Last night's President speech in Pa...... (Page 7): The ranking list is impressive and useless. Here is an analysis of the differences in the French and American health care systems.

pafret Loc: Northeast

Morgan wrote:

Health care should not be part of the capitalist's... (show quote)

The ranking list is impressive and useless. Here is an analysis of the differences in the French and American health care systems. The French system is neither socialized medicine nor single payer. It is composed of government controlled, not-for-profit, insurance funds and private supplemental insurance.

"The French health care system comes in at or near the top of international rankings, while the US system falls well down the lists. It stands to reason, then, that US health care reformers should have something to learn from the French experience, but just what? There seem to be lessons both for those who are optimistic about US health care reform and those who think reform will be difficult.

On the optimistic side, the French experience clearly shows it is possible to have universal access to health care of the highest quality while maintaining broad freedom of choice both for patients and doctors. French patients have the right to choose their own primary care doctors, and with only minimal restrictions, to see specialists of their choice. French doctors can choose whatever treatments they believe to be appropriate. That includes even use of cutting-edge treatments like the cancer drug Avastin. (Because that drug, which can cost up to $100,000 per year, does not cure cancer and appears to extend life by, at most, a few months, its use is restricted as not being cost-effective by many US private insurers and also by government health care systems in Canada and the UK.)

Freedom of choice is critical to the politics of health care reform in the United States. Opponents of reform love to play the "socialized medicine" card, which, in the minds of many people, means an impersonal, regimented, system where one stands in line at a government clinic for the first available doctor, who then prescribes a course of treatment according to strict regulatory guidelines. The French health care system is far from fitting that picture.

On the critical issue of costs, the lessons are more complex.

The good news is that their highly rated health care system costs the French 11.2 percent of GDP, compared with 16 percent in the United States, based on 2008 OECD data. In dollars per capita, the gap is even more dramatic. By that measure, the United States spends exactly twice as much on health care as France, with less to show for it.

There is reason to think that some of the cost-saving features of the French system could be incorporated in US reforms. Lower costs of administering the medical payment system are one example. France does not have a true single-payer system. Not-for-profit insurance funds closely supervised by the government pay most of the cost of care, but people also carry supplementary insurance, similar to Medigap plans, that cover deductibles and co-pays. Still, despite the involvement of multiple insurers, the French system spends less than half as much on administration and marketing than the 7% of health care costs reported for the United States.

Another area where the French save costs is through more aggressive government bargaining with hospitals, doctors, and pharmaceutical companies. The US government has done less in this area. For example, under Medicare Part D the government is explicitly prohibited from bargaining for lower drug costs.

Medical malpractice is a third area where would-be US cost cutters might learn from French experience. France uses an approach pioneered in Scandinavia, under which cases of alleged malpractice are decided by special review boards that operate outside the court system. This Scandinavian approach is sometimes compared to the US worker compensation system, in that it is less focused on finding fault than on providing compensation to patients who have been harmed by improper care. Payments are made from a national fund, freeing doctors from the burden of malpractice insurance. Costs of administering the malpractice system are lower than those of adversarial court proceedings, and the chances of freakish "jackpot" awards are lower than when juries are involved.

At the same time, other elements of the French cost control experience are are less encouraging for US reformers. One is the fact that despite all efforts, health care costs have been growing faster than GDP in France, as they have in the United States, and are increasingly a cause for concern. The Sarkozy government has made some efforts to tighten controls, but these have met with opposition. For example, a 2009 reform law that was supposed to strengthen the cost control authority of hospital administrators was perceived by doctors as a threat to their autonomy, and brought them out on the streets in protest.

A final factor that complicates any comparison between French and US health care costs is the fact that French physicians earn only about a third as much as their US counterparts. Although doctors in France are respected, well-compensated, professionals, a medical career there is by no means a guaranteed ticket into the top 5 percent of the income distribution, as it is in the United States. The gap in doctors' earnings makes a big difference for national health care costs. About 20 cents of every US health care dollar is paid to individual physicians and clinics, and that does not count staff doctors in hospitals, whose salaries are included in the 30 cents of the US health dollar that goes for hospital services."

So you tell me, how do we gain control of insurance companies, to make them go non-profit and reduce Doctor's compensation to half of what it is currently, without curbing the insane compensation of corporate executives? Is this possible under our form of government? I think not. What will we do with the ambulance chaser industry when medical malpractice suits are reduced to I was hurt, pay me.

Morgan

Super Dave wrote:

Who gives a rip what the WHO says?

The UN does not support freedom. They cater to Socialists, Communists, and anti-Semities.

It has NOTHING to do with what they think! It has to do with where we rate, geeeeez

This is how the right responds everytime you don't want to face an outcome. Where's all that chanting of make America great again... when it comes to health care and education this or education?
The UN doesn't cater to those you've mentioned, that's just the dogma you've bought into.
PS try and stay on topic.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Morgan wrote:

It has NOTHING to do with what they think! It has ... (show quote)

The topic I responded to was your useless "opinion driven list" from an organization that is neither competent, honest, or sharing in American values of liberty and personal choice/responsibility.

If you bought into the Obamacare lies, perhaps you shouldn't try to lecture me on "dogma", because I knew they were lies when they were first spoken.

Morgan

pafret wrote:

The ranking list is impressive and useless. Here is an analysis of the differences in the French and American health care systems. The French system is neither socialized medicine nor single payer. It is composed of government controlled, not-for-profit, insurance funds and private supplemental insurance.

"The French health care system comes in at or near the top of international rankings, while the US system falls well down the lists. It stands to reason, then, that US health care reformers should have something to learn from the French experience, but just what? There seem to be lessons both for those who are optimistic about US health care reform and those who think reform will be difficult.

On the optimistic side, the French experience clearly shows it is possible to have universal access to health care of the highest quality while maintaining broad freedom of choice both for patients and doctors. French patients have the right to choose their own primary care doctors, and with only minimal restrictions, to see specialists of their choice. French doctors can choose whatever treatments they believe to be appropriate. That includes even use of cutting-edge treatments like the cancer drug Avastin. (Because that drug, which can cost up to $100,000 per year, does not cure cancer and appears to extend life by, at most, a few months, its use is restricted as not being cost-effective by many US private insurers and also by government health care systems in Canada and the UK.)

Freedom of choice is critical to the politics of health care reform in the United States. Opponents of reform love to play the "socialized medicine" card, which, in the minds of many people, means an impersonal, regimented, system where one stands in line at a government clinic for the first available doctor, who then prescribes a course of treatment according to strict regulatory guidelines. The French health care system is far from fitting that picture.

On the critical issue of costs, the lessons are more complex.

The good news is that their highly rated health care system costs the French 11.2 percent of GDP, compared with 16 percent in the United States, based on 2008 OECD data. In dollars per capita, the gap is even more dramatic. By that measure, the United States spends exactly twice as much on health care as France, with less to show for it.

There is reason to think that some of the cost-saving features of the French system could be incorporated in US reforms. Lower costs of administering the medical payment system are one example. France does not have a true single-payer system. Not-for-profit insurance funds closely supervised by the government pay most of the cost of care, but people also carry supplementary insurance, similar to Medigap plans, that cover deductibles and co-pays. Still, despite the involvement of multiple insurers, the French system spends less than half as much on administration and marketing than the 7% of health care costs reported for the United States.

Another area where the French save costs is through more aggressive government bargaining with hospitals, doctors, and pharmaceutical companies. The US government has done less in this area. For example, under Medicare Part D the government is explicitly prohibited from bargaining for lower drug costs.

Medical malpractice is a third area where would-be US cost cutters might learn from French experience. France uses an approach pioneered in Scandinavia, under which cases of alleged malpractice are decided by special review boards that operate outside the court system. This Scandinavian approach is sometimes compared to the US worker compensation system, in that it is less focused on finding fault than on providing compensation to patients who have been harmed by improper care. Payments are made from a national fund, freeing doctors from the burden of malpractice insurance. Costs of administering the malpractice system are lower than those of adversarial court proceedings, and the chances of freakish "jackpot" awards are lower than when juries are involved.

At the same time, other elements of the French cost control experience are are less encouraging for US reformers. One is the fact that despite all efforts, health care costs have been growing faster than GDP in France, as they have in the United States, and are increasingly a cause for concern. The Sarkozy government has made some efforts to tighten controls, but these have met with opposition. For example, a 2009 reform law that was supposed to strengthen the cost control authority of hospital administrators was perceived by doctors as a threat to their autonomy, and brought them out on the streets in protest.

A final factor that complicates any comparison between French and US health care costs is the fact that French physicians earn only about a third as much as their US counterparts. Although doctors in France are respected, well-compensated, professionals, a medical career there is by no means a guaranteed ticket into the top 5 percent of the income distribution, as it is in the United States. The gap in doctors' earnings makes a big difference for national health care costs. About 20 cents of every US health care dollar is paid to individual physicians and clinics, and that does not count staff doctors in hospitals, whose salaries are included in the 30 cents of the US health dollar that goes for hospital services."

So you tell me, how do we gain control of insurance companies, to make them go non-profit and reduce Doctor's compensation to half of what it is currently, without curbing the insane compensation of corporate executives? Is this possible under our form of government? I think not. What will we do with the ambulance chaser industry when medical malpractice suits are reduced to I was hurt, pay me.

The ranking list is impressive and useless. Here ... (show quote)

You have some very solid points here. Possibly the key to affordable health insurance is having the government being able to negotiate, but it appears the lobbyists are much too persuasive to get done what needs to be. The insurance companies along with pharmaceuticals will never shoot the golden goose and their foot at the same time.

As we(OPP) discussed the health care plan I brought up that fact several times, bringing up that exact point. Stating they were not in the conversation when talking about cost. For example, there was that CEO of a pharm. company who increased his profit margin 700%.

Why do we prohibit fuel gauging, but not on prescription drugs? On the interview, they question the young man why he was increasing this cancer prescription drug cost by such a large percentage and with his insolent smirk on his face, his reply was... because he can.

The French doctors might work for less but they also don't have the debt that the medical students have here. One has to ask not so much about their earnings but more to the point the distinction in the quality of life they have. This is where I find Americans have been losing. Mind you this is also due to the life we live and one's attitude. Americans are caught up in keeping up with the Jones's. Our drive is always having the latest gizmo, and what is in at the moment.

Speaking with some people from the UK, they've spoken of how happy they were not having to worry about their health care and couldn't imagine people who have gone into bankruptcy as people have done in the past in America or just wasted away.

Like I've said the only way I can see needs being met for all,is to have public and private. The elite will continue to get the Best care, but at least everyone will get care.

Morgan

Super Dave wrote:

The topic I responded to was your useless "opinion driven list" from an organization that is neither competent, honest, or sharing in American values of liberty and personal choice/responsibility.

If you bought into the Obamacare lies, perhaps you shouldn't try to lecture me on "dogma", because I knew they were lies when they were first spoken.

What a crock...really. It was wasn't my opinion driven list, it was "the list" of where we fall in comparison. Check anywhere on where we are in healthcare compared to other countries, we're sucking wind. Fools paying the most and getting the least, you know like cable tv. Why because we're corporate America. It isn't "We the People" anymore, it's "Corporations are People Too." The insurance companies are running our lives and sucking us dry. People will be going back to no coverage, or bad coverage and paying high dollar for it.
Trump is a perfect example of our government serving corporations needs and NOT the needs of the People.

pafret Loc: Northeast

Morgan wrote:

What a crock...really. It was wasn't my opinion dr... (show quote)

What you don't want to recognize is that we live in a Corporatocracy and every President since Dwight Eisenhower serves the corporate oligarchy. Eisenhower was a johnny-come-lately in recognizing this since the problem was discussed in a 1936 book by Daniel Guerin: "Fascism and Big Business", which spoke about growing interrelationship between government and industry.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Morgan wrote:

What a crock...really. It was wasn't my opinion dr... (show quote)

You are sad. Trump serves corporations? Were you in a coma while your Godking Obama was in office?

Socialism never ever serves the needs of citizens better than citizen rule.

For goodness' sake get off your knees and think for yourself.

You claim Trump serves corporations and you want him in charge of your healthcare?

Morgan

pafret wrote:

What you don't want to recognize is that we live in a Corporatocracy and every President since Dwight Eisenhower serves the corporate oligarchy. Eisenhower was a johnny-come-lately in recognizing this since the problem was discussed in a 1936 book by Daniel Guerin: "Fascism and Big Business", which spoke about growing interrelationship between government and industry.

I have and I do... have I given up on our ideologies, no not yet, I still have hope. Some of what is going on today mis possibly just what we need to get people to stop being so complacent and allowing things we don't want to see happen, happen. Maybe things have to get stripped down to its framework in order to rebuild again and finally, maybe we can rebuild it to avoid corruption, let's start with the money.

Morgan

Super Dave wrote:

You are sad. Trump serves corporations? Were you in a coma while your Godking Obama was in office?

Socialism never ever serves the needs of citizens better than citizen rule.

For goodness' sake get off your knees and think for yourself.

You claim Trump serves corporations and you want him in charge of your healthcare?

Is Trump King? If that happened I missed it, though I know that is his true desire. Never said I want Trump for anything, that's for sure. That will come through Congress and not Trump, but since it's a Republican majority so that's there's a snowball chance in hell of any good reform for the regular Joe. One more personal attack and I'm through conversing with you, I have been civil with you and I can't be bothered with such narrow-minded BS.

Our Healthcare serves the wealthy and wall street...deregulating the EPA, serves corporations, the new tax plan serves the same people, taking away parks and environmentally protected land to drill, serves oil corporations.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Morgan wrote:

Is Trump King? If that happened I missed it, thoug... (show quote)

Good grief have you been brainwashed.

You really think congress passes regulations designed to harm their campaign donors? Really? That's what you think?

Are you really that naive/dumb?

The ONLY way to make government less corrupt is to make government less powerful.

Morgan

Super Dave wrote:

I thought you said:
1. You needed Obamacare to cover your preexisting condition.
2. Changing my policy against my will was necessary.

Was I mistaken?

1.Obama care/ACA is not an insurance company, do you understand that? States get to choose along with insurance companies who will be in their state, some states have more, some have less. we choose who to go with from our state.They wanted it to go cross state lines but that was blocked in order to have it more apt to fail. Therefore Obamacare doesn't cover preexisting conditions but did put an end to that stipulation among insurance companies,you with me?
2...nope never said that.

Morgan

Super Dave wrote:

Good grief have you been brainwashed.

You really think congress passes regulations designed to harm their campaign donors? Really? That's what you think?

Are you really that naive/dumb?

The ONLY way to make government less corrupt is to make government less powerful.

,
Congress is passing regulations based on campaign strategies and not the real issues, and you fine with that?

And no, that is not how to make government less powerful. A democracy is one ruled by its people, therefore something that should never be feared he people, if that ever occurs, that means we have already allowed our government to be overthrown.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Morgan wrote:

1.Obama care/ACA is not an insurance company, do you understand that? States get to choose along with insurance companies who will be in their state, some states have more, some have less. we choose who to go with from our state.They wanted it to go cross state lines but that was blocked in order to have it more apt to fail. Therefore Obamacare doesn't cover preexisting conditions but did put an end to that stipulation among insurance companies,you with me?
2...nope never said that.

Of course Obamacare isn't insurance. Obamacare is the government overlord that forces insurance companies to screw Americans while favoring certain corporate interests.

No - The states only are not allowed to choose any insurance company or plan that doesn't meet Obamacare mandates. The state I lived it was unable to choose to allow me the plan that I had before Obamacare. I was forced to choose between more expensive plans with higher deductibles that covered my needs less. I can now get women's birth control pills free, but the coverage I needed at the price I used to pay became illegal.

If you're still so naive/stupid that you think congressional Democrats and Obama passed Obamacare because they loved you, why don't you try to find out how may Democrat campaign donors got filthy rich off of it.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Morgan wrote:

,
Congress is passing regulations based on campaign strategies and not the real issues, and you fine with that?

And no, that is not how to make government less powerful. A democracy is one ruled by its people, therefore something that should never be feared he people, if that ever occurs, that means we have already allowed our government to be overthrown.

1. America is a Republic. Didn't you learn this in elementary school?

2. Of course Congress is passing regulations to get them re-elected... Duhhhh...

3. Yes. The way to make government less powerful is to make the citizens more powerful... What are you thinking?

4. Obama promised to "Radically Transform" America. And he managed to do quite a bit of that. He made many Americans think terrorism is something you can make deals with. And worse of all he's got millions more Americans on their knees, palms up, pleading with the government for healthcare, food stamps, and other services that they would have been providing for themselves otherwise.

Morgan

Super Dave wrote:

1. America is a Republic. Didn't you learn this in... (show quote)

What are you thinking? Where the hell have you been... really? You know what, you have not a clue about what I'm talking about. I know all about what form of government we are, FederalRepublic which is a "branch" of Democracy and not the other way around...DUUUUUH

#3... actually think, and then get back to me, I'm continuing to lose my patience with you.
Learn about who put America on its knees buddy every time, not the Democrats, the Republicans. Who keeps people from not getting an education or health care.