How to Fix Health Care Without Spending a Dime (Part 1 of 2)

Here are ways to deal with most of the things that are wrong with our health care system, none of which will cost the taxpayers any money at all. (Please watch both parts before commenting.) Restore consumer-controlled health care: www.downsizedc.org Make your health insurance more affordable: www.downsizedc.org Protect and Improve Health Savings Accounts: www.downsizedc.org End onerous health care regulations: www.downsizedc.org Sources: Parente, S. et al, “Consumer Response to a National Marketplace for Individual Insurance,” Final Technical Report for DHHS Contract HP-07-024, aspe.hhs.gov Brook, R. et al, “The Effect of Coinsurance on the Health of Adults,” R-3055-HHS, www.rand.org Ruwart, Mary J., “Healing Our World in an Age of Aggression” (Second Edition) Bovard, James, “Shakedown: How the Government Screws You From A to Z” Angell, Marcia and Arnold S. Relman. “Prescription for profit,” The Washington Post 2001 Jun 20; Sect. A:27.

Related posts:

  1. Demand Single Payer Health Care NOW!
  2. Are Health Savings Accounts The Right Medicine For The Ills Of The Health Care Industry? Explain.?
  3. Survey Shows Women Still Spending on Skin Care Despite Ec…
  4. Weekly Address: Health Care Reform, the Key to Our Fiscal Future
  5. When Health Care Reform Passes In September Will The Cost Savings Be Immediate?
This entry was posted in How To's and tagged care, debate, Health, Medicine, Politics, States, uhc, United, universal, us. Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to How to Fix Health Care Without Spending a Dime (Part 1 of 2)

  1. shanedk says:

    If it’s just based on money, it IS an economic problem. BY DEFINITION.

    It’s just like the housing crisis being caused by economic problems, even though there was nothing wrong with the actual houses themselves.

  2. shanedk says:

    Again, give me ONE GOOD REASON why the AMA is the only organization that could ever possibly do this. That is the challenge you’ve been talking around all this time. Can you do it or not?

  3. shanedk says:

    Yeah, there are just places where you have to win a lottery to get to see a doctor…

  4. solitary200 says:

    In Canada the doctors visits are free. Again all countries do differ :P

  5. chupamiubre says:

    No thats a problem with HEALTH CARE. I should never be denied medical care i need. Were not talking some stupid stuff i walked into the ER and after some 2hrs of waiting i was turned away because i had no money on me. This was before any doctor had ever seen me to know if what i had was life threatening or not. Think about that one. if i had gotten sicker or died because they turned me down they would of been sued for MILLIONS.

    If you need care, you should be able to get it PERIOD!

  6. shanedk says:

    “We’re you not paying attention during the Bush years?”

    Yes, apparently more than you were.

    “Do you realize just how much deregulation had happened during it?”

    I know how much they SAID it was deregulation, but all I saw was more corporatism.

  7. shanedk says:

    Greed seeks power, and power seeks money. Big companies have more money, and the greedy politicians who have sought power also want the money. So they end up making deals at the behest of the big corporations, which lets them have an advantage over their competition. The big corporations let the government make lots of decisions about how businesses are to be run because they know they can absorb those costs better than the smaller competition.

    And it IS a form of fascism, albeit a subtle one.

  8. beechgrovejoe says:

    Yes your reasoning is circular.

    If you think that every person coming out of a school is of the same quality, you haven’t worked with too many college grads have you.

    You seem to be the one that won’t accept that your anti AMA line is just not convincing and get pissed that people don’t agree with you.

  9. glukolover says:

    Ok, then the question becomes…
    How does a Government become corporatist?

    And I don’t buy the fascism thing for a second.
    It’s a juvenile and naive way of thinking.
    He’s not evil, just payed for.

    I just think that the America government and the vast majority of thous in power, have a financial interest to insure that big business wins, and you, the people, lose.
    It’s not fascism, it’s just corporatism.

    Government responds to thous who pay them.
    Because who stands to gain from the status quo?

  10. glukolover says:

    Going off the computer point, as it was once my profession.

    Not only is it an international business, which forces competition, but also competition with thous who have strict rules and regulations regarding the computer products they sell.
    Thus insuring a degree of quality.

    So this isn’t a free market system.

    If you want me to take back my earlier comment, fine, I was being somewhat sarcastic.
    It is said it’s a free market, but in reality it results are the opposite.

  11. shanedk says:

    Do you remember the scenario or not? We’re talking about a DYING PERSON. We aren’t worried about long-term here, and YOU are the one wanting to play with this person’s life. As I said, it’s tantamount to MURDER.

  12. shanedk says:

    The problem there is all of the bureaucratic requirements–including paperwork–that doctors and hospitals have to do, especially with regards to insurance. That’s what I pay (or put on my credit card) myself when I can and file insurance myself.

    This is a serious problem–doctors spend more time each day filling out paperwork than they do seeing patients. A lot of them get out of the profession as a result.

  13. shanedk says:

    Circular reasoning.

    They graduated from the SAME medical school, and got the SAME degree. So how is one “qualified” and the other isn’t?

    No, you’re right because you’re right because you HAVE to be right. Dogmatism.

  14. kamakazechris says:

    I agree. Just because the previous seperate studies show it to be safe doesn’t necessarily mean it is. Meta studies are very important as well as further studies.
    You have to remember you are dealing with peoples lives, you cannot have a la sa fair attitude here. You simply cannot play with peoples lives like that.

  15. Othelie says:

    @solitary200: That’s not true. I live in Norway, and doctor visits aren’t free. It’s cheaper for some groups, but for most it’s not.

  16. glukolover says:

    We’re you not paying attention during the Bush years?

    Do you realize just how much deregulation had happened during it? All under the label of ‘free market’.

    Supposedly the ‘free market’ regulates itself, but the real result is a monopoly (or oligarchy), as you have now.
    But whenever anyone talks about regulation, they scream at the top of their lungs, ‘free market!’.

    As for computers, any half wit can tell you it’s a international business. You have no choice but to compete.

  17. shanedk says:

    Yes, open it up to competition, have them do the testing themselves, and hold them accountable when they certify a drug that ends up being unsafe. Just like UL.

  18. shanedk says:

    No.

    What was the point of this question?

  19. kamakazechris says:

    When I travelled to the usa I had to wait half a day to get treatment…. despite the dislocate and broken arm. Just because they couldn’t clear my insurance properly.
    When profitability comes before health. There is a serious problem.

  20. SakuraElyse says:

    “There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch”

  21. jordler says:

    Are you a homosexual shanedk ?

  22. Surhotchaperchlorome says:

    When you say to privatize the FDA, does that mean to open it up to competition?
    Also, to get the government out of it, allowing market forces to work on it?

  23. Surhotchaperchlorome says:

    What does “TANSTAAFL” mean?

  24. shanedk says:

    That is IN NO WAY an ad hominem attack.

    You’re an ignorant moron. I’m done with you.

  25. JaMoond says:

    definition
    idiot: a person of subnormal intelligence

    That is a textbook ad hominem attack.

    You can’t seem to address any of my points with valid counterpoints supported by evidence. Now you are pulling yourself out of the debate, and you called me a “dogmatist.”

    I think it’s clear to both of us who is the real “dogmatist.”