Health System preference

[DaveShack]

Which of these hypothetical healt care systems would you prefer? Note, these are not real world examples, they are made up. These are obviously only some of the medical services, for purposes of illustration. Assume the rest of the plan follows the general pattern shown here. It is not intended for the comparison to be fair necessarily.

Which health care system would you prefer?

System A (some examples)

• 5% payroll tax, no cap
• No health insurance premiums
• No out of pocket expenses for covered items, some items no coverage at all
• Assigned a doctor, no choice
• 1 month waiting time for appointment other than emergency
• Only strictly necessary prescriptions covered. Examples:
  • Life threatening conditions (diabetes, high blood pressure, cholesterol)
  • Debilitating pain
  • psychological
  • zantac / prilosec etc. only with serious illness
  • antibiotics only with confirmed bacterial diagnosis (wait a day before scrip filled)
• Optional prescriptions not covered
  • birth control
  • low-grade pain medication (tyl/codeine etc.)
  • viagra etc.
  • sleep aids
  • ADHD
• caps on major treatments
  • cancer treatment only on 20% or higher 5 year survival rate, else home to die
  • no reconstructive surgery
  • no completely optional surgery (cosmetic)
  • natural childbirth only (no casearean or epidural except in life threatening situations)
• Illegal to pay your own money for certain services (cosmetic for example) which are not covered

System B (some examples)

• $200/month premium
• $20 copay for some services
• Own choice of doctor
• 1 week waiting time for appointments
• All prescriptions covered with copay indexed to drug cost
• major treatments covered with 10% copay and annual maximum out of pocket
  • all cancer treatments
  • reconstructive and cosmetic surgery
  • elective caesarian
• Freedom to pay your own money for any services which are not covered.

 

[Stevenpfo]

1 month waiting time for appointment other than emergency

Is this some kind of futuristic Canadian health care?

I chose option B because of wait times, choice of doctor, presciptions and such.

I still support the health care system in Canada though. I just think it needs a lot of work.

 

[Perfection]

System B, because System A is fascist.

 

[Bud2998]

I'd choose system A. As a type 1 diabetic, I spend hundreds and hundreds of dollars per month on insulin, not including what I pay on insurance which is about another good couple hundred dollars per month. Even if I don't have a choice on which doctor I get and the waiting times are long, the free insulin would make it worth it.

 

[DaveShack]

I'd choose system A. As a type 1 diabetic, I spend hundreds and hundreds of dollars per month on insulin, not including what I pay on insurance which is about another good couple hundred dollars per month. Even if I don't have a choice on which doctor I get and the waiting times are long, the free insulin would make it worth it.

What about the 5% increase in payroll taxes for system A?

 

[Bud2998]

What about the 5% increase in payroll taxes for system A?

I'd still be paying less.

 

[McManus]

Otherwise I would choose system A, but for the caps on treatments. Otherwise I fully support A, but restrictions are bad...

 

[DaveShack]

Not a hot-button issue, I guess.

@Perfection, System A has elements of both socialism and fascism. I'd choose B without question BTW.

Also I should have clarified that the payroll tax in A and the premium in B would be for a single person with no dependents, both mechanisms of paying for the system would increase costs based on number of people covered.

 

[{|}$~\]

Neither system, as described, is acceptable. "A" is morally equivalent to murder. "B" would leave some people unable to afford vital health care.
"C" would have the following features:

• Funded by progressive taxation
• No out-of-pocket expenses for those who can't afford them
• Choice of doctors
• All prescriptions covered, except contraceptive and erectile dysfunction for non-married persons
• All life-necessary surgery covered, even if minimal long-term survival rate
• Reconstructive surgery for grossly disfigured
• Cosmetic surgery for major congenital deformations
• No "vanity" surgery
• Epidural/Caesarean childbirth
• Can pay own money for uncovered

cancer treatment only on 20% or higher 5 year survival rate, else home to die

I am extremely disturbed by this horrible suggestion, and sincerely hope that you do not actually support it.

 

[JohnRM]

None of the above.

 

[DaveShack]

System A's "cancer limit"

I am extremely disturbed by this horrible suggestion, and sincerely hope that you do not actually support it.

Of course not, I'd be appalled as well.

System C

• Funded by progressive taxation
• No out-of-pocket expenses for those who can't afford them
• Choice of doctors
• All prescriptions covered, except contraceptive and erectile dysfunction for non-married persons
• All life-necessary surgery covered, even if minimal long-term survival rate
• Reconstructive surgery for grossly disfigured
• Cosmetic surgery for major congenital deformations
• No "vanity" surgery
• Epidural/Caesarean childbirth
• Can pay own money for uncovered

System A represents my worst fears of what could happen if System C were enacted first and then costs exceeded projections.

 

[{|}$~\]

I don't think it would be that hard to pay for "C" if you taxed uber-gajillionaires.
The only drawback would be that someone might have to settle for twelve yachts instead of fifteen.

With "B", poor people woudn't be able to afford medical care even if it would raise their chance of survival from 0% to 100%.

 

[Perfection]

I don't think it would be that hard to pay for "C" if you taxed uber-gajillionaires.
The only drawback would be that someone might have to settle for twelve yachts instead of fifteen.

Most "uber gajillionaires" spend only a very small fraction of their money on such things. Most plug their earnigns right back into investments, which usually is quite good for the economy and beneficial to workers on the whole.

 

[El_Machinae]

Hey! That sounds familiar!

But you're right. If we didn't have people investing capital, then no new projects or companies could start.

Let me assure you that uber-gajillionaires did not become such by wasting money, but by building it.

 

[{|}$~\]

Most "uber gajillionaires" spend only a very small fraction of their money on such things. Most plug their earnigns right back into investments, which usually is quite good for the economy and beneficial to workers on the whole.

What about the $6,000 shower curtain and the $2,000,000 birthday party with the beverage-dispensing ice sculptures?

 

[Perfection]

What about the $6,000 shower curtain and the $2,000,000 birthday party with the beverage-dispensing ice sculptures?

It's mere spare change compared to the billions they invest.

 

[The Condor]

I chose B because I like choosing things. I mean like with a you could end up with some totally crap doctor that sucked where as with b you could just fire him and get a better one. Also, I hate the doctors so the less I have to think about it the better so B is also superior in its ability to get you in and out of the doctors faster. Also, having access to all the types of pills you could need is good to. Also, paying for your own doctor appointment is good to.

 

[{|}$~\]

The tax increases necessary to pay for "C" would also be spare change for the rich, but could mean the difference between life and death for the poor.

"B" would be acceptable if poor people's premiums and co-pays were government-subsidized.

 

[Whomp]

I voted B

A private healthcare system undoubtedly works better than a governmental system. Governments survival doesn't require them be competitive. Private does.

 

[Moss]

Of the two...B

choice of doctor is key...that and appointment time...

but neither are that good...I like the health insurance plan I have now better.