Health Care Costs is the Primary Driver of our National Debt

[JeffreyS]

You had me until you said "Universal Health Care", Faye.

It's a pie-in-the-sky concept, like ending world hunger.  It sounds fantastic, but it's not realistic.  One size never fits all, not even the hats that claim.  If obesity is a disease, it's a desease of the mind.  Not knowing you ate too much, or that woofing down half a pack of Oreos is bad for you.  It's only hereditary in the sense that fat children tend to have fat parents (or lazy parents).

And what about medical facilities' collective fear of getting sued?  Doesn't that also play into the cost of care?  Precautionary measures, running tests, administrators, paperwork, beaurocratic red tape...$$.

And you want the government to handle to your health care?  The government seems awfully fond of banning things.  Through the eyes of an official, I would think the most efficient means of achieving the goal of affordable health care is to control what goes into people's bodies.  Don't we have enough proof that there are things the government should keep its hands OFF of?

Why is it pie in the sky every modern country does it but us.  Are we so inferior to other countries?

[FayeforCure]

You had me until you said "Universal Health Care", Faye.

It's a pie-in-the-sky concept, like ending world hunger.  It sounds fantastic, but it's not realistic.  One size never fits all, not even the hats that claim.  If obesity is a disease, it's a desease of the mind.  Not knowing you ate too much, or that woofing down half a pack of Oreos is bad for you.  It's only hereditary in the sense that fat children tend to have fat parents (or lazy parents).

And what about medical facilities' collective fear of getting sued?  Doesn't that also play into the cost of care?  Precautionary measures, running tests, administrators, paperwork, beaurocratic red tape...$$.

And you want the government to handle to your health care?  The government seems awfully fond of banning things.  Through the eyes of an official, I would think the most efficient means of achieving the goal of affordable health care is to control what goes into people's bodies.  Don't we have enough proof that there are things the government should keep its hands OFF of?

Why is it pie in the sky every modern country does it but us.  Are we so inferior to other countries?

Yes, and the beauty of all those countries offering universal health care to all their citizens is that their systems aren't a one size fit all system.

There is the Canadian system with private providers (like our Medicare system), there is the UK and Spain system with public providers (like our tri-care system for the military), and then there are hybrid systems like the ones provided in the Netherlands and Germany.

But what all these advanced nations have in common is that everyone has access to affordable health care through a universal health care system.

Regardless of whether these citizens are overweight, smoke, are young or old, are employed in a full-time job or not, are female or male or all the other exclusionary characteristics we have in our silly patchwork health care system that additionally has abysmal health care outcomes for our population.

[kells904]

Because most of those other countries don't have 300 million people living in them, JeffreyS. For all the successes of Tri-care, you don't hear about the failures.  Losing paperwork, making mistakes, etc.  For some, going to Medical was no big deal; for others it was a nightmare.  But I don't think they're not doing their best; it's high customer volume. The more people a single entity has to serve, the more you're asking for disaster.

This is merely speculation, but of the people I met in the UK, a lot of 30-somethings lived quite modestly, or had roommates.  That seems like the consequence of having the govt taking so much of their money to provide sevices on a nat'l level.  Also, do you remember when the doctors over there went on strike?  I reeeaaaaally wouldn't wanna have to deal with that here.   I wonder if Americans would accept another change in lifestyle to accommodate for UHC.  Wouldn't it just feed into more talks of tax hikes and class warfare rhetoric.  Great Britain is

It's just my opinion that Washington screws things up more than they fix things.  And stuff gets politicized unnecessarily, just so they can get reelected.  Look, Socialism worked fine in smurf village, but there was only 100 of them.  300 mil of em?  Probably not the same result.

[buckethead]

Kells, I love to sling the word socialism around as much as any red blooded American boy, but universal health care is neither unaffordable, nor unattainable. We already spend more per person on healthcare than these socialist nations mentioned by others, while providing less care per person.

I believe the constitution should be amended to include health care provision as a function of the federal government.

We could simply refrain from three of our wars per century, and come out even (fiscally). Morally we come out way ahead.

[FayeforCure]

Because most of those other countries don't have 300 million people living in them, JeffreyS. For all the successes of Tri-care, you don't hear about the failures.  Losing paperwork, making mistakes, etc.  For some, going to Medical was no big deal; for others it was a nightmare.  But I don't think they're not doing their best; it's high customer volume. The more people a single entity has to serve, the more you're asking for disaster.

Oh really? You are actually quite uninformed. Not that these are advanced nations but China has universal healthcare and 1.3 billion people, and Brazil with 200 million people also has universal healthcare!!!!

Brazil

Main article: Health care in Brazil

The universal health care system was adopted in Brazil in 1988 after the end of the military regime's rule. However, free health care was available many years before, in some cities, once the 27th amendment to the 1969 Constitution imposed the duty of applying 6% of their income in healthcare on the municipalities.[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_health_care#Brazil

Jan 22, 2009 â€" BEIJING â€" China announced that it intended to spend $123 billion by 2011 to establish universal health care for the country's 1.3 billion

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/22/world/asia/22iht-beijing.1.19590543.html

But somehow you'd like to withhold universal healthcare from your fellow citizens because the US "can't do it"

[kells904]

I thought the smurf reference would overpower the socialism reference...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality-of-life_Index

I kinda see the fact that they aren't advanced nations as sort of important to the whole equation.  Brazil ranks 39th and China comes in at 60th on a Quality of Life Index of 111 countries. So...maybe universal healthcare is the greatest thing ever in China and Brazil, while everything else sucks.  Maybe universal healthcare in China mad Brazil sucks equally as much as everything else.  I don't know; I'll bet we could find something that makes both arguments and we can go back and forth all day.  But my heart's not into it.  Yeah, I'll concede to being "uninformed" if you want me to.  Whatever.   I'm not arguing the merits of a UHC system; I've said that a couple times already.

America suffers from voter fraud, welfare fraud, tax fraud, a southern border that we can't seem to (or don't want to) control, a population far too into self-gratification to care that they're eating themselves into early graves.  We've got several other, innumerable issues, including high school graduates who can't even properly put together a sentence, in the ONLY language they've been using since birth.  I think we've regressed overall as a people; the Steve Jobses of the world cast such a big shadow that they hide the hordes of underachieving sheeple.  Everybody can't be Steve Jobs, but people also seem to be too nice to admit we're carrying dead weight.  No, health care for all is not unaffordable, nor unattainable.  Again, not arguing the merits of the idea.  But what I don't share with you guys is your optimism that it would function properly.  You can build the safest car in history, but if you have idiots driving it, it's still going to get wrecked at some point.  You want those con artists in Washington to handle something as important as your body?  I sure don't.  THAT is my main concern.  I'd also expect people to drag the system down, from scamming the crap out of it.

We unfortunately have bigger fish to fry, IMO.

[ChriswUfGator]

You had me until you said "Universal Health Care", Faye.

It's a pie-in-the-sky concept, like ending world hunger.  It sounds fantastic, but it's not realistic.  One size never fits all, not even the hats that claim.  If obesity is a disease, it's a desease of the mind.  Not knowing you ate too much, or that woofing down half a pack of Oreos is bad for you.  It's only hereditary in the sense that fat children tend to have fat parents (or lazy parents).

And what about medical facilities' collective fear of getting sued?  Doesn't that also play into the cost of care?  Precautionary measures, running tests, administrators, paperwork, beaurocratic red tape...$$.

And you want the government to handle to your health care?  The government seems awfully fond of banning things.  Through the eyes of an official, I would think the most efficient means of achieving the goal of affordable health care is to control what goes into people's bodies.  Don't we have enough proof that there are things the government should keep its hands OFF of?

We have relatively crappy healthcare compared the comparable portions of the developed/industrialized world (e.g., Europe) with socialized medicine, if you really get into it. They have healthier populations, better access to healthcare, easier approval process for new treatments, lower wait times, pretty much any given metric you want to name. And aside from Greece, all their economies are doing far better than ours.

[ChriswUfGator]

You had me until you said "Universal Health Care", Faye.

It's a pie-in-the-sky concept, like ending world hunger.  It sounds fantastic, but it's not realistic.  One size never fits all, not even the hats that claim.  If obesity is a disease, it's a desease of the mind.  Not knowing you ate too much, or that woofing down half a pack of Oreos is bad for you.  It's only hereditary in the sense that fat children tend to have fat parents (or lazy parents).

And what about medical facilities' collective fear of getting sued?  Doesn't that also play into the cost of care?  Precautionary measures, running tests, administrators, paperwork, beaurocratic red tape...$$.

And you want the government to handle to your health care?  The government seems awfully fond of banning things.  Through the eyes of an official, I would think the most efficient means of achieving the goal of affordable health care is to control what goes into people's bodies.  Don't we have enough proof that there are things the government should keep its hands OFF of?

Why is it pie in the sky every modern country does it but us.  Are we so inferior to other countries?

Frankly, yes.

[ChriswUfGator]

I thought the smurf reference would overpower the socialism reference...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality-of-life_Index

I kinda see the fact that they aren't advanced nations as sort of important to the whole equation.  Brazil ranks 39th and China comes in at 60th on a Quality of Life Index of 111 countries. So...maybe universal healthcare is the greatest thing ever in China and Brazil, while everything else sucks.  Maybe universal healthcare in China mad Brazil sucks equally as much as everything else.  I don't know; I'll bet we could find something that makes both arguments and we can go back and forth all day.  But my heart's not into it.  Yeah, I'll concede to being "uninformed" if you want me to.  Whatever.   I'm not arguing the merits of a UHC system; I've said that a couple times already.

America suffers from voter fraud, welfare fraud, tax fraud, a southern border that we can't seem to (or don't want to) control, a population far too into self-gratification to care that they're eating themselves into early graves.  We've got several other, innumerable issues, including high school graduates who can't even properly put together a sentence, in the ONLY language they've been using since birth.  I think we've regressed overall as a people; the Steve Jobses of the world cast such a big shadow that they hide the hordes of underachieving sheeple.  Everybody can't be Steve Jobs, but people also seem to be too nice to admit we're carrying dead weight.  No, health care for all is not unaffordable, nor unattainable.  Again, not arguing the merits of the idea.  But what I don't share with you guys is your optimism that it would function properly.  You can build the safest car in history, but if you have idiots driving it, it's still going to get wrecked at some point.  You want those con artists in Washington to handle something as important as your body?  I sure don't.  THAT is my main concern.  I'd also expect people to drag the system down, from scamming the crap out of it.

We unfortunately have bigger fish to fry, IMO.

Your chart is from 2007 data.

I don't suppose anything has happened that would have changed the U.S.'s quality of life rating since 2007, has it?

No financial meltdown? No quadrupling of unemployment? Nothing rings a bell?

[JeffreyS]

I thought the smurf reference would overpower the socialism reference...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality-of-life_Index

I kinda see the fact that they aren't advanced nations as sort of important to the whole equation.  Brazil ranks 39th and China comes in at 60th on a Quality of Life Index of 111 countries. So...maybe universal healthcare is the greatest thing ever in China and Brazil, while everything else sucks.  Maybe universal healthcare in China mad Brazil sucks equally as much as everything else.  I don't know; I'll bet we could find something that makes both arguments and we can go back and forth all day.  But my heart's not into it.  Yeah, I'll concede to being "uninformed" if you want me to.  Whatever.   I'm not arguing the merits of a UHC system; I've said that a couple times already.

America suffers from voter fraud, welfare fraud, tax fraud, a southern border that we can't seem to (or don't want to) control, a population far too into self-gratification to care that they're eating themselves into early graves.  We've got several other, innumerable issues, including high school graduates who can't even properly put together a sentence, in the ONLY language they've been using since birth.  I think we've regressed overall as a people; the Steve Jobses of the world cast such a big shadow that they hide the hordes of underachieving sheeple.  Everybody can't be Steve Jobs, but people also seem to be too nice to admit we're carrying dead weight.  No, health care for all is not unaffordable, nor unattainable.  Again, not arguing the merits of the idea.  But what I don't share with you guys is your optimism that it would function properly.  You can build the safest car in history, but if you have idiots driving it, it's still going to get wrecked at some point.  You want those con artists in Washington to handle something as important as your body?  I sure don't.  THAT is my main concern.  I'd also expect people to drag the system down, from scamming the crap out of it.

We unfortunately have bigger fish to fry, IMO.

Expect more, Demand more this country is run very competently.  The problem is our political is currently serving it's corporate masters very well.  With a little political finance reform it could serve the constituents just as well.

[kells904]

http://www.mercer.com/press-releases/quality-of-living-report-2011

I don't really like this list because it's broken down by city.  Even so, you get an idea of which countries have the most representation, putting several other countries ahead of the U.S.  But if it's even possible at all to make apples-to-apples comparisons on health care--the reason I believe that Brazil and China were brought up--those two places are nowhere to be found on this list.  Places with far smaller populations than the U.S. dominate the top spots, but that falls in line with what I was saying: "quality access for all" is easier to pull off when "all" doesn't equal several hundred million.

I have a hard time, though, grasping the idea that things are so much better in Europe, when the news channels keep beating me over the head with talks about a "Eurozone Debt Crisis."

Expect more, Demand more this country is run very competently.  The problem is our political is currently serving it's corporate masters very well.  With a little political finance reform it could serve the constituents just as well.

Well, yeah...I expect elected officials to live their life as common people who serve their country for a few years, fully expecting to rejoin the working force, akin to jury duty.  Term Limits.  My personal preference is that city government had more power and influence than federal government.  It's easier in my eyes to effectively govern. 

But instead, we've got a ruling class, because the vast majority of voters have a very short memory, and the attention span of a gnat.  They are simply looking out for #1, not the greater good, and are easily persuaded by hyperbole and sound bytes.  We as a nation have come to expect the government to play the role of "Daddy".  So we keep re-electing the same people.  Politicians know all this, obviously.  And non-political types are afraid to run, because they'll get chewed up and spit out by mudslinging career politicians. 

So a whole lotta things have to change in a hurry, Jeffrey, to have an effectively-run country, where accountability is expected.  A personal responsibility paradigm shift, that I don't believe ever happens until we reach a full-on crisis.  I don't see that happening any time soon.

[BridgeTroll]

Kells, I love to sling the word socialism around as much as any red blooded American boy, but universal health care is neither unaffordable, nor unattainable. We already spend more per person on healthcare than these socialist nations mentioned by others, while providing less care per person.

I believe the constitution should be amended to include health care provision as a function of the federal government.

We could simply refrain from three of our wars per century, and come out even (fiscally). Morally we come out way ahead.

Agree BH...

[ChriswUfGator]

Kells, I love to sling the word socialism around as much as any red blooded American boy, but universal health care is neither unaffordable, nor unattainable. We already spend more per person on healthcare than these socialist nations mentioned by others, while providing less care per person.

I believe the constitution should be amended to include health care provision as a function of the federal government.

We could simply refrain from three of our wars per century, and come out even (fiscally). Morally we come out way ahead.

Agree BH...

Of all the +1's I never thought I'd give, this is top of the list, but with that said...

+1

[BridgeTroll]

Kells, I love to sling the word socialism around as much as any red blooded American boy, but universal health care is neither unaffordable, nor unattainable. We already spend more per person on healthcare than these socialist nations mentioned by others, while providing less care per person.

I believe the constitution should be amended to include health care provision as a function of the federal government.

We could simply refrain from three of our wars per century, and come out even (fiscally). Morally we come out way ahead.

Agree BH...

Of all the +1's I never thought I'd give, this is top of the list, but with that said...

+1

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year Chris!  I have ALWAYS said... if healthcare is a right... we need to amend the Constitution to make it so...

[FayeforCure]

If you are really worried about our National Debt, cast your vote for President accordingly!!



Figure 1: Criminal Health Care Fraud Prosecutions over the last 20 years


Members of Congress of both parties often complain about fraud and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid (M&M), usually charging that the President is not doing enough to keep bad guys from stealing money from these vital programs.

Guess what? Thanks to provisions in the Affordable Care Act (ACA/ObamaCare) and to an unprecedented effort by the Obama Administration, more progress has been made in the past three years to combat health care fraud and abuse than ever before. There was a 68.9 percent increase in criminal health care fraud prosecutions from 2010 to 2011, and 2010 was already the highest ever. See the chart below, released last month by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University. (Note: NPR did a fine piece on this topic last Friday.)

Everybody knows there is a lot of fraud in M&M, though no one really knows how much. In the 1990s, the FBI made a back-of-the-envelope calculation of 10%, a never-validated estimate which has assumed undeserved biblical truth status. There's a lot, no doubt. Back in 1997, the New York Times reported that crime families were dropping drugs, prostitution, and gambling to get into health insurance fraud because the money was so much easier to steal.


Someone once told me the most successful day in the history of the Internal Revenue Service was the day they sent Martha Stewart to jail -- because so many folks had the thought, "if they will send Martha to jail, why would they treat me any better?"  Same with these stats -- it is not just the numbers who get caught and go to jail -- and one bad guy was sent up the river for 50 years -- it's everyone out there who now realizes they have a bigger chance of getting caught. 

The Justice Department and the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health & Human Services lead the federal effort. I worked on private health insurance fraud issues during my time working on the ACA in the U.S. Senate and saw the construction of the health reform law's anti-fraud provisions from the inside. It was the professionals from DOJ and OIG who set the agenda -- and the smart anti-fraud provisions that were written into Title VI of the ACA are paying off.

Part of the effort involves hyper-charged efforts to catch bad guys through the Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT), and a bigger part involves re-engineering the system to keep them out. For example, prior to the ACA, if a bad guy got kicked out of one state Medicaid program for fraud, he got kicked out of one program; under the ACA, when he gets kicked out of one, and he gets kicked out of all them, including Medicare. That's smart, and that's just a tiny bit of what the ACA does on fraud & abuse.

http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/health/health_stew/2012/01/obamacare_is_winning_the_fight.html