should not publish such one sided articles.

Complete nonsense.
Any possible savings will result from rationing.
Those will be savings only when compared to the cost without rationing, not when compared to costs resultant from a true competitive system.
Look at Canada where people are dying as I type while waiting for care. or better yet Massachusetts where the state is already drowning, and rationing.
Shame on you for promoting this boondoggle.

Let's talk about the uninsured. There are 46 million of them, according to the highest estimate.

10 million are illegal immigrants.

About 45% of them are without health insurance for less than four months.

About 25% of them qualify for Medicaid or SCHIP, but haven't done the paperwork.

About half of them make more than $50,000/year.

Finally, 89% of Americans are happy with the quality of their health care.

So, in the end, the uninsured are almost wholly comprised of people who CHOOSE not to have health insurance and illegal immigrants. Yes, we have a real crisis on our hands.

The very small number of people who CANNOT get health insurance (including illegal immigrants) can just walk into an ER and say "treat me"; the hospital is legally obligated to treat them.

What the system needs is free market reforms that have nothing to do with government playing a more active role.

To bad Obamacare does not cover everyone. Obama is proposing a national healthcare alternative plan…not socalizing medicine. Obamacare will still leave 16 million people uninsured at a cost of at least $1.6 trillion.

In reference to the below comment about the US raning 34th in health care, I have the following question: "why is tort reform not part of any of Obamas proposed plan?" If the stated purpose of medical tort liability is to limit poor medical outcomes, the US would be higher on the list because we have, as far as I know, the most aggressive and punitive tort system in the world.

It seems odd that a president who has built his entire presidency on removing unjust enrichment by the rich against the general population would strongly sanction a practice that unjustly penealizes the entire nation to the benfit of perhaps 20000 greedy tort attorneys.

So where are ALL the physicians and nurses coming from to take care of these 48-50 mm newly insured??? How about TORT reform??? How about capping what the lawyers receive at 5% rather than 40-60% of the award!!!!! We need reform and we need to cut the cost of health care but i am not sure we want congress to tell us how to do it!! look at the post office… how about Medicare that seems to be going bankrupt??? Has anyone tried to renew your care lately???? like the lines??? get ready for health care government style…..

I have one question for those who dont want gov't subsidized health system. When did it become okay for healtcare to become a for profit industry?? Why is the most important field to mankind completely for profit? This is utterly ridiculous!

Now its okay to call 911 and get get gov't backed police and fire protection. Most Americans were sent to government ran schools, most of us came out okay. Well pretty good for the most part. So why is okay for those services to be subsidized and not healthcare? Virtually every other developed country has a better system than ours AND BETTER HEALTH! The facts speak for themselves. They are happier and healthier.

The pathetic distrust and gov't paranoia amongst so called great minds and experts is laughable. Its rather a pretty simple concept, if you give everyone healthcare, the costs will come down for the majority that have it now. It will get cheaper for all because now we all pay extra for those whose jobs or employers dont have it. But remember, this proposal requires money from the personreceiving benefits too. Everyone contributes to this plan.

For those who think capitalism will solve this mess, then I think you need to take off the blinders. It hasn't solved the mess yet and healthcare is getting more expensive. At this rate, the special interests groups of our generation will stop progress once again and we will all watch America sink further down. Very sad indeed…

My wife and I are raising our two nieces because their parents refuse to work, refuse to get off drugs, and continue to be slugs of society. Under Obama's plan, these deadbeats would have the same exact insurance as my wife and I provide for our family and their children. I absolutely refuse to have my tax dollars provide insurance for those who are to lazy to try and provide for themselves.

A couple of points:

*First, the talking point that continues to be used that states we are 34th in the world for healthcare outcomes doesn't necessarily mean our healthcare is worst than the countries ahead of us. Other factors such as obseity rates, exercise habits, eating habits, and how much each individual is attentive to their own health may explain some or all of this difference. It only takes a small amount of critical thinking to see this is a weak talking point.

Second – I'm glad some groups claim a government option would actually save us money but considering the track record of a large current government agency that partially competes against the private sector (US Postal service) I think we deserve a DETAILED explaination of how this would actually happen before that particalar talking point gets passed around as a fact.

A bunch of Fools. You mean to tell me that everything will magically get cheaper if we just have a plan.

It costs what it costs. The only thing that WILL make it cheaper is to increase competition, not because that will make the cost of each procedure cheaper, but because companies will pursue every avenue to increase efficiencies.

Anyone stupid enough to believe that putting anyone without insurance, under an insurance plan will make his medical bills cheaper, well, I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn.

Comments that are outside of the narrow idea of this debate have been screened by CNN. My earlier post did not appear. Please be aware that not all public comments are getting posted.

We need to think outside the box to solve this problem. Unless all ideas can get posted, this problem will never get solved.

If Washington continues with its existing assumptions, the system will collapse no matter what new law is implemented.

Okay yeah obama care is pretty cheap. It will only cost us. Our freedom, our liberty, our property, our republic, our constitution, oh yeah and a couple trillion dollars. No big deal. Lets do it!
http://planotexaspolitics.wordpress.com/

I'm one of your neighbours from the great white north. If anyone tells you that the Canadian Universal Health Care System doesn't work(ie. have to wait months or years for major procedures) they are straight up lying. Do yourselves a favour, just pick up the phone and dial a Canadian phone number, ask whoever answers the phone if they are happy with our healthcare. You are all doing yourselves a great diservice if you support anything other than a public plan that you could supplement if you choose to with extra coverage from a private insurer. There is only one thing I would change in our system – add a small user fee per visit to discourage abuse.
Good luck my friends.

This article is complete fluff.

The Economic Policy Institute doesn't even remotely resemble a legitimate authority on this subject or any other.

The idea that the government can create an ADDITIONAL "entitlement" – i.e give more people something for nothing and spend less money is total nonsense.

In the mid sixties when the government started Medicare, it predicted the annual cost in 1990 would be $12 billon. The actual cost in 1990 was over $100 billion.

Anyone who believes the cost estimates put out by the advocates of ANY new government giveaway program is a complete idiot.

Great thinking! The federal government excels at making things faster, cheaper, and more efficient. And to CNN Money: way to repackage that think tank press release as journalism!

Talking to friend I met from Canada. I joked with him concerning the 'HealthCare' reform we are planning and how he can move back to Canada after it is passed. He was not joking when he said that he might. Stories about waiting for whatever treatment that you might need are true in many instances.

Bottom line: When has the government EVER done anything correctly. PLEASE don't use the post office as an example. There are many days that mail is not delivered to us as it is suppose to be.

We should believe the Economic Policy Institute? Give me a break. You know what. They are right from the fact that eventually the cost of healthcare would go down. The thing they are not telling you is that how poor your healthcare will be. When you use rationing as a basis to cut costs then the costs will be controlled at the expense of having good healthcare for everyone. The people without healthcare will not mind because they didn't have any to begin with. The rest of us will kiss our benefits goodbye to accept a government run system that will be neither efficient or effective. Good luck on the that one. Ask Britan how theirs is faring. The competition Obama is introducing will eventully eliminate the private sector plans. The governement will have the monopoly.

The grass is always greener on the other side…. until you live there. My cousin lives in Canada and comes to the US so she can see doctors. Why? Because if she had to wait for when they let her go to a doctor, she would die.
So stop perpetuating some propaganda that you hear about how everything is so great. It is not.

You don't increase competition by getting the Government involved. Let capitalism run its course. How about lowering taxes and/or promoting incentives for HSA's?

It is interesting to note that in the latest research done by the World Health Organization the U.S. ranks 34th in the world as to our health care. It appears that all the nations ahead of us are from the industrialized west. Additionally, each nation has socialized medicine with all their people being covered. Dying to know which nation was first? France.

I am an American living in Australia. the national health care plan is very good. Private plans are available and I do have private supplement, however the costs are low. Having a public plan DOES keep the private insurance companies in line. Anyone can get treatment across the country no matter what state one lives in, the private health care is also portable. The insurance lobby is so strong, I'm not sure we ever have a chance of reform. Please keep an open mind!

One of the major faults of the proposed Obama plan has to do with how it will affect our doctors. The current Medicare reimbursement system reimburses a physician for a drug based on ASP (average sales price) plus a nominal mark-up, say 6%, and thus allows physicians to earn a profit. However, this profit is about 25% less than what they used to make just a couple of years ago, and practices which have a big portion of their business coming from Medicare patients, may go under. It is for this reason that over 40% of private plans have been reimbursing at higher rates, some as high as ASP+15%, to allow physicians to stay in practice.

Amplify universal coverage into a massive Medicare model: you can see now how a primary care practice, one that under the Obama plan switches from say, 40% Medicare patients, to 100% Medicare, can realize massive reduction in profits can practically go out of business. Is this possible? Absolutely. Therefore, how does the proposed plan help access to care and better patient outcomes?

The article uses one independent analyisis to bring forward a potential savings in excess of 1 Trillion. The independent analysis was completed entirely or through the sponsorship of the Economic Policy Institute (EPI).

The EPI inclcudes as one its members EPI economist Jared Bernstein (was appointed to the new position of Chief Economist and Economic Policy Advisor for Vice President Joe Biden in 2009).

Independent yes. Without bias, no. Should there have been disclosure of relationship between memebers and senior administration officials? Yes.

Score: Lousy article and journalistic integrity (ouch, that one hurts). Dependency on CNN for making informed decisions? Maybe the weather.

I WAS IN Canada and i didn't wait at all. There was NO Scary moments of long waiting halls etc etc. Its all made up by folks wanting to protect their own bottom line.

Can any of these people tell me how the government is efficient at anything ? There not ! Common sense tells all of us that.We all want reform. I do not want the government to involve itself in creating more rules. They have already contributed enough in helping the costs in healthcare rise to very high levels. And another thing why is congress and Obama exempt from what they say would be so great for everyone but not good enough for them ? As I read these posts by others I continue to see that this healthcare for everyone just makes sense. If it makes so much sense then tell me why the people crafting it are exempt. Common sense seems to have alluded those in favor of the govt plan. Folks have lost there minds. First irresponsible people took loans they couldn't afford for FREE and look what thats done for us. Now we have the gimme gimme crowd wanting even more! Sick! American people listen to the europeans and Canadians there health care sucks!

Extending Medicare Part A to younger people (perhaps, 50, 40 or everyone) would get the job done. It is VERY low cost, emphasizing preventive medicine.

If people want to spend more, they can still buy insurance through their employers (if it's available; today, many employers do not offer it).

If people want to spend a fortune, they can buy private insurance (like COBRA) and hope that the insurer doesn't cancel the coverage upon filing of the first claim.

I lived in New Zealand in 2007, where I purchased health insurance as a foreigner for much less than I could buy it here as a citizen ! And, the care is better there. They fund both their pension and health care systems with a petroleum tax, which also has the benefit of suppressing oil imports. Nobody complains; people demand these types of security.

So, maybe we tax sins to pay for national health care: trans fats, tobacco, oil, lead, imports from China, etc. There are a LOT of good options.

Healthcare should be dealt with in a step by step process instead of trying to fix everything at the same time. The place to start would be the creation of a separate court system involving those with actual medical experience. This coupled with caps on malpractive lawsuits to reasonable levels would be a good start to reign in costs of health insurance. After this was put into place the overall problems could be re-examined and appropriate measures taken from there.

Correctly addressing problems takes time and hastily created and implemented programs end up causing as many problems as they solve.

No need to go that far back. Just 5 years ago my premiums (working for large international company) were less than half of what we are paying today, we actually could choose a "traditional" plan instead of PPO/HMO, the co-pays for typical services were 30-50% less, and less than half for prescriptions.
I personally do not know what the right answer it, but I do know that the present system is not sustainable for most, even if they do not see it that way.

Any government subsidized option can only result in the elimination of private insurers, and government rationing. The results are simple and predictable if you understand the most basic laws of economics. This is not theory look around you to see examples.

Law of Supply and Demand
1) How competition reduces (not increases) cost
Profit motive is the critical component to reducing cost or improving service. If businesses in ANY market are earning attractive profits, that market will attract competitors who want to enjoy the attractive profits . Those new competitors increase available supply to the market and compete for existing customers. As a customer seeking the best available healthcare, while trying to stretch your dollar, you will go to the new doctor if the service is better or the cost is lower. The original doctor will either improve service, reduce cost or go out of business. Either way, competition has worked because the patients are choosing the best care for their money. Economics is also an efficient rationing system. You will not buy more than you need, because you money is precious and limited.

The Obama model will create automatic, predictable and unavoidable responses in the healthcare market.
1) it will destroy the current rationing system by making healthcare "more affordable", removing the patient's incentive to find the best use of their money
2) this will increase demand without increasing supply. (more people will visit the doctor for less necessary purposes
3) Here is the fun part – in a free market, this change would cause prices to go up as there are more customers bidding for the same service, which would in turn attract more competitors and force price reductions. In the Obama model, more customers = more cost, but prices cannot go up because there are price controls, so no new competitors will be attracted. So, since the rationing system has been destroyed, the new rationing system is your government rationing healthcare on your behalf.

Simple, predictable, unavoidable.

to will in orangeburg, sc – we should provide insurance to those without a job because one day, you or i may be in that same situation. it isn't about having a job or paying for someone else. covering everyone will lower costs and I know this for a fact having been in the health insurance industry for 10 years

Debate shall be on health care and access to care for the people regardless of their income. As long as there is care for the people no body will abuse the system.

Business for profit on peoples's health and care (health insurance) is flawed system. There shall not be any more business on the care. Peoples are dropped left and right by these business whenever they cannot make profit out of them.

We do not need spend huge amount of money for supporting these insurance companies. Half of the proceed goes for supporting the profit and administration cost of these companies rather than for the care of patient.

Make health insurance business outright illegal. Come up with single payer system and provide access to health care for eacy and every individual regardless of their income level. That is citizen's right.

R. Cooper: you're registered as a Republican since 1974? Sure, and I'm an ultra liberal. If you acted, supported, and voted for Republican ideology you wouldn't be bellyaching about Fox News. It's only liberals and Democrats who complain about Fox News because Fox took away their total monopoly on news. btw, Fox news employs more liberals than ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and MSNBC employs conservatives combined. And we're supposed to believe you're a Republican. Not even a nice try. It's funny that you say nothing negative about CNN for using a liberal advocacy group as a primary source, yet you bring Fox News into the discussion.

It's true that millions of people use the emergency rooms because they are too poor to buy insurance. But 10 million are eligible for Medicaid; they are just too lazy to apply. And over 3 million people earn over $75K but are too cheap to buy health insurance. But if something happens to them the insurance companies are vilified for not paying claims to people who lied on their applications about preexisting conditions. Would you expect GEICO to pay out for a wrecked car if the customer adds collision to his policy after totaling his car?

A group like ACORN should be helping poor people get registered, but they are too busy exploiting them for their own personal gain. You should complain about that.

My family healthcare insurance monthly pricetag TRIPLED beginning April 1 of this year, while the deductibles caught up with them in orbit! To add further insult, we aren't allowed to change the coverage for one year, or following a "life event". Too bad the monthly premium doing the triple jump doesn't qualify as a life event.

So a liberal think tank says a government plan can save money and people believe them?

What's worse is that the media picks the story up and runs it and supports it.

Maybe we need an investigative report on how much of the US media is the lackey of Obama?

We have movie ratings so how about a rating system that ranks "news services" and magazines on a liberal to conservative basis? If a rating system is good enough to protect people from certain materials why shouldn't it work for reporting?

America already has universal coverage.
You can go to the emergency room where you can not be denied. But you do leave with a bill that will likely put you in bankruptcy.

Reforming health care is not about socialism, it is social insurance. Doctors remain in the private sector but paying for health care would be mandated for those who don't pay now.

People who pay for health care now are paying a premium for those who can't afford to pay and go bankrupt. People who pay for health care now will pay less because those who don't pay now will be paying in the new plan.

Some people who pay for their health care now loose it when they get sick because they loose their job, and they go bankrupt anyway even though they've been paying.

Health Care is more expensive than the average individual can afford.
A comprehensive Universal health care plan is the humane and wise thing to do.

Health care is being held hostage by the insurance corporations right now who themselves ration care and only want to insure the healthy for massive profits.

Do we expect the military to profit off their wars? Do we expect the firefighters to profit off their protection? Do we expect police to profit off their patrolls? We expect them to make a living wage, but not the profit that the insurance companies make.

We are now seeing "The *King* of PORK BARREL SPENDING" (Obama and his Congress) at it's best, and we will never see it like we have in the past six months and are about to see in the next four years. Google it and weep, because this administration hasn't even gotten started yet.

This is a long read, but sums it up quite well:

http://community.whptv.com/forums/thread/4183573.aspx

…

The biggest problem with american health care is that it cannot be competitive by nature. This type of business is part of local economy. You can't outsource it to another country, since if your sick you can't get on a plane to fly to another country to get treated. And how many people actually will call up doctors office to do some price comparison shopping on different items, or have doctors put up pricing scheme on web sites.

The health insurances companies have very good control on cost and are managing that cost (and growth) for profit. By nature that is their motivation.

Interstingly enough in many other modern countries who have socialized health, they all have one thing in common. Wether directly or indirectly government setup the basic rates. So if you are a doctor or a health insurance company (or pharmacy ) operating in those countries, if you want to be in business you have set rates determined by the government. If you can afford your own private doctors, that's great, but if like 99% of people out there you have a limited budget you are still covered because as a society, the local government mandates it from its health providers, insurer ( and drug ) companies.
Irony is, it seems to be ok to do in other countries, because some of those companies offset potential loss revenue with the US market.

Not to mention getting old. If you can't work because you are getting old, good luck finding a health care provider willing to take you on, at an affordable rate (since your income is most likely reduced). As a business it doesn't make sense to them.

for more info just look at the way health care economy models are setup in Switzerland, Germany, France, England, Taiwan and Japan.

Look, I don't know who is right. This country has the most advanced medical research, highly trained medical personnel, great schools, innovative pharmaceutical companies, and award winning medical facilities. But, we are subsidizing not just the medical community, but foreign countries who get the same drugs we do at 10% of the cost.

Why can't we regulate the entire process, work toward a healthier society, and do it at a cost that everyone can afford? I don't care how we achieve it, it must be done, for every reason we have heard and more that we haven't. I am one of the great unwashed, with no health coverage for years, because I can't afford to get meaningful coverage at a cost I can afford to pay. I am 63 and my health is declining.

We spend twice per capita the amount that is spent in any other country, and with all of our other advantages, we rank 37th in outcomes. What's up with that?

Every time the federal government gets a wild hair to socialize things, they royally screw it up and people like me foot the bill for some liberal jack ass idea. Why do I have to pay more money every month so that some politician who is trying to buy votes for the next election can have his way? Throw all the bums out on their fat cat asses! The best way to fix medicare, the budget, and the health care issue is to make every member of the House of Reps. and the Senate dependent on social security, the budget, and private health care. I guarantee all three problems would be fixed in 90 days.

In response to "Why not learn from the rest of the industrial world, Single payer works…." kind of curious, I live in Seattle near the Canadian border and when Canadian's need good quality care they cross the border and come to America. For some of even the most basic services they wait for months or are routinely denied services we take for granted.

Were in the middle of a full blown depression, and the president wants free health for the dead beats, 20-40 million illegals, not to mention after the rest of the illegals maybe another 150-300 million will pour into this dead broke, very soon to be a 3rd world country. You are living through the end of an era. The collapse of an empire. We cannot stop this. No one can. But as in all empire collapses, a huge transfer of wealth takes place. As you have seen, this has already started.

There is no free ride. People are uninsured because they do not pay for insurance. I pay for insurance, and that is why I have it. The world owes nobody anything – including a meal, a home, or a doctor. We should all only have what we pay for. PERIOD. If you need help, call your parents. That's what my kids do. There is no way to get something for nothing.

In 25 years my ins premiuns have risen to 4 times what they were in 1983,1984 ( this both my and my employers cotribution). While my benefits are @ 1/10th of what they were during the same aforementioned years.
It is the escalating costs and rapidily dropping benefits that have raised the number of uninsured in this country to such alarming levels, andthis trend has no end in sight until we postively look at all options and proposals.
We dodged the scariest scenario concerning this issue just this year,had the H1N1(swine flu) been more virulent with the number of people uninsured,it would have made 1918's pandemic appear modest. With today's population and mbility,it is truly frightening.
Instead of looking at our problems only from a liberal or conservative positions, we had better looking at them using the common sense approach.
CASE IN POINT: It is correct and encouraged to critique a column using fact and intelligent opinion(non-abusive). To criticize that it was simply liberal hogwash, mean you need to return to FOX.com for the daily spoonfeeding to your brain.
NOTE: I have been a registered Republican since 1974,and considered conservative by most of the Republicans I know.

Failure to include a public plan would result in our doing this again in 4 or 8 years. Actually anything less than a single payer system may fail.
Why not learn from the rest of the industrial world, Single payer works and is less costly.
All countries with a single payer system have better health than Americans.

All you socialists that want FREE health care go to Canada and see how long that takes. Why should those of us with a job pay for a single one of you?

1. One liberal think-tank figures quoted in this article…gee and they are pro Obama.

2. The Obama plan appears to be one size fits all…where's the competion to drive down prices in that?

3. Illegal aliens are already on a free ride…are they going to contribute? Hell, NO!
(We are still paying my mother's med bills one year after she passed away. Why, you ask? Because she was an American citizen)(She didn't qualify)

4. Congressman and Senators have a super-duper healthcare system for life…will they join the one size fits all program? Hell, NO!

5. Where do our active military and retired military personnel and their families come in to play?

6. Where do our Senior Citizens, our Homeless Citizens come into play.

7. All we hear from Obama and company is you taxpayers that can afford healthcare will have to give it up so the illegals will have a better life.

8. Well, all you pro-Obama supporters have not convinced us that Obama and company are serious about healthcare…'cause it doesn't include them.(Likewise, Social Securiity)

9. A Michael Moore movie???…anybody
that would spend money to see one of his films needs a featherduster up the tail pipe.

The title reads more like an advertisement for Obama. I thought media is supposed to report the facts.

So much for the free and the brave. Now we are the sick and taxed to death. When did it happen that the Feds were to solve all our problems?

The way to "solve" the health problem is for Washington to challenge its own assumptions. Health care in America today is really sick care. Instead of more drugs and surgery for illness, we need more health.

It is arrogant to think in the past 50 years Americans have created the best health care in the world. Chinese medicine has worked for 1000 years. We need to understand how to keep well rather than feel so sick. And not use so many pills. Most of the treatments today are unnecessary. But if we were well than the politicians and drug companies would not have so much power and money.

You can be sure that President Obama's proposed health care reform plan will return benefits far far less than promised and cost far far more than estimated. If President Obama has his way, he will fill the United States with a population like locusts, consuming everything in sight. If this foolishness is allowed, America's future bleak!

If Congress would do something about the high cost of malpractice insurance it would make health care affordable for most people.

RE: Money's Two Cents

Actually, anyone in the private sector would be bailed out with billions of taxpayer dollars.

"So it will make more people abuse the system than the poor already are."

Umm… the person who said this really needs to THINK. The only reason the poor -might- abuse the system is because the system isn't providing for them when they go through the normal channels.

If Obamacare won't help the poor, then we will have to watch them become healthier than those that use allopathic care, simply because homeopathic and other natural medical alternatives are cheaper and have little to no side effects.

Its ludicrous that Obama has to fight with politicians over something they should care about…the health of their people. Sometimes I feel politicians need to be booted out of the country for being so uncompassionate and uncaring. No loss of livelihood nor life is worth the money. None.

The main reason people should fear a national health care system is that then the government will start telling them what they don't want to hear: many of our ills are due to our life choices. Obesity and smoking are two main problems. People don't want to hear that. If you want to cut down on some of those problems tax the heck out of them: cigarettes, alcohol, junk food (anything that does not contain unprocessed ingredients); you'll see our population getting healthier in six months!

I worked in healthcare for 25 years. I saw first hand from the front lines a lot of things that go on-some that are good, some that could be improved on, and some that, well, should not be allowed in civilised society.

Yes, some of the poor do use the ER's as primary care sources. They do this because of one very important reason-no physician or clinic in the US will be paid to see them otherwise. They HAVE NO OTHER SOURCE of care. They should. They need it. This needs to be addressed.

Yes, doctors order more tests and more expensive tests than they really and truly need a great deal of the time simply because of the CYA factor–but it is ALSO because of the fact that the patients are ASKING the doctors to order them and will go to another doctor if that one doesn't do it. This practice needs to be halted. Doctors need to ask patients why they are asking for these expensive tests, why they are changing doctors, and have the balls to refuse to order the tests. Insurance companies-on the other hand-need to learn both how to allow doctors to order the tests that they truly NEED to diagnose properly (and they do know how to do that) and to learn NOT to reward these patients by paying for these tests when they do this doctor swapping.

Doctors-on the other hand-need to learn how to order clinical laboratory tests MORE discriminately–instead of broad shotgun panels, order just the testing for the disorders and syndromes that they are following. Unless they are doing a "physical", it is pointless in theory and in practice to have the broad spectrum chemistry panels run simply because the doctor can't be bothered to remember that he really needs only two or three tests on that panel. The only thing that is being done is advertising his or her sheer laziness-
and that "ain't good".

People want more from healthcare services-and they should get it. It should be more personalized-I agree. Yes, records should be electronic and easily available to providers. Likewise, making all of this available to the public is going to cost money. Some of the savings is going to come from the fact that medical records personnel, files, records, transcription, etc. cost like rip. That's a fact. Digital radiography imaging instead of conventional films on x-rays, ultrasounds, CT, MRI's, PET's, and other testing enables radiologists and physicians to share images across the nation or across the world. It also lowers storage requirements tremendously-hence cost.

"Lower" level doctors–family practice, GYN, peds–these need to be paid more so that more people will enter the fields–we have enough specialists in the cities to choke ourselves with. What we don't have is enough of these people–and the people to support them.

The uninsured and the minimally insured-where I belong at present, need help-and badly. Perhaps health care is or is not a basic right as defined under the Bill of Rights–I'll leave that to more educated minds to discuss–but it darn sure is a responsibility of society to PROVIDE for its citizens something like the availability of something that is affordable. Now, how you define "affordable" can be determined by the mean or the median of income–and if you don't know how to figure that kind of math, or what it means, time for school.

The current insurance system doesn't work because the insurance companies are presently using math to tell them what to pay and what not to. Math is great in theory–the trouble is, they are in office, and computers don't see patients. Doctors and nurses DO.

There also needs to be greater peer review and more prosecution of fraud and abuse–and the swiftness and certainty of it is the deterrent. It is too slow now-far too slow. The people doing the investigations need to be moving much faster.

Many comments miss the point that the same rationing and restrictions exist under private insurance. Trust me, get a diagnosis and you WILL be canceled for some pretext. You will not be authorized non standard care for any condition either. Having access to primary care and standard services would be amazing. Buy private insurance for more luxury if you want.

What about free access to pills, specially pain reliever? Lot of people enough educated to understand what they need much better then follow doctor suggest. Because the goal of doctor is his profit but not people health. Doctor simply have no reason to improve people's health. His goal is to fraud healthy people for profit from new testing and so on. No reason to trust your health to doctor if you have a basic skills in medicine. Even many easy surgery that cost big tens of thousand dollars in hospitals may be done home by using simple tools, nonprofessional knowledge and pain reliever.

The underlying issue is really about money. Not so much about the health and support of those in the most need. What would probably work is to set up free hospitals with public doctors working for the the Dept of Health as contractors alongside military doctors. The supplies and equipment could be purchased for the facility through contract bidding and consider have an audit or group oversee the quality and efficiency of the operation regularly. How difficult is it to establish a good working system that benefits the patients in need first and foremost, then the doctors, equipment manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies, etc. It appears there will always be people needing care no need to be led by greed.

By the way, Congressional Reps and Senators (both Republican and Democrat) already have a very nice medical plan, heavily subsidized by the taxpayers. As far as I know, none of them (Democrat OR Republican) have ever refused to accept coverage on ideological grounds. How come none of them talk about this? Why should they have a better medical plan than we, their employers?

I'm not carrying a torch for government funded medical care, by the way, but Geez-Louise, people, this thing is way broke and needs to be fixed. Public funding may or may not be the way to go, but a cost penalty of close to a trillion dollars a year is a major competitive economic disadvantage for the US, and a huge impediment to growth. As GM tried to tell us a time or two way back when they were still a going concern. Here's an interesting article about how much benefit Toyota got relative to GM from the government funded health care system in Japan.

http://www.autoweek.com/article/20050401/FREE/504010702

My Cobra payments of $458.19 per month will escalate to $780 per month on December 1st – who will pay this for health insurance? Certainly not me. It is time to provide health care for everyone in this country OR it is time to radically alter our form of government. In a new American government the people's welfare will be at the heart/center of policy decisions, not the elusive dollar bill. Congressmen, Senators, and Wall Street/investment bankers know and care nothing about the people who pay the bills, yet they reap the greatest profit and scream the loudest when their profit is reduced. Well, I'd love them to live the life of an average American for 1/2 year, it would open their eyes to the pain/suffering and the difficult, if not impossible, choices they face everyday. Perhaps they would then make more charitable and merciful decisions on who gets what.

I'd like to see Obama fix the current programs such as social security and medicare BEFORE adding yet another , inefficient , wasteful goverment program. All you do is have to look at the social security system — they have spent every penny of the surplus funds for the past 30 years and when the time finally comes for baby boomers to begin to retire , to draw the money they set say for themselves — oops the program is broke. Anyone in the private sector would be thrown in jail for the same actions.

As one who lived with our family of 5 for the 11 years (1994 thru 2004) in a northern, well developed, EU county with socialized, single-payer medical care, it's clear that most propents of the same here in the US have not had the benefit of this "cheaper" experience. Imagine no competition… no "Urgent Care"…no "Radiology Associates" …no "Independent Testing Labs" …just you and your GP…and whether or not he/she "allows" you to seek additional care for anything …at "The" hospital. My wife suffered aseptic meninigitis which causes a brain annuerism while we were there. After several visits and 3 days time (3 days which are now completely lost to her memory)the GP "allowed" her to go to the hospital – where an intern took extensive background notes, conferred in another room with the Dr. – we never saw him – and came back to tell us to come back in 2 weeks to see if things "are better" and we'd be put on the waiting list to do a scan at that time. We were on the plane for the US the next day – where thank God, she survived, was immediatrely diagnosed and treated with anti-inflamatory drugs the very same day we arrived.

We were not unique….ask a Brit…or a Canadian.

Obamacare???….beware, as it is very likely that you will receive just what you asking for.

The whole "public option" is a canard that just won't die. The Republicans are doing their best to equate a public option with guaranteed complete annihilation of the insurance industry. The truth is, Congress could design a public option in many different ways. It could require that a public option only offer a no-frills basic plan, rather than something more comprehensive. It could require that only X number of people could buy a public plan. It could require that nobody making over X dollars can acquire a public plan. The possibilities are only limited by the imagination. Even in the worst case scenario, if all the doom and gloom Republicans are throwing out there comes to pass (highly unlikely), nothing is preventing Congress from modifying or even canceling a public option.

The public plan isn't the bogeyman the Republicans make it out to be. Americans should not be fooled.

I am so tired of hearing paranoid nay-sayers try to scare the hell out of people about Health Care reform. Either the person is completely irrational or they are paid by a Health insurance provider to sway opinion. Something has to be done, current insurers are in a word-killing people over money by cancelling plans when diagnosed with a serious illness. Not only that but if you have 'employer paid' health coverage, your premiums are going to continue to go up until the insurance provides virtually no coverage. Either the current mediccal system will eventually completely collapse or the health insurance companies will go out of business simply by their own doing because it will be too expensive to purchase. A competing government sponsored health plan is a good option and would keep insurers in check.

Its time for all americans to have good health care. HMO's only want to make a profit! we need a government that cares about its people Take a look at other countries health care systems an see for your self.Its time for a change! I've been told by people who say that the US people are afraid of our government. Its time for us to take a stand.I love my country but sometimes when I compare our healthcare with the rest of the world I am sad!

I agree the government is not one to run anything well. Over $250 for a toilet seat, $150 for a hammer. The Medicare program was changed a few years back by changing how they pay out, and it was designed to pay hospitals less. What happened? The hospital changed they billed method, and adjusted to the new rules, and now they are pay more than before. See the government cannot get it right.

the Commonwealth Fund showed what Obama’s advisers know, that a public plan competing with the private plans — even if it pays more than Medicare does — saves the nation trillions and most Americans get health insurance.

I know for a fact health insurance is out of reach for the self employed with a pre-existing condition.I hope Obama get this bill past. ALL Americans derserve to have affordable health Ins.We pay taxes,meaning we pay in for medicaid for low income,pay hospital bills for others that can't afford to pay. We are already paying for these expenses.What we need is what Obama is wanting to pass. AFFORDABLE INS FOR ALL.If a person had the right figures,i would bet it would be cheaper than the way things are now. An uninsured person that can't afford a doctor visit ends up in the emergency room, which means more money.I don't understand why some americans are so much against this plan. Remember this is America, "UNITED WE STAND"……or do we?

the main problem with a universal health care plan is getting service. A friend in Canada waited 8 years before he could get a hip replacement even though his was almost completely gone.

CNN–used to be Clinton News Network, but whose new title should be Clown News Network. We know who you're in bed with, so why would anyone listen to your "unbiased" report, opinion, or anything you have to say?!

The United States spends 17% of its GDP for health care. Other industrialized nations spend about half that while in most instances providing health care to all their citizens.

Meanwhile, our health care system is failing us as a population, as the average life expectancy in the U.S. is about the same as for Cyprus or Bosnia.

Congress is fighting hard to keep the elements of the current system because it lines its pockets with health care money. Max Baucus (D-MT), Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, opposes a public option for health care. Maybe that's because 3 of the top 5 industry groups contributing to Baucus are insurance companies, health professionals, and pharmaceutical companies.

Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has also been an outspoken opponent of changes in the current health care system. No doubt its because his top contributors are, ranked in order: 1. health professionals, 2. insurance companies, 3. pharmaceutical companies and 4. hospitals & nursing homes.

While the interests of the health care industry are obviously being looked after, who's looking after our interests?

Look up your congressman and senators on opensecrets.org and see who they get their financial backing from. Then call their offices and send them emails and remind them that while money is important, they can't get re-elected without votes, and remind them that you still hold the key in that regard.

That is our only hope for real change; otherwise, Congress will just be rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, and we will all be the worse off for it.

It is already determined that if we spend $1 trillion in healthcare, we would only cover 1/3 of those uninsured. It would cost $3 trillion to cover everybody. But you are not going to get this from the MSM.

They say Obamacare will save the US up to $1 trillion over 10 years, but that does not equate to the $1 trillion a years budget for the next 10 years Obama is going to make us suffer

Good try. The "independent analysis" you include is from a liberal think tank.

National health care will cost more than the present system because if you force people to pay for something, they will finds ways to get value out of those lost dollars. So it will make more people abuse the system than the poor already are.

Plus we all know how well the government runs the economy, freddie and fannie, the SCO, Social Security, the California economy, and so on.

At least with the private sector if a insurance company or hospital/doctor is a screw up we can go to another.

Can't escape with a national system. Perhaps on a state level it might work, this way different states can try different methods.

HOW RIDICULOUS

Let's face it, the wealthy, Obama and the democrat politicians will keep their cadilac health care plans and options.

The only ones who will be impacted are the almost 200 million Americans who already have healthcare coverage. In order to meet Obama and the democrats goal to insure anyone in this country, leggally or illegally, they will reduce the benefits for the rest of us.

It's a scam. Don't let Obama and the democrats get away with this.

The US pays approximately $3000 per person (total cost of medical care including government, insurance company, and private contributions divided by the US population, including those with no medical care) per year more than our peer countries in the G7. That's fact, as reported by the US government. And medical care in the US is no better, and by some small margin, not as good as that provided by the peer group, based on average life expectancy, infant mortality rate, and similar measures of overall performance. If the US could change it's health care system to perform, economically, as well as our peer countries, we would reduce our annual health care cost by over 900 BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR. Is that enough evidence for you?

Yes putting in some real competition (instead of our current big boy's club) would help, and yes money would be saved if public option allowed the millions who can't currently afford healthcare, to get help earlier, instead of waiting until it's more extreme and more expensive to treat simply because they wouldn't afford it earlier.

Then again so long as you keep the parasitic bean-counting corporate bureaucrats (aka for profit insurers) between you and your doctor, they will find a way to game the system.

Study after study by the likes of the nonpartisan Congressional Budgets Office and Government Accountability Office show we could save hundreds of billions per year if we did what Japan does, what Australia, Canada, Europe, New Zealand, the rest of the first world does: a "medicare for all" or "single payer" system for basic medical care (with private insurance "add ons" for extras, allowed). Sure we need a uniquely American solution, each of the above countries does it a little differently, we can create our own unique US flavor of single-payer.

Amazingly enough, non other than Taiwan about 10 years ago studied health systems from around the world and chose the best model they found: Medicare in the US (which is far more efficient than private insurers, studies show) only they gave it to all their citizens. Why can't we have Medicare For All in the US? Google "pnhp singlepayer myths" for one group of M.D.s on this..but would the media red-bait Obama and industry cry "commie!" if he advocate Medicare for All as about 2/3 of Americans in polls say they favor? They're red-baiting him even for the timid "public option" for pete's sake..I hope we wake up as a nation!

Eliminate the health insurance companies and add the profits they skim back into the system. Problem solved. Single payer, baby!

"Cheaper" doesn't necessarily mean that we may have to pay more for healthcare.
This article is a non-starter. Show me how much I'm going to save for healthcare insurance with the Obama-backed healthcare bill.

From junk bonds, to junk mortgages, to junk money, to junk health care.

Feds=big Ponzi

Lets clean house (of representatives), take back the Republic.

Campaign for Liberty.

Sure, more socialism does wonders for unemployment. Every person that adovcates socialized is either a Chavez/Obama-loving closet communist or an ignorant sheeple that is easily swayed by every forked-tounged huckster that crosses their path. But don't listen to me…I guess I'll just continue to pay for your mortgage, processed cheese food and soon your deadbeat boyfriend's viagra. This country is beginning to look a lot like France.

If we are serious about reducing the cost of health care then the government needs to start talking price controls. If anyone think that the Health Insurance, Drug, or Medical Industries will lower prices just because the government makes it "mandatory" for everyone to have health insurance then I have some property to sell you with a good view of the moon. These industries are going to continue to increase their rates at 3-4 times the rate of inflation as they have for the past 20 years unless they are regulated.

You DON'T Still pay for the uninsured. Most of us DON'T go to the doctor unless we are sure we are DYING.. we pay for it out of our own pockets or with credit when we do.. and we don't smoke, and we eat healthfully. AND WE PAY TAXES TOO!

Also, they've only taken information from one source in this article, the admittedly "liberal" Economic Policy Institute, who only cite one supposedly independent study. There needs to be viewpoints from both sides…

I hereby nominate the author of this "misinformation" for the Nobel Prize for fiction!

Unfortunately the middle class will once again pay the price here. The only way to pay for this plan is to tax the people who have health insurance. Everything the government has tried to do in health care has failed. Look at the state of Medicare and the Military health system. If our chosen elected officials were forced to receive their care in a VA hospital, instead of enjoying life-time Blue Cross coverage they would really be looking for a solution. Ultimately they will never face the same issues as the rest of America.

Hawaii had to END their Keiki (children's) health insurance program because many parents were deliberately stopping their employer's health insurance coverage of their kids in order to use the free state program.

We still pay for those 40 million people – they just get free health care from hospital emergency rooms, and the hospitals charge the rest of us more to make up the cost. Use a little common sense here.

You can't seriously use the headline "cheaper than you think" and not even support that statement in the article. This plan will have accomplish some important goals for Obama, but it will not improve health care or save money.

Part of the reason healthcare is so expensive, is people who never end up paying for their health care. The people who go the hospitals and end up never paying any of their hospital bills, which then causes inflation as Insurance Companies end up picking up the slack so Hospitals can maintain business. If there were a public health care plan, this wouldn't happen so prices would go down.

If prevention was a greater focus than intervention it too would end up making health care cost less.

A huge reason as to why health care is expensive in America is the profit driven principle of American Healthcare. The company who makes the medicine and the company that makes the supplies WANT to make money, the insurance company WANTS to make money, then the doctor NEEDS to make money (to pay off his medical school loans).

When everyone is trying to make money, then prices go up. The problem with capitalism (as far as health care)–where competition should drive prices down–there becomes the standard of quality. If you believe your company manufactures a better product, you charge more. And since Medical Companies are all vying to make the best product, it tends to drive prices up more.

What often happens is, when someone low income tries to get insurance, they can find one that's affordable, right? It's only affordable for a period of a few billing cycles, as the Insurance Company begins to raise the premiums and these low income families can no longer afford their 'affordable' health care plan.

Basically, unless your employer offers health care benefits (which you usually need to be full-time to qualify for; and many corporations keep employees like cashiers just under full-time employment to prevent the employee from qualifying [this is to save money on the companys own premiums]), then you have to cope with nothing or hope your low income enough for medicare or medicade.

In our society there becomes a dead zone. Many of these estimated 50 million people make too much money to qualify for Medicare/Medicade and can't afford an insurance plan off the shelf.

Our "health care system" today is a shameful corporate run mistake. Watch Micheal Moore's "Sicko" if your not afraid of the truth. We live in the most powerful country in the world, why isn't affordable health care available to everyone? Anyone complaining that the system does not need to be changed has never gone through the financial travesty of severe illness, even with insurance coverage. In my opinion Obama's plan is only scratching the surface of the problem.

we need some facts not just broad brush argument like this…my gut tells me that you can't add 40 million people and have it cost less…get real…look around at what happens to all government programs–they grow, they cost overrun…look at massachusetts and their plan…2, 3 , 4 times what it was expected to cost…why not analyze rather than just blather