US Health Care - Propose a solution in accord with Tao

[Aetherous]

vsaluki,

 

Great post. Seriously.

 

...

 

The suggestion to help educate people on preventative medicine is good...but the government already does a ton of that. Kids are taught it in schools. There are tons of posters that get put up in schools, clinics, etc.

 

It's simply not effective because the public doesn't care. Plus, I think there's actually a bit too much info, which makes things confusing.

 

But everyone knows to eat more fruits and veggies, and to be active...like I said, it's just that no one cares enough. I mean, even I don't follow those two simple instructions enough.

 

...

 

Something slightly more effective than educating, that could be done by any one of us, would be opening a healthy and cheap "fast" food restaurant. Use whole foods (for instance make healthy stews), and serve not such huge portions like every other restaurant, but enough to be satisfied. Have it be cheap, like 3 or 4 bucks for a meal.

 

I think the key to helping people is to make the healthier choices be super convenient.

 

If I go to McDonalds for instance, I spend over 5 bucks on a meal. And it's not very nutritious at all.

 

I'd rather choose some place that I knew had healthy and good tasting food, which was cheaper, and just as quick to pick up. Who would choose otherwise?

 

I think this idea is the biggest key towards helping communities be healthier...but there's not much profit in it, so it'd be hard.

[Zhuo Ming-Dao]

Something slightly more effective than educating, that could be done by any one of us, would be opening a healthy and cheap "fast" food restaurant. Use whole foods (for instance make healthy stews), and serve not such huge portions like every other restaurant, but enough to be satisfied. Have it be cheap, like 3 or 4 bucks for a meal.

 

I think the key to helping people is to make the healthier choices be super convenient.

 

If I go to McDonalds for instance, I spend over 5 bucks on a meal. And it's not very nutritious at all.

 

I'd rather choose some place that I knew had healthy and good tasting food, which was cheaper, and just as quick to pick up. Who would choose otherwise?

 

I think this idea is the biggest key towards helping communities be healthier...but there's not much profit in it, so it'd be hard.

 

This would be a really great thing to see more of, and I would imagine that it would have great market. I know that I usually go to Chipotle when I need fast food, for this exact reason. It is the only fast, cheap place that I know of that has healthy, high quality food. And this is a resturant that is pulling in some pretty good profits. More options in this vain are a very very good thing.

 

Any way that the healthy option can also be the convenient option means that more people will benefit from it without having to rely on ill-conceived government intervention.

[vsaluki]

 

The suggestion to help educate people on preventative medicine is good...but the government already does a ton of that. Kids are taught it in schools. There are tons of posters that get put up in schools, clinics, etc.

 

It's simply not effective because the public doesn't care. Plus, I think there's actually a bit too much info, which makes things confusing.

 

But everyone knows to eat more fruits and veggies, and to be active...like I said, it's just that no one cares enough. I mean, even I don't follow those two simple instructions enough.

 

...

 

Something slightly more effective than educating, that could be done by any one of us, would be opening a healthy and cheap "fast" food restaurant. Use whole foods (for instance make healthy stews), and serve not such huge portions like every other restaurant, but enough to be satisfied. Have it be cheap, like 3 or 4 bucks for a meal.

 

I think the key to helping people is to make the healthier choices be super convenient.

 

If I go to McDonalds for instance, I spend over 5 bucks on a meal. And it's not very nutritious at all.

 

I'd rather choose some place that I knew had healthy and good tasting food, which was cheaper, and just as quick to pick up. Who would choose otherwise?

 

I think this idea is the biggest key towards helping communities be healthier...but there's not much profit in it, so it'd be hard.

 

 

Appealing to people the right way is everything. I think that half of the McDonalds that I've ever eaten I ate because my daughter wanted to go to their playground. And many was the time that my wife and I bemoaned the fact that we couldn't find a good, healthy restaurant with the same kind of playground as McDonalds. If we play the game right we can solve much of the problem without having the government force things on people.

Edited September 21, 2009 by vsaluki

[lino]

This thread on Buddhism, as usual was derailed, and raised a lot of points about health care in the USA. But I saw no solutions proposed.

 

Fact: Health care in the USA is not available to everyone as many can not afford it.

 

Fact: Many who do work and attempt to take care of themselves get ill and find themselves losing their homes and unable to support their families due to exorbitant health care costs.

 

Fact: We who do attempt to take care of our health end up paying for those who smoke, drink, and overeat excessively because they get sick.

 

What is a solution in accord with Tao?

 

Argue for or against govt health care but propose a solution.

 

One solution I propose is education; integrate Chinese and other self health care like qigong. More education in the schools on the effects of smoking, eating well, exercise, and substance abuse like crystal meth. But the govt is not really going to do that, folks like me are a drop in the bucket making the attempt to do that, but perhaps the first step of a thousand mile journey... What is YOUR solution?

 

 

My solution:

 

1. pharmaceutical companies that falsify "studies"

 

2. companies that try to patent anything that is naturally occurring

 

be subject to a corporate Death Penalty.

[Ya Mu]

Am I okay with paying for that. No, of course not. But that is the catch 22 that we find ourselves in when we pay for healthcare with tax money. First we force people into a government financed and controlled system, then we claim that we can tell them how to live their lives. If government health care is going to be a given, then we have two options. Take away peoples freedom and tell them how to live, or pay the tab for that freedom. My vote will always come down on the side of freedom - even if I don't like paying for it. But the problem goes further than that. If we are going to regulate and tax and coerce based on the healthcare excuse, then where are we going to stop.

 

We start by taxing fattening foods. Of course you can get fat eating pasta.

 

How about alcohol and cigarettes. Their consumption is going to result in bigger tax payer bills.

 

How about people playing too much video or watching too much TV. That can make them fat and unhealthy. Should we have regulations only allowing people 1 hour of each a day.

 

How about surfing the net and talking on social forums. Enough of that will certainly widen out your butt.

 

Maybe we could mandate that everyone show up at a common location for exercise every day. That would help their health.

 

How many things about the way that you live your life effects your health. I mean where does it stop. I could imagine the fat guy that you described above saying, hey if you are going to tell me how to live because of healthcare costs, then I don't want people taking my tax money to pay for some hokus pokus holistic health programs that have never undergone the billion dollar testing programs or even the emperical validity test that other forms of healthcare must undergo.

 

Then we could all fight over who has what right to impose what kind of regulations on whom. In the meantime, government is writing more laws and taxes every day limiting our choice of how to live. Government is always happy to play off groups against each other.

 

We all think that we know better how other people should live. The test of your believe in freedom and your own right to freedom lies in your willingness to defend the freedom of people whose actions you don't approve. In my opinion, the Toa way is to have yourself flow with the universe. It's not forcing others to flow as you think they should. That's like trying to turn the yin yang symbol all into what you believe to be white.

 

Good Points.

 

But the fat guy in my example doesn't pay any taxes and gets medicaid as well as a "disability" check. And he is only 29.

[Ya Mu]

vsaluki,

 

Great post. Seriously.

 

...

 

The suggestion to help educate people on preventative medicine is good...but the government already does a ton of that. Kids are taught it in schools. There are tons of posters that get put up in schools, clinics, etc.

 

It's simply not effective because the public doesn't care. Plus, I think there's actually a bit too much info, which makes things confusing.

 

But everyone knows to eat more fruits and veggies, and to be active...like I said, it's just that no one cares enough. I mean, even I don't follow those two simple instructions enough.

 

...

 

Something slightly more effective than educating, that could be done by any one of us, would be opening a healthy and cheap "fast" food restaurant. Use whole foods (for instance make healthy stews), and serve not such huge portions like every other restaurant, but enough to be satisfied. Have it be cheap, like 3 or 4 bucks for a meal.

 

I think the key to helping people is to make the healthier choices be super convenient.

 

If I go to McDonalds for instance, I spend over 5 bucks on a meal. And it's not very nutritious at all.

 

I'd rather choose some place that I knew had healthy and good tasting food, which was cheaper, and just as quick to pick up. Who would choose otherwise?

 

I think this idea is the biggest key towards helping communities be healthier...but there's not much profit in it, so it'd be hard.

 

Great idea for the restaurant. I can see a chain happening. Is there already a "Scotty's Healthy Fast Food" in the making?

 

But I disagree with the education thing. It is more like a matter of how it is approaced. I knowin our area the teachers are mostly fat omen. Sure they put up the mandatory poster or "health" class may show the mandatory slide. But they do not try to educate the students on this issue because that would be going against what they themselves like to do. They also have no education themselves on preventive medicine, so how are they to educate the children on this? This is just like the stupid "just say no to drugs" program they did on TV and in schools. It didn't educate the students on anything. True education means getting into the details.

 

Those are key words. Tao in fact is a form of preventive medicine. Any kind of preventive medicine is better than the lack of one.

 

Solution: encourage public to take care of themselves with the preventive medicine. Discourage relying on medical doctors and hospitals.

 

A healthy lifestyle is an effect of the preventive medicine taken as a broad category.

 

Agreed totally! I preach this every day.

[joeblast]

Are you guys coming up with "more healthy" ideas, or are you coming up with ideas that will actually change the structure of the system so that it will provide better service at a cheaper price?

 

As long as you pay a big lump sum out of your paycheck for insurance, you will never be close enough to the actual costs to make accurate and informed decisions for yourself with regard to your health and health care.

 

Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance Insulates Employees From Full Cost, Promotes Overspending

 

Ezra Klein in today's Washington Post article "You Have No Idea What Health Costs" writes that "The average health-care coverage for the average family now costs $13,375, according to the the Kaiser Family Foundation's 2009 Employer Benefits Survey."

 

Actually that's not exactly accurate, since Kaiser actually reported that "In 2009, the average annual premiums for employer-sponsored health insurance are $4,824 for single coverage and $13,375 for family coverage. Premiums for family coverage are 5% higher than last year ($12,680), but there was no statistically significant growth in the single premiums."

 

According to America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), the Average Annual Health Insurance Premiums in 2007 were $2,613 for "individual market single coverage," and $5,799 for individual family coverage," or about half of the employer-sponsored health insurance costs quoted by Kaiser. The huge difference in premiums is likely because the AHIP data includes insurance for those not covered by employer-sponsored health insurance, including those who are self-employed or retired.

 

This difference in health care insurance premiums between Kaiser and AHIP highlights some of the major problems associated with employer-sponsored health insurance: a) it's a tax deductible expense for the business, it's non-taxable compensation for the employee, and c) employees are insulated from the full cost of medical insurance because they pay only 26% of the full cost, all of which serve to result in overspending on more expensive health care coverage, ceteris paribus.

 

As Jeffrey Flier, Dean of the Harvard Medical School recently wrote:

 

There is our inefficient and inequitable system of tax-advantaged, employer-based health insurance. While the federal tax code promotes overspending by making the majority unaware of the true cost of their insurance and care, the code is grossly unfair to the self-employed, small businesses, workers who stick with a bad job because they need the coverage, and workers who lose their jobs after getting sick.

 

I agree on the tort reform as well, but as usual its how much for whom?

 

The education bit as part of reform should include helping people understand how to navigate the changing waters so they can have a better idea as to what they will need - the end user being behind the driver seat and all.

[Taoist81]

The only way to make healthcare more affordable is to get both the government and health insurance out of primary care coverage. Both cloud the actual cost of tests, doctor visits etc. making it impossible for the market to regulate prices. This guy makes the point very clearly and eloquently: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200909/health-care

[joeblast]

That's a result of what I proposed

 

That article was disgustingly verbose. Could have been summed down to a page, easily.

[Ya Mu]

One thing that has not been mentioned in detail is the problem of health care givers collecting the insurance. I personally support fee for service instead. In order to collect insurance the health care professional has to hire a fulltime person and pay them 30-60 K a year JUST to fill out insurance paperwork. And in the case of medicare/medicaid, if the filer screws up then it can be a felony charge on the health professional.

I know in my field, (I work as a licensed massage therapist) there are many that push for insurance companies to re-imburse for massage therapy. Heck, if I had to file all that paperwork I would have to work a couple of days more than I do now just to pay for the filing of insurance claims. No thanks! Fee for service with a guarantee of satisfaction gets me more clients and I make more than if I took insurance. What a waste of dollars for "health care" in the current medicare/medicaid and insurance setup.

 

SO far, some of the ideas to better our system are:

 

1) More education

2) More access to preventative health care

3) More "free economy" competition with less regulation as well as more laws (or undoing of existing regulations) eliminating restriction on interstate insurance competition

4) More targeted Government spending

5) Increase healthy eating by opening healthy alternative restaurants (might this come under education?, no one is going to offer these unless they come to the conclusion that it is a money making investment)

6) Financial incentives for maintaining good health and disincentives for maintaining poor health

7) Tax "unhealthy" and incentives for "healthy" foods - problem of definition of unhealthy/healthy

I am sure I have left out some.

[松永道]

[joeblast]

competition is what makes for-profit industries thrive - without it, stagnation, largess is all that prevails.

[Ya Mu]

[Encephalon]

competition is what makes for-profit industries thrive - without it, stagnation, largess is all that prevails.

 

That is, until they become so big, through mergers and acquisitions, that they obliterate competition, spend millions on lobbying and campaign contributions, and begin to actually author public policy in favor of their own interests.

 

You know, it's one thing to bring up Adam Smith and the happy bedtime story of "The Invisible Hand," but Smith was pre-capitalist, and had no idea about the influence of monopolization, subsidization, and advertising. In fact, he already had some nasty things to say about the greedy bastards of his day. What do you think he would have thought of our era?

 

Clinton's great gift to the media conglomerates in 1996 was to allow them to consolidate into ever fewer hands. The rationale for this argument was that it would lead to "competition" and everyone's cable bill would go down precipitously. So much for public ownership of the airwaves.

 

News flash: Capitalism hates competition. It always has. And no amount of Reagan-esque mantra recital is going to change that.

 

Sorry Joe. We're still buddies, right?

[Baguakid]

I think the problem with alternative avenues for good health is ignorance of what good health practices are. For example, I often spend a LOT of time trying to teach, introduce to people what something as simple as Standing Qigong is and how it can benefit them. I have yet to have one person ask to learn. So, as far as Eastern Modalities go, people are and happily remain ignorant. They only see the west as their magic pill and are happy to go under the knife to correct their problem.

 

Throwing Pearls to the Swine comes to mind.

 

People have no idea of Qi, Blood, 5 elements, etc from the Chinese view point, nor DO THEY CARE for the most part (my experience in my part of the US).

 

In fact, in China, when I was there, there is a movement away from Chinese medicine by the youth. I hope not but that's the results I got from questioning them at English Corner events.

 

So, I just continue to practice by myself. Recently I had a reaction from my standing practice, fluid erupted from my Left K1 point (yongquan). Most westerners would go to see a podiatrist to have that looked at where I see it as toxins coming out.

[Ya Mu]

That is, until they become so big, through mergers and acquisitions, that they obliterate competition, spend millions on lobbying and campaign contributions, and begin to actually author public policy in favor of their own interests.

...

News flash: Capitalism hates competition. It always has. And no amount of Reagan-esque mantra recital is going to change that.

...

 

Yep, it happens.

 

Remember all the mom and pop small businesses that existed channeling American made goods before mega-mart came along with volume-purchased cheaper Chinese made goods? Wiped out all the small businesses. And now grocery stores, and I am sure mega-mart packs a heckuva lobbying effort.

[topflight]

[Taoist81]

That is, until they become so big, through mergers and acquisitions, that they obliterate competition, spend millions on lobbying and campaign contributions, and begin to actually author public policy in favor of their own interests.

 

You know, it's one thing to bring up Adam Smith and the happy bedtime story of "The Invisible Hand," but Smith was pre-capitalist, and had no idea about the influence of monopolization, subsidization, and advertising. In fact, he already had some nasty things to say about the greedy bastards of his day. What do you think he would have thought of our era?

 

Clinton's great gift to the media conglomerates in 1996 was to allow them to consolidate into ever fewer hands. The rationale for this argument was that it would lead to "competition" and everyone's cable bill would go down precipitously. So much for public ownership of the airwaves.

 

News flash: Capitalism hates competition. It always has. And no amount of Reagan-esque mantra recital is going to change that.

 

Sorry Joe. We're still buddies, right?

 

That is the one place that government is actually good in the economy, trust-busting and protecting against monopolies and fraud. Most monopolies only become possible through government protection of a particular field or corporation. Subsidization is not capitalistic, it is quite the opposite. Advertising is just called propaganda under non-capitalist systems, but it is still there.

Capitalism doesn't "hate" anything, it is a simply system and it is dependant on competition. Some of the companies may not like competition, but capitalism doesn't exist without it. No amount of MSNBC/Michael Moore-esque mantra recital will change that. The bad behavior (often government supported) of individuals or groups doesn't make a system bad.

If you don't like Wal-mart, don't shop there. If you don't like government subsides, vote libertarian.

[joeblast]

That is, until they become so big, through mergers and acquisitions, that they obliterate competition, spend millions on lobbying and campaign contributions, and begin to actually author public policy in favor of their own interests.

 

You know, it's one thing to bring up Adam Smith and the happy bedtime story of "The Invisible Hand," but Smith was pre-capitalist, and had no idea about the influence of monopolization, subsidization, and advertising. In fact, he already had some nasty things to say about the greedy bastards of his day. What do you think he would have thought of our era?

 

Clinton's great gift to the media conglomerates in 1996 was to allow them to consolidate into ever fewer hands. The rationale for this argument was that it would lead to "competition" and everyone's cable bill would go down precipitously. So much for public ownership of the airwaves.

 

News flash: Capitalism hates competition. It always has. And no amount of Reagan-esque mantra recital is going to change that.

 

Sorry Joe. We're still buddies, right?

Ah, but then the fundamentals of capitalism are tossed out the window! Obliterating competition is not what you're after - beating the competition is part of doing well, yes, but - we all know there can always be too much of a good thing. Antitrust laws were invented to beat back such things, for when the beast gets too large, its tougher to fall, but falls with more weight. You know something's wrong when it fiscally makes sense for a company to spend tens of millions on lobbying, of all things.

 

 

 

 

To take it further toward root, if the political culture werent so diseased, corrupt...the legislative lifers need to go. In fact, I'd be so bold as to say that is where the fixing of our healthcare needs to start - with plenty of fresh, new blood in congress. We simply do not need the preponderance of liars and cheats we have in there at present. Its astonishing that a liar and crook can be the head of an ethics committee, a tax cheat as treasurer, widespread admissions from legislators that they dont have the time to read the bills they enact into law. Hell, morons from my wonderful *cough* state were the ones playing solitaire for chrissakes.

 

That's the first gravy train that needs to be ended.

[Encephalon]

Ah, but then the fundamentals of capitalism are tossed out the window! Obliterating competition is not what you're after - beating the competition is part of doing well, yes, but - we all know there can always be too much of a good thing. Antitrust laws were invented to beat back such things, for when the beast gets too large, its tougher to fall, but falls with more weight. You know something's wrong when it fiscally makes sense for a company to spend tens of millions on lobbying, of all things.

To take it further toward root, if the political culture werent so diseased, corrupt...the legislative lifers need to go. In fact, I'd be so bold as to say that is where the fixing of our healthcare needs to start - with plenty of fresh, new blood in congress. We simply do not need the preponderance of liars and cheats we have in there at present. Its astonishing that a liar and crook can be the head of an ethics committee, a tax cheat as treasurer, widespread admissions from legislators that they dont have the time to read the bills they enact into law. Hell, morons from my wonderful *cough* state were the ones playing solitaire for chrissakes.

 

That's the first gravy train that needs to be ended.

 

Agreed. And yet, the Supreme Court is going to reverse a decision that prohibits unlimited campaign contributions by corporations to politicians, meaning, that their sophistry will be unleashed even further, their ownership of politicians will be more absolute, and the public won'thave any chance at all of lobbying on their own behalf.

 

Campaign finance reform was a real option at one time. The only way to turn this around is through public financing of campaigns with a significantly shorter campaign season. There is no other way you can get money out of politics.

[Ya Mu]

[Aetherous]

Wow, yeah, topflight has some really good ideas.

[Encephalon]

Will Ferrel and friends have a great twist on Health Insurance companies.

 

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/22/p...i_n_294406.html

[joeblast]

what a surprise, moveon gets hollywood celebrities to focus on something other than the main point of the story in order to kahn people into believing the public option is actually a good idea for the country. funny or die? in Farrell's case, its clearly Die...if he didnt have good supporting actors in his films they'd be even more non-funny than they already are, since he thinks that the only things that are funny are things inappropriate.

[Encephalon]

what a surprise, moveon gets hollywood celebrities to focus on something other than the main point of the story in order to kahn people into believing the public option is actually a good idea for the country. funny or die? in Farrell's case, its clearly Die...if he didnt have good supporting actors in his films they'd be even more non-funny than they already are, since he thinks that the only things that are funny are things inappropriate.

 

I interpret it as a piece of satire charged with pointing out the superfluous role that insurance companies play in the whole equation. I don't know exactly what has really morphed into the "public option;" notice that the term "universal health care" has been discarded in the bin of toxic Marxist terms. I do know that it will be far less generous to the public and more generous to insurance companies than a universal plan, and that's not by accident. Could it be $$millions spent on campaign contributions to senators and congressmen?

 

Compensation for the insurance companies does not match their creative contribution to delivering health care. Why is this tolerated when government largess is demonized? Because someone is cleaning up, in my estimation.

 

The health insurance industry has clearly outlived it's usefulness. There are other realities that call for the imechanism of nsurance.