Quote:
Originally Posted by blackestate
Tankdriver;
Sorry, I did not mean to imply that the usa is the only place the comes up with new ideas, And I will admit to being new to looking at this topic, that is why I asked the question. This seems to be a discussion, more than a bashing from one side or the other.
I understand it will not be exactly the same, but that is what everyone is comparing. And there are a lot of things I do not like about the system here in the usa, and agree some things need to change.
I realize there are a lot of sources for funding (governments and groups that fight a certain thing for example), but it seems to me that a lot of the driving force in the new development is profit, And insurace companies do impact that by choosing the perscriptions they write and pay for. So it does impact it. I know of few who can actually afford medicines on their own. We do ned to be compasionate, but also require everyone to do what the can for themselves. And I do not see either side tring to find a good solution.
|
Medical advancements are not entirely profit driven. And as I mentioned, other countries with universal health care do medical research too, so they too profit from their procedures and equipment designs. Insurance companies primarily concern themselves with procedures and devices that cost less. That is what they drive in terms of medical research. Cheap alternatives. Depending on your plan, they will accept most if not all non-elective pills your doctor may prescribe.
The impetus for developing drugs comes from the government and pharmaceutical companies. There are huge government subsidies for the development of new medications. That is why nearly everything these days is a syndrome, disease, or disorder. So that government money can be procured to develop drugs to combat them. People not being able to afford prescriptions is a big deal, one that IMO needs to be addressed. The costs of these medications need to be controlled by allowing government programs to negotiate their rates, as private insurance does.
As for requiring everyone to do what they can for themselves, the current proposal mandates people buy coverage. If you do not buy health insurance, you get fined. Now, if the government is going to mandate people go get their coverage, then the government is obligated to make it affordable. The majority of people on Medicare also carry private insurance to handle the gaps in MC coverage. Not to mention, MC doesn't cover 100% of everything. They have percentages and copays same as everyone else.
There are parts of healthcare reform both sides agree on. The problem is the parts they don't agree on need to be included in the bill. If they are not, they'll never make it on their own. That is why they don't simply pass more than one bill. The things the Democrats want to pass are more reform oriented than what the Republicans want.