The thing that really gets to me is young adults not getting proper healthcare, with lifelong consequences, and ending up with burdensome levels of debt, also potentially lifelong, despite being covered by an employer's healthcare plan. Veteran's also have experienced long wait times for inadequate treatment. A veteran told me he finally got an attorney and sued the responsible parties after years of living with a risky undertreated injury while continuing to work. The veteran's case was so strong, not only he decisively won a civil suit, but a referral was considered for criminal prosecution. Third party providers routinely, systematically "Delay", "Deny", and "Depose" in order to put up roadblocks against paying claims. It helps their bottom line, but is fundamentally a breach of obligation under the legal principles of agency law that defines relationships and legal obligations thereof. This is happening also with homeowners insurance. Notably, there was a somewhat recent 60 Minutes segment on this related to hurricane related claims. Our healthcare system is beyond broken for patients. A possible solution would be to designate different tiers of coverage. A basic tier I Coverage could address Injury care, prevention, most dental services, and communicable diseases. This should be universal coverage for citizens or legal visitors, regardless of employment status. A healthcare right, as some say. The next tier could address genetic diseases and type II diabetes. This could be optional coverage with premiums based on actuaries. The final tier covers heart disease and cancer. This additional coverage cost could be based on actuaries and perhaps also include the actuarial cost of basic coverage. The principle behind the tiers is to avoid the situation of younger workers effectively subsidizing older workers, directly or indirectly, even after considering differences in premiums charged. All coverages should have a token deductible to reduce patient system abuse. There could be subsidizing surcharges for member lifestyle choices beyond actuarial, for substance abuse and unhealthy body mass index. There should be a solid system of check and balances that monitors healthcare and payment provider compliance. The healthcare "Chain of service" needs to be streamlined. It is foundationally ridiculous that doctors have to spend 30% of their time "translating" their treatment notes into insurance coverage terms in order to get paid. He have the technology, but third party payers have created another roadblock against fulfilling their obligations. Companies that benefit by selling harmful products, such as many processed foods and addictive products could have an increased excise tax that subsides at least basic healthcare coverage. The preceding ideas were top of mind. Efforts should be made to gather ethically minded healthcare professionals, victims of third party payors, their attorneys, and regulatory personnel to discuss durable solutions. Do you have any ideas of your own?
The ACA is a failure when compared to the original intention One part was to tax Golden health plans, because greedy corporations give it to the executives.....Then they learned that union leaders also had Cadillac plans....then nevermind
It is not only young adults! I have posted extensively on the topic of medical care in the U.S. I will summarize for you. My view is that we in the U.S. should simply copy an existing, highly efficient and low cost medical care delivery system that already exists, such as that in France for example. Nevertheless, medical care is something that could fit into a capitalist mold, but capitalists would fight tooth and nail against a truly capitalist medical care system. (We capitalists are capitalism's chief enemies!) A capitalist solution to medical care access would entail taking on far more competition and far more risk.* What's curious is how outrageous costs and tight control has spawned dark access points to medical care, and the government is allowing them to the chagrin of the medical cartel, at least for now. The U.S. has adopted, for most of its citizens, neither a capitalist approach to medical care nor a socialist approach, but has, via a process of sequential bad decisions, drifted into lucrative fascism in the form of a government protected cartel. It's the worst possible outcome. Incidentally, the U.S. does incorporate, at least for large numbers of its citizens, two moderately successful socialist medical care systems. We call them "The VA" and "Medicaid". It's the VA the Trump administration seems interested in eliminating. The U.S. will disintegrate before there is affordable access to medical care for everyone. But a good system might emerge from the ashes. ___________________ *Perhaps you have spent time in South America. If you have, than you may have experienced less regulation, better medical care at lower cost, and more personal freedom. But you also took on more risk. There is a trade off between risk and freedom. A highly competitive medical care delivery system could fit into a capitalist mold and greatly reduce costs, but it would, of course, increase risk. Understanding this is useful to politicians. Our politicians quite effectively use the threat of risk to get what they want. This works in all economic systems. And since no one can accurately predict the future, risk avoidance is a powerful tool in the hands of those, such as insurance companies, defense industry CEOs, etc., who are skilled in the art of exaggeration and fear mongering.
Trump’s Pentagon strips Mark Milley of security clearance and guard detail Pete Hegseth, US defense secretary, also seeks review of retired general’s rank in latest move by Donald Trump’s administration against his critics https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...milley-of-security-clearance-and-guard-detail
Reply to your post is inline. Your post formatting has been changed to facilitate response: QUOTE="piezoe, post: 6084049, member: 45984"]It is not only young adults! I have posted extensively on the topic of medical care in the U.S. I will summarize for you. My view is that we in the U.S. should simply copy an existing, highly efficient and low cost medical care delivery system that already exists, such as that in France for example. Nevertheless, medical care is something that could fit into a capitalist mold, but capitalists would fight tooth and nail against a truly capitalist medical care system. (We capitalists are capitalism's chief enemies!) A capitalist solution to medical care access would entail taking on far more competition and far more risk.* What's curious is how outrageous costs and tight control has spawned dark access points to medical care, and the government is allowing them to the chagrin of the medical cartel, at least for now. At this point, I'm going to agree with you. My concern is a group of US career politicians with little managerial sense will also ultimately screw up the model you mentioned. At least it seems to be established that France's model, as an example, is a better system that what the United States currently has. The U.S. has adopted, for most of its citizens, neither a capitalist approach to medical care nor a socialist approach, but has, via a process of sequential bad decisions, drifted into lucrative fascism in the form of a government protected cartel. It's the worst possible outcome. Incidentally, the U.S. does incorporate, at least for large numbers of its citizens, two moderately successful socialist medical care systems. We call them "The VA" and "Medicaid". It's the VA the Trump administration seems interested in eliminating. I may be wrong here, but is not the VA an important, if not critical resource in the development of healthcare professionals comprised of military personnel? If so, an important reason to keep the VA, although there may be significant benefits gained through efforts towards increased efficiency. The U.S. will disintegrate before there is affordable access to medical care for everyone. But a good system might emerge from the ashes. There probably should be some mention of the American Medical Association (AMA) somewhere. It seems they have been a net negative influence on healthcare quality in support of domestic pharmaceutical companies unilateral policies leading excessive industry profits without corresponding patient benefits. Healthcare statistics seem the bear this point out. ___________________ *Perhaps you have spent time in South America. If you have, than you may have experienced less regulation, better medical care at lower cost, and more personal freedom. But you also took on more risk. There is a trade off between risk and freedom. A highly competitive medical care delivery system could fit into a capitalist mold and greatly reduce costs, but it would, of course, increase risk. Understanding this is useful to politicians. Our politicians quite effectively use the threat of risk to get what they want. This works in all economic systems. And since no one can accurately predict the future, risk avoidance is a powerful tool in the hands of those, such as insurance companies, defense industry CEOs, etc., who are skilled in the art of exaggeration and fear mongering.[/QUOTE
Trump has gotten a lot with his nominees. But we all know how the kabuki dance works. There has to be at least one sacrificial lamb so that the senators will be able to delude themselves into thinking that they are independent and ballsy. Tulsi is going to be one such sacrificial lamb. It's just the way the dance works, and cannot be helped. Obviously Bobby is at risk too. Kash will get rolled over extremely hard but probably make it.