paper pushing and insurance company overhead adds 30% to the system. defensive medicine probably at least 10% more. how about we start there?
If you have proof of that I'd like to see it. In general insurance companies get LOWER prices than people without insurance. The bigger the insurance company the cheaper the price...they basically negotiate "bulk" pricing that individuals can't. I don't see how that ADDS 30% to total cost.
The U.S. wastes more on health care bureaucracy than it would cost to provide health care to all of the uninsured. Administrative expenses will consume at least $399.4 billion out of total health expenditures of $1,660.5 billion in 2003. Streamlining administrative overhead to Canadian levels would save approximately $286.0 billion in 2003, $6,940 for each of the 41.2 million Americans who were uninsured as of 2001. This is substantially more than would be needed to provide full insurance coverage. The administrative structure of the U.S. health care system consumes a large share of health spending. In 1999, administrative spending consumed at least 31.0 percent of health spending, according to a report in today's New England Journal of Medicine. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/8800.php
And what would the government workers overhead be under a single payer plan? With their guaranteed pensions and the like. I think it safe to say private insurance companies would do a much better job managing their overhead than that of the government, because the HAVE to.
LOL sure it is. Edit: That 3% doesn't include many costs associated with medicare overhead. Such as taxes, sales commisions, profits, legal fees and more that I am missing off the cuff.
Assuming these numbers are accurate, you are saying that $578/month/person is "more than needed"? Also what about the people working for private insurance companies now? They would become unemployed and added to that number of people needing government health care which would further reduce the "savings". All of that still hinges on the belief that the US federal government would actually be able to run this efficiently....ROFL.
u can get unicare or bluecross in Texas for a family of 4 for $240 a month with 1K deductible - that's what i pay...and when i was single it was under $100.00 a month - u can't go to the doc everytime you get a cough, but if u get hit by a mack truck your covered
You've missed the point entirely. The reason medical delivery in the US must be overhauled is not because there are people without insurance, it's because the current rate of medical care cost increases cannot be sustained! Bringing more people under insurance coverage is just one of the many necessary changes that is needed to control future costs and keep care affordable for the maximum number of people. The current "system" is unsustainable. There is no choice but to change it drastically and the sooner the better. Obama understands this. You do not. One can argue that the proposed changes are not the right ones, but to argue that no, or very little, change is needed suggests you are completely out of touch with reality.
Pab(s)t, you never cease to amaze with your ad hominen arguments -- short on logic and completely missing the point. One would hope you are a much better trader than Devil's advocate.