^^^ i would tend to agree with that
― itdn put butt in the display name (gbx), Thursday, 19 November 2009 16:44 (fourteen years ago) link
Three Word Username - elaborate please!! i think most of us here wd like to be edjimicated on these things
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 19 November 2009 16:45 (fourteen years ago) link
i am v uneducated, but i think in countries that still retain private insurance companies (france, eg) those companies are still allowed, legally, to be for-profit
― itdn put butt in the display name (gbx), Thursday, 19 November 2009 16:46 (fourteen years ago) link
which would make the quoted statement in 3WUN's post at least factually incorrect
― itdn put butt in the display name (gbx), Thursday, 19 November 2009 16:47 (fourteen years ago) link
(but regs may be so tight that those private companies simply do not post profits with margins even approaching those seen in the US)
― itdn put butt in the display name (gbx), Thursday, 19 November 2009 16:48 (fourteen years ago) link
i thot that US health insurers don't have margins that amazing? like, not more that 4-5%?
hospital groups, device makers, PHARMA all do quite well, i believe.
― goole, Thursday, 19 November 2009 16:50 (fourteen years ago) link
Excluding the menz thing is tempting but unworkable, even if only because then it's like, well, who gets to vote on Alzheimer's research funding -- only people or family members of people with Alzheimer's? Or people with the gene showing that they MIGHT get it -- but when what if they vote unpopularly and then they NEVER get it, how can you justify their votes having counted? I mean it's just a prospective disaster.
― WHY DON'T YOU JUST LICK THE BUS DIRECTLY (Laurel), Thursday, 19 November 2009 16:50 (fourteen years ago) link
is that the case, goole? honestly didn't know, i had blithely lumped them in with all the other players in the industry that DO post what are just jaw-dropping profit margins
― itdn put butt in the display name (gbx), Thursday, 19 November 2009 16:55 (fourteen years ago) link
i dunno there's probably an ezra klein blog post somewhere laying it all out
― goole, Thursday, 19 November 2009 16:56 (fourteen years ago) link
in countries that still retain private insurance companies (france, eg) those companies are still allowed, legally, to be for-profit
yes but france has a govt insurance system as well! in essence the private insurance is to cover your deductible, and the rest is covered by the government.
i was saying that the industrialized countries that DON'T have any govt. insurance scheme have incredibly tight regs on the private companies that in effect make them nonprofits HOWEVER that is just something i READ and could in fact be WRONGGO
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 19 November 2009 17:00 (fourteen years ago) link
u.s. insurance companies have something like 5-9% profit margins but as the "1st bank of change" from SNL says it's all about volume, baby
laurel: yeah, that's why i would ~tend~ to agree with suzy, but ultimately feel that any kind of healthcare plan that involves every person in america as a stakeholder will by necessity run into conflicts of interest in how we deliver care/research/etc. HOWEVER, i really believe that an individual woman's right to make decisions regarding her own body is qualitatively different than those situations you outlined. being a woman is not pathological (~somewhere, a cad makes a joke~), and it might not be useful to think of it in the same terms as, say, multiple sclerosis or something, you know? that is, including reproductive health measures into a public option (birth control, reg ob-gyn visits, abortions, etc) is just flat-out different from the apportionment of resources to investigate conditions that affect waaaay less than 50% of the population
(not that this is anything you really need to be told, obv! i'm just sorta being pedantic)
― itdn put butt in the display name (gbx), Thursday, 19 November 2009 17:02 (fourteen years ago) link
ahh, tracer, i see. i didn't realize that the euro countries in question had ONLY private insurance
(i rarely have time to actually ~read~ this thread, which is a bummer since that's why i started it in the first place. figured ilx would know a lot more about all this than i did)
― itdn put butt in the display name (gbx), Thursday, 19 November 2009 17:03 (fourteen years ago) link
shock at the SHAMBLES that is socialized medicine - many women in the UK have to wait UP TO THREE WEEKS for a FREE ABORTION:
http://www.nhs.uk/LiveWell/sexualhealth/Pages/Abortionyouroptions.aspx
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 19 November 2009 17:07 (fourteen years ago) link
gotta say that seeing a ".gov" address that ended in "Abortionyouroptions" would cause some major cognitive dissonance over here
― itdn put butt in the display name (gbx), Thursday, 19 November 2009 17:11 (fourteen years ago) link
xposts although having said that, I'm sure there are plenty of anti-abortion women who'd be only too happy to limit others' reproductive options because they're just sisterly like that. It's like feminism taking a hit because there are women who think pole dancing lessons are cool. Laurel, abortion itself is like no other medical issue because wrt Alzheimer's we all have brains but just over half of us have a uterus - what would be nice here is for men to accord the same respect to women as we accord to them - nobody is trying to limit men's reproductive choices with any coverage or legislation - and that can mean anything from vasectomy to Help! My Sperms Are Hiding to Viagra.
Having lived outside the US most of my adult life, I now find it culturally weird for my health history to be something my employer has to know about before hiring me, or a point of negotiation, at any rate - I would prefer that my health be a confidential matter between me and my doctor. I think it would be better for business if employers did not have to shell out for healthcare for their employees but instead paid a flat rate of social security whatever the number of employees, but that would mean insurers would starve OH NOES. In countries with single payer or socialized medicine, the public care provisions take care of the seriously ill that insurers in the US would baulk at and private care is a top-up offered by employers that might help with, say, not waiting ages to see a dermatologist, being a worried well person who'd like an MRI, or getting your eyes lasered.
― viagra falls (suzy), Thursday, 19 November 2009 17:14 (fourteen years ago) link
I agree about the 50% thing, gbx, and also the non-pathologism of being female etc. But what conclusion you come to about that kind of depends on how you draw the lines between different "kinds" of people, ie what associations you privilege.
― WHY DON'T YOU JUST LICK THE BUS DIRECTLY (Laurel), Thursday, 19 November 2009 17:15 (fourteen years ago) link
xposts although having said that, I'm sure there are plenty of anti-abortion women who'd be only too happy to limit others' reproductive options because they're just sisterly like that.
glad you raised this cuz I was gonna say... male lawmakers may be the face of anti-choice legislation but let's not kid ourselves that a solid majority of women are pro-choice
― Jack Kirby's Orangutan Surfing Civilization (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 19 November 2009 17:16 (fourteen years ago) link
Sorry, the (deliberate?) misreading of the Swiss system by Democrats with ties to big insurance has lead to a great deal of misinformation floating about. Swiss insurance companies are not known for their charity, and are intended to be profit-making. Everybody knows by now that all Swiss residents are required by law to have health insurance. Companies which issue health insurance are required to have basic coverage policies available, from which they may not profit. These policies kinda suck, although they are not terrible, and folks who can afford to get more coverage (which is most folks in Switzerland) will pay more for better coverage. There's profit in those insurance policies.
The most important that gets left out when people talk about the Swiss system: the Swiss minimum wage, which most moderate US Democrats would find shockingly high.
― Three Word Username, Thursday, 19 November 2009 17:36 (fourteen years ago) link
My mom (for example) has moved from being totally pro-choice/fuck those guys with their signs into middle age to 'only in cases of rape or threat to woman's life' so I know women are hardly united and some like punishing other women for their life choices or accidents of circumstance. Maybe I'm just looking for even one male politician (who isn't Al Franken) to show some humility about something 35 per cent of women - including those who 'don't approve' - have to deal with at some point in their lives. And like I said, women don't generally act/have the power to limit things to do with men's reproductive health.
― viagra falls (suzy), Thursday, 19 November 2009 17:37 (fourteen years ago) link
xp Is it? Wikiped thinks the gross annual wage in Switz is 15,551 International dollars, whatever those are when they're at home. (Note: apparently there is no statutory minimum wage but greater collective bargaining power to raise wages in general?)
― WHY DON'T YOU JUST LICK THE BUS DIRECTLY (Laurel), Thursday, 19 November 2009 17:40 (fourteen years ago) link
TWU thanks - that makes sense. So there's a non-profit basic plan that these private insurers must offer, and then you can top that up with more enhancements later? I think France is not actually too different - only in that the basic plan is a government plan.
What I'd be interested in knowing is how expensive an average "top up" plan in Switzerland costs. I think in France it's something on the order of 80 euro a month.
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 19 November 2009 17:42 (fourteen years ago) link
Laurel what the fuck is an international dollar? Is that some kind of UN conspiracy?
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 19 November 2009 17:48 (fourteen years ago) link
I can't find any good English language sources on Swiss minimums, and Laurel is correct that they are a result of collective bargaining rather than statute, but dig out what little German you have and look here:
http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/de/index/themen/03/05/blank/key/05.html
Not going to tell you dudes how much I pay for my supplementary stuff, but depending on what you want covered (hospital choice, private room, preventative stuff) it can get up there.
― Three Word Username, Thursday, 19 November 2009 18:28 (fourteen years ago) link
god shut the fuck up Droopy
― Jack Kirby's Orangutan Surfing Civilization (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 19 November 2009 18:51 (fourteen years ago) link
I know I have a rep as a morbid playa hata or whatever but seriously would dance on this fucker's grave
― Jack Kirby's Orangutan Surfing Civilization (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 19 November 2009 18:52 (fourteen years ago) link
A September Research 2000 poll found that Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell would defeat both Blumenthal and Lieberman in a potential three-way 2012 matchup; the same poll found that 68 percent of the state’s voters support the public option.
^^^WAY TO NOT REPRESENT YOUR CONSTITUENTS asshole
― Jack Kirby's Orangutan Surfing Civilization (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 19 November 2009 18:53 (fourteen years ago) link
I think you'd get a pass for that one. xp
― WmC, Thursday, 19 November 2009 18:54 (fourteen years ago) link
http://i45.tinypic.com/vyr6mb.png
Downwardly Mobile: The Unexpected Cost of Being Uninsured
OK, I am waaaaay far left in regards to universal coverage, but I would never have claimed that the disparity of results was this bad when it comes to emergent trauma mortality rate (which seems like one of the few places where the playing field would approach evenness). And yet, there are the numbers. I am kind of stunned. This is amazing and ideally will be cited by every single senator who supports healthcare reform. (Also the coauthorship of Gawande makes me hopeful that this will turn into the cornerstone of a rad New Yorker article.)
― C-L, Friday, 20 November 2009 01:43 (fourteen years ago) link
whoa
― max, Friday, 20 November 2009 01:45 (fourteen years ago) link
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2009/11/19/quebec-facebook-sick-leave-benefits.html
― itdn put butt in the display name (gbx), Friday, 20 November 2009 04:14 (fourteen years ago) link
when NPR pundits doubt that something as "EXPANSIVE" as the Senate bill will pass, you know we're fucked.
END THE TWO MOTHERFUCKING GIULIANI WARS, we can afford it.
― Feingold/Kaptur 2012 (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 24 November 2009 01:15 (fourteen years ago) link
Stupak-like motion tabled by Senate, 54-45. PHEW.
― special vixens unit (suzy), Wednesday, 9 December 2009 00:16 (fourteen years ago) link
whoah was honestly not expecting that to happen
― mr. strawman spotter (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 9 December 2009 00:18 (fourteen years ago) link
pleasantly surprised!
Meanwhile this Ezra Klein column is worth reading.
― Hell is other people. In an ILE film forum. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 9 December 2009 00:20 (fourteen years ago) link
no-one seems clear on whether the public option was dropped or not. news said yes, reid said no, apparently there is some kind of pseudo thing
― akm, Wednesday, 9 December 2009 03:00 (fourteen years ago) link
im prepared to beat the shit out of joe lieberman if it comes to it
― max, Wednesday, 9 December 2009 03:45 (fourteen years ago) link
i am not a violent person but
― max, Wednesday, 9 December 2009 03:46 (fourteen years ago) link
no jury in america would convict you
― uninspired girls rejoice!!! (Hoot Smalley), Wednesday, 9 December 2009 04:06 (fourteen years ago) link
soooo does anyone know whats going on
― max, Wednesday, 9 December 2009 14:38 (fourteen years ago) link
I don't get how allowing 55+ citizens to "buy into" Medicaid solves anything; this is more feinting.
― Hell is other people. In an ILE film forum. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 9 December 2009 14:41 (fourteen years ago) link
ppl 55 to 65 are the most likely to be un-/underinsured and have the worst health of those not covered by medicare. it's a fair chunk of ppl that should be covered.
yeah it's a feint but with the lieberman and snowe show what are you gonna do?
― goole, Wednesday, 9 December 2009 15:10 (fourteen years ago) link
fuckin Lieberman. tyranny of the minority here.
― mr. strawman spotter (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 9 December 2009 16:29 (fourteen years ago) link
can someone explain this stupid "national insurance program run by private insurers" plan cuz I don't see how this accomplishes anything.
― a triumph in high-tech nipple obfuscation (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 10 December 2009 18:56 (fourteen years ago) link
i don't really get that part. the only good signs of this that I see is that it will now be illegal to rescind coverage or deny coverage for people with pre-existing conditions (that is, that's really the thing I'm most concerned about since my family now falls into this boat), and I think there is a price cap on how much they can raise the costs on people with conditions. But there also doesn't seem to be anythings stated about the level of care required; you can have 'insurance' that refuses to pay for anything substantial. Is there anything in the bill to keep that from happening?
― akm, Thursday, 10 December 2009 18:59 (fourteen years ago) link
A death panel.
― Hell is other people. In an ILE film forum. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 10 December 2009 19:00 (fourteen years ago) link
and not to be redundant but I wish all kinds of horrible cancer on Lieberman. Ass cancer. Brain cancer. Ronnie James Dio's cancer. in fact, just take all the cancer afflicting everybody else and give it to ol' Joe, that'd be good.
― a triumph in high-tech nipple obfuscation (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 10 December 2009 19:03 (fourteen years ago) link
Why? His gold-plated health care will pay for it.
― Hell is other people. In an ILE film forum. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 10 December 2009 19:04 (fourteen years ago) link
gold doesn't cure everything
― a triumph in high-tech nipple obfuscation (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 10 December 2009 19:18 (fourteen years ago) link