Jump to content

Root Cause Thread


Recommended Posts

I do, it's called effective wellness programs. People begin to live healthier, health costs will go down. End of story

 

And enact the death panels. No, seriously. Stop this idiocy of letting dying people make the decision to have every last possible resource expended on their behalf (at any cost) just because they are too cowardly to face the end. And reform the legal side so doctors don't prolong treatment past a reasonable stage just so they can protect themselves from being sued later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 48
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

What I find the most disturbing is that they have convinced a generation that they are required to pay for their child's college education. I know some people who have used their 401(k) to pay for it.

 

I understand them wanting the parents to contribute, but to borrow against their 401(k) or remortgage the house is just crazy.

 

Indeed. Your kids can get a loan for their education, but you can't get one for your retirement. I don't contribute a dime to my kids 529's until I have fully funded our 401k and Roth IRA accounts for the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And enact the death panels. No, seriously. Stop this idiocy of letting dying people make the decision to have every last possible resource expended on their behalf (at any cost) just because they are too cowardly to face the end. And reform the legal side so doctors don't prolong treatment past a reasonable stage just so they can protect themselves from being sued later.

Why do you even need a death panel? Why can't someone, of sound mind, make the decision when they want to go?

Unless that's what a panel would decide, are they mentally stable enough to make the decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boy, this is certainly a straw man if I've ever seen one....Why not just say it's government? Unfortunately too many ideologues will focus on "liberal" government, when it's government that enables an industry because that industry pays government to keep their coffers filled. Both sides of the aisle are captive to vested interests.

 

In what may surprise many, I agree with the overall sentiment that government enables this to happen, but they do so to support an industry, not for the benevolence of those who use the programs.

 

1. Student Loans. Since the majority are financed through the private sector and guaranteed by the government--who wins? It's just like housing. If students default, the government will come in and bailout the banks.

More to the question on root cause. Two things have changed dramatically: states have reduced support for higher ed (HE) dramatically; and higher ed has drifted away from its core business. The state subsidy has decreased and those costs have been pushed on to students; and HE administrators pay themselves like private sector managers and funnel money to pet projects (Ever wonder why Jack Quinn was appointed president of ECC?).

 

The dramatic increase in student loan debt perpetuates the inefficiencies, pads the profits of banks, and creates implicit liabilities for the government (the guarantees). So who's to blame? No one and everyone. As is typical, we've created a system where all parties benefit (except for the graduate). Btw, this isn't just in public HE, as private colleges receive government subsidies too.

 

I won't offer a list of solutions here (I do have some), but I do want to respond to something Rob said. A strong liberal arts education IS valuable because it creates broader, critical-thinking individuals. And Businesses DO want people with applied skills who can think critically and communicate. You hire an accountant from Bryant & Stratton, you hire a manager from a HE institution that includes a strong liberal arts background along with an accounting degree (a solution is to make sure students get both applied and liberal arts skills).

 

2. Healthcare. Do you think the health industry wants to change things? It's the same process. Government provides a spending stream that goes right into private sector coffers. Rising medical costs are supported by a system that continues to shell out to meet those costs. Is it a liberal democrat issue? Who the Hell increased Medicare--Bushjr!!

 

I've said this often, but not recently: government is a redistribution mechanism that influences a flow of $5 trillion/year--it's a BIG BUSINESS, which is why big business pays to influence that flow. Which brings up that question about wealth creation: does anyone get rich without sucking off the government's teat? Every business wants a piece of that action.

 

Cheers. :beer:

Ding Ding Ding

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't know the "best way to fix it." Do you mean healthcare or insurance? I think the debate has been about providing national insurance as an alternative. Again, though, I don't have a solution here.

 

Well, you indicated that the reason for massive corruption in helathcare/Medicare is the large sums of dollars doled out by the government. So how will the system look like when you quadruple that spending? How can anyone think that the care is going to get better and be less expensive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, you indicated that the reason for massive corruption in helathcare/Medicare is the large sums of dollars doled out by the government. So how will the system look like when you quadruple that spending? How can anyone think that the care is going to get better and be less expensive?

Since you came up with the conclusion that nationalization was the natural solution, I guess you need to answer it. I simply diagnosed the disease doctor, it's up to you to cure it...

 

Also, not trying to be totally flippant; while it's easy enough to see the broad cause, because it's not just the healthcare industry and government, but I don't know enough about the solutions to really flap my mouth about it. As far as I know, there are only two people in the world who have answers to every problem.....

And we are fortunate, I think, to have both of them here on PPP.... :beer:

Edited by TPS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And enact the death panels. No, seriously. Stop this idiocy of letting dying people make the decision to have every last possible resource expended on their behalf (at any cost) just because they are too cowardly to face the end. And reform the legal side so doctors don't prolong treatment past a reasonable stage just so they can protect themselves from being sued later.

You are very stupid. That's all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you even need a death panel? Why can't someone, of sound mind, make the decision when they want to go?

Unless that's what a panel would decide, are they mentally stable enough to make the decision.

 

The 'death panel' was just a colloquialism....the mechanics of how you do it are not the point. The reason that decision can't be left up to the individual because they will say (like they do now) "try everything and anything until I drop dead, no matter what it costs". They do this because they know Uncle Sam will just pick up the tab.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since you came up with the conclusion that nationalization was the natural solution, I guess you need to answer it. I simply diagnosed the disease doctor, it's up to you to cure it...

 

 

I take it the sarcastic rhetorical was lost on you? Nationalizing helathcare isn't the solution precisely for the reasons you describe. But creating a $2 trillion behemoth (when healthcare costs add up to 15% of GDP) you will have plenty of incentive for opportunists to game the system, and knowing the history of governments to prevent corruption & abuse, this will be one big gusher.

 

But, I know, at least people will have free medical coverage.:wallbash:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 'death panel' was just a colloquialism....the mechanics of how you do it are not the point. The reason that decision can't be left up to the individual because they will say (like they do now) "try everything and anything until I drop dead, no matter what it costs". They do this because they know Uncle Sam will just pick up the tab.

Boy, that's a bit ironic, you don't want it left to the individual? :devil:

Seriously, I think Kevorkian already proved that individuals can and will make that decision. I'm with Tom, I'd definitely pull the plug, especially if I was going to be a burden on my family.

 

I take it the sarcastic rhetorical was lost on you? Nationalizing helathcare isn't the solution precisely for the reasons you describe. But creating a $2 trillion behemoth (when healthcare costs add up to 15% of GDP) you will have plenty of incentive for opportunists to game the system, and knowing the history of governments to prevent corruption & abuse, this will be one big gusher.

 

But, I know, at least people will have free medical coverage.:wallbash:

Sorry, Pavlovian response; I thought you were putting words in my mouth again. :devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boy, that's a bit ironic, you don't want it left to the individual? :devil:

Seriously, I think Kevorkian already proved that individuals can and will make that decision. I'm with Tom, I'd definitely pull the plug, especially if I was going to be a burden on my family.

 

Really? So a sample size of 100 Kevorkian patients proves that the general public will make responsible end-of-life care decisions? So the current situation where we spend billions every year on futile end-of-life care means................??

 

Perhaps you are assuming in your statment that such bills are longer get paid by Uncle Sam (or rebilled by the medical facility to other patients) but instead by the next of kin. In that case, I might be inclined to agree that people with some skin in the game might act more responsibly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? So a sample size of 100 Kevorkian patients proves that the general public will make responsible end-of-life care decisions? So the current situation where we spend billions every year on futile end-of-life care means................??

 

Perhaps you are assuming in your statment that such bills are longer get paid by Uncle Sam (or rebilled by the medical facility to other patients) but instead by the next of kin. In that case, I might be inclined to agree that people with some skin in the game might act more responsibly.

To the first point, in the current situation I believe the court ruled it illegal, so Dr. K was shut down. Yes, I agree, the medical industry has the incentive to keep people alive, but there is also no other choice at the moment. I'm sure the medical industry would fight a "right to death" option too. I do think a significant number of the population would choose to go on their own terms though, and I would not want it to be determined by some board--it's an individual's choice. How is this happening, that I'm defending that against you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the first point, in the current situation I believe the court ruled it illegal, so Dr. K was shut down. Yes, I agree, the medical industry has the incentive to keep people alive, but there is also no other choice at the moment. I'm sure the medical industry would fight a "right to death" option too. I do think a significant number of the population would choose to go on their own terms though, and I would not want it to be determined by some board--it's an individual's choice. How is this happening, that I'm defending that against you?

 

 

LOL! I'm fine with the individual making the choice too.....just so long as that choice does not end up driving our country deeper in debt which then causes some corrupt POS in Congress to claim that I am not paying enough in taxes since I have a job making more than minimum wage (which is what is happening now). And I'm not sure what your idea of 'significant number' is, but IMO that would be a still be a substantial minority of the population.

 

And of course I'm speaking theoretically. I have zero faith or expectation that any real reform will ever happen in my lifetime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do, it's called effective wellness programs. People begin to live healthier, health costs will go down. End of story

 

This strategy (if implemented) would go a long way towards curing what ails us (and health care costs). Obesity is epidemic in our society. There are more fats kids than ever. Kids that we considered "fat" when I was growing up would be considered normal today. Eat too much crap, spend too much time in front of gaming consoles or computers, and not enough time being active. Portion sizes - out of control. Back in the day, a coke came in a 6.5 or 8 oz bottle. Now they are 16, 20 or 24. And people just drink all that sugar like it's water. Just getting society to practice healthy living would go a long way to reducing healthcare costs. And the mentality that we need a pill for every damn thing that's wrong with us is ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a few have already mentioned, both health care costs and tuition are, to a great extent, a result of government meddling.

 

Medicare, Medicaid and mandated access to student loansd have driven the single taxpayer out of the market.

 

Most people really never see their bills for either...or don't care since the government is paying, so health care providers and schools are free to charge whatever they wish...as long as they take care ofthe paperwork to get it paid by the government.

 

Private health insurers have grown immensely since the mid '60s when government programs began pricing the middle class out of slef-insuring. I am old enough to still remember the early 60's $5 doctor visits and the $15 xrays....then along came Medicare & Medicaid and the yearly cost increases became nearly exponential.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Health care COSTS(forget insurance premiums, that is effect), are going up. If you don't understand that health care costs are the cause, and rising premiums are the effect of that, then GTFO out of my thread....unless you can prove that insurance is in fact contributing to health care COST*. That would actually be interesting. In any event, what are the root causes for the heath care costs increasing? (*Sorry about the disclaimer, but we have to account for the idiots)

 

2. Tuition COSTS, NOT student loan interest, are going up. What are the root causes of this? It would also be interesting if somebody could make the case for a cause/effect flip on this one.

 

It seems to me that its a waste of time to talk in terms of Political Solution A or B that deals with managing the effects, if we haven't put any serious thought into dealing with the cause. Never mind about the symptoms, what about the disease? And, are there any insights into the treatments of the "symptoms" actually contributing to the "disease" of these abnormally rising costs?

 

I'm just saying: there's no way in hell my parent's student loans were anywhere near the same debt commitment, $ for $, as what kids are being asked to deal with now. And, there's no way Medicare was outlaying cash for their parents the way it is now. This is out of hand, and a reasonable 18 year old has a reasonable B word about incurring 100k in debt before they even buy a house.

 

What's it going to be like 10 years from now? Why aren't we killing the disease? Or, how many limbs are we going to hack off to save the body?

 

New therapies that make people live longer, are the primary reason healthcare cost rise.. More people, longer living, expense RD.... You insurance premiums go up as a combo of what was stated above, and 10 percent f the US shifts there care csts on to paying citizens.

 

tuition costs going up? Goverments strategy of cheap expanded credit gives school no reason to cut costs... And with more students in schools, capital expansion also contributes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...