Obama's Health Care Plan

[Viva_La_Migra]

For me:

Tort reform? Yes.

Federal plan available for sale to everyone? Yes.

Federal negotiations for drugs? Yes.

Federal standard for use of electronic records? Yes.

Federal standards for rating hospital success and performance? Yes.

Mandate that every person must have some kind of health care insurance in place? No! This is still America! A free people should be able to choose whether or not they have insurance. If one chooses not to have an insurance plan, then hospitals are only required to provide basic life saving services in emergency situations. Got the flu, but don't have insurance, don't come here! Wait it out and take over the counter medications to relieve symptoms. Car accident? We'll stitch you up, make sure you aren't going to die, then send you home ASAP with a HUGE medical bill!

We'll see how it shakes out. It's still early. But I believe there will be some kind of plan passed.

I like the idea of allowing all U.S. citizens and legal permanent resident aliens to buy into the FEHB plan. More participants SHOULD mean lower premiums. I just don't trust the government to properly and effectively negotiate premiums for the masses when the insurance companies are allowed to lobby Congress. It won't work. Congress will allow campaign contributions to cloud their judgment and make US pay more! The health care lobby is a powerful lobbying group now, imagine if they were getting money from everyone in the United States! Too much power for one segment of the population!

In addition to a reasonable insurance policy that the people can, but are not required to purchase, why not allow people to save more money tax free in medical savings accounts and allow them to carry those accounts over year after year if the money is not used? This way one could save up money for emergency medical expenses that, statistically speaking, is bound to come up at some point in everyone's lives. As a disincentive to non medical withdrawals, tax such withdrawals at 50-60%.

My thoughts are not a perfect solution to the problem, but I like that better than government run health care.

 

[alevin]

I like that idea up to a point, VL. I went w/o insurance for 4 years in my 20's. Tell someone living on minimum wage at age 22-23 they have to buy health insurance, yeah right. I worked with a guy couple years older than me, He slid a motorcycle under a semi couple years earlier, no health insurance, big medical bills for orthopedic repairs. He was back in one piece and paying off bills. single, no dependents, probably little other debt.

We lived in the desert in employer-provided tents and food provided by our employer too, no housing or utility costs (employer provided generator and tent for food storage, propane for cooking, lighting by truck battery-don't run it down, go to bed early) those 5 months either).

I was able to save most of salary for the winter months when I was laid off, looking for another job. would have had to draw unemployment if had been paying for health insurance, as it was, I landed parttime job and paid my bills through the winter, never ever did draw unemployment. tradeoffs everywhere you look. No easy solutions.

 

[nnuut]

About allowing every person in the USA to join the FEHB Plan. Let's see Uncle Sam pays about $900 a month toward my FEHBs. Let's say 210 MILLION citizens would like to sign up, how much is that beside the amount that we pay? $1.89 \11 a year. That's lots of zeros behind $1.89. NO WAY!! The only way they can do it is to cut benefits and raise costs. IMHO

 

[nnuut]

Electronic Medical care?

Health care's future may already exist

Insurers are testing a concept called 'medical home' that could transform how health care is delivered.

By Parija B. Kavilanz, CNNMoney.com senior writer
July 23, 2009: 12:13 PM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- It's time for your 2015 annual physical.
But your family doctor already knows all your vital readings from the self-tests you administered.
If she sees any problems, she'll send your electronic records to a specialist and coordinate the way you're treated. And the two of them will send periodic e-mail reminders of what you need to do to stay healthy.
This health care concept, called "patient-centered medical homes," could improve the overall quality of care, and save consumers time and money. But skeptics maintain that the financial savings aspect still has to be proven.
The model is already being tested in 44 states -- with such big health insurers as UnitedHealthcare, Aetna and Medicaid taking part -- and utilizes key components of President Obama's reform effort
In medical homes, the family physician is like a personal health coach, responsible for managing all aspects of the patient's health care needs, explained Paul Keckley, executive director of Deloitte Center for Health Solutions, a unit of consulting firm Deloitte LLP.
The doctor also leads a team of coaches -- including nurses, pharmacists, nutritionists and other medical professionals -- with the aim of providing a more "holistic" approach to health care.
Round-the-clock access, electronic health records, use of e-mail and phone communication, patient feedback, fee for service and fee for performance are all central to this concept.
The concept is about meaningfully changing the daily habits in a "population of chronic diseases," Keckley said, and "to do that you have to coach people and constantly manage and track their care through text message reminders, counselors and support groups."
Eventually, a healthier population would reduce the number of medical procedures and costly hospital admissions, potentially lowering consumers' insurance premiums.
Interest grows: Enthusiasm about medical homes is picking up, but only gradually. [more]
http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/23/new...medical_home/index.htm?postversion=2009072312

 

[Buster]

Don't know if anyone caught Obama's slick way with words during his Health Care sales speech last night..But in one comment that was glaring, he made it sound as if Generic drugs are a new concept within his Health reform plan...Just saying that he is glossing over some things in some ways..

 

[ekatteng]

The way I will fix health care... 1. allows pharmacies to import their drugs from England, Germany, France, Japan etc... qualified and certified overseas pharmacepticals. This will put to compete our pharmaceptical industry global wide and will low the drugs cost. 2. penalized by denying federal support to all medical schools that rejects qualify students. Currently 3000 qualified medical students are being rejected every year by universities due to space. Many more doctors amoung the population will lower the cost of doctor visits. medical doctors will be visiting at your home for small fees. 3. Open military hospitals and clinics to all civil service employees and all citizens under 21 years or full time students under 25 years old.

 

[phil]

Is there some consensus here that the I fund will tank if WE pass some universal healthcare plan?

A quick examination of all the assets in the I fund shows us that not one, not two, but almost EVERY country where the I fund has assets has universal health care, and many have had it for over 30 years.

Where is this coming from?

 

[phil]

Let's just stick to economics in TSP. A review of the I fund shows us that just about EVERY country where the I fund has assets has universal health care, many having it for over 30 years. Why does the rest of the developed world seem to get away with tremendous economic growth coupled with universal healthcare?

Maybe they know something that we don't. Are they just a lot smarter than we are?

 

[tsptalk]

Let's just stick to economics in TSP. A review of the I fund shows us that just about EVERY country where the I fund has assets has universal health care, many having it for over 30 years. Why does the rest of the developed world seem to get away with tremendous economic growth coupled with universal healthcare?

Maybe they know something that we don't. Are they just a lot smarter than we are?

TSP Returns / indices since TSP started... from 1988 thru current (Sep 3)

.............................G Fund.....F Fund.....C Fund....S Fund......I Fund
1988 - SEP 2009 ... 261.90%....348.06%....533.25%...602.22%....185.72%
.

 

[Bullitt]

Re: Long term fund stragegies

Is there some consensus here that the I fund will tank if WE pass some universal healthcare plan?

A quick examination of all the assets in the I fund shows us that not one, not two, but almost EVERY country where the I fund has assets has universal health care, and many have had it for over 30 years.

Where is this coming from?

You're splitting hairs if you're worried about ObamaCare tanking the I fund. Europa has bigger worries than what's going on in the health industry. ie: banking solvency, over-leveraged, lending, the Euro.

What is your definition of long term?

 

[James48843]

TSP Returns / indices since TSP started... from 1988 thru current (Sep 3)

.............................G Fund.....F Fund.....C Fund....S Fund......I Fund
1988 - SEP 2009 ... 261.90%....348.06%....533.25%...602.22%....185.72%
.

Perhaps that is a bad time frame to make comparisons from-.

The I fund was not started until 2001. And it is heavily weighted in Japan, which had a real fluke with it's stock market in the late 1980's and 1990's.

If you run the EAFE back all the way into 1969, when it started- you would see it was up thousands of percent since then.

http://www.msci.com/licensing/eafe_factsheet.pdf



It is up a healthy amount since 2001 - when it became a TSP index.

Just like Arnold says.......

the I fund will soon say...."I'll be baaaaack."

 

[phil]

Unless I'm sadly mistaken, the I fund didn't begin until 2001, unless you had money in it before. Tell me your secret, please. So let's redo the math, shall we?

 

[phil]

Then, from doing the revised math, maybe we can say that the economic growth of much of the rest of the developed world came BECAUSE they had an efficient healthcare system?

 

[phil]

By the way, putting out false statistical information is just plain wrong. I'm sure that it wasn't deliberately done.

As far as Europe having problems, having universal healthcare doesn't seem to have bothered them too badly. Also Japan and Australia seem to be doing okay economically.

I have an idea. Let's try universal health care for Americans. If it becomes less efficient, we can deregulate the system, get the federal government out of it. Deregulation seems to have worked so well, particularly federal deregulation in the energy business (Enron).

What's everyone so frightened of? That it would work?

 

[tsptalk]

Unless I'm sadly mistaken, the I fund didn't begin until 2001, unless you had money in it before. Tell me your secret, please. So let's redo the math, shall we?

The EAFE (which is the I-fund) has been around for many years. That's why I said TSP / indices. That's my secret, wiseguy. Same math. My data is TSP related and why it goes back to 1988 for comparisons.

I'll look at James's data. Maybe it does tell another story.

Let's just stick to economics in TSP. A review of the I fund shows us that just about EVERY country where the I fund has assets has universal health care, many having it for over 30 years. Why does the rest of the developed world seem to get away with tremendous economic growth coupled with universal healthcare?

I thought you were asking a question regarding the returns of the countries of the I-fund for the last 30 years so I tried to help, but it sounds like you didn't really have a question - you had an agenda.

 

[James48843]

Tom:

Better check your figures.

I just added (and subtracted) up your column of "S" fund, and came up with a different number than you did.

I came up with 250.63%, not 611.85%

Am I doing it wrong?

Thanks

Jim

 

[James48843]

EAFE history. It started on December 31, 1969, with a value of 100.

TODAY, it closed at 1461 and change. It hit a high around 2400 before crashing down over the last year and a half.

Here is the chart history:

View attachment 6771


Looks to me like it's ready to start climbing again.
​

 

[tsptalk]

Tom:

Better check your figures.

I just added (and subtracted) up your column of "S" fund, and came up with a different number than you did.

I came up with 250.63%, not 611.85%

Am I doing it wrong?

Thanks

Jim

It's compounded. The S-fund is column "K" in my spreadsheet. This is the formula I use...

=(100*((1+(K27))*(1+(K26))*(1+(K25))*(1+(K24))*(1+(K23))*(1+(K22))*(1+(K21))*(1+(K20))*(1+(K19))*(1+(K18))*(1+(K17))*(1+(K16))*(1+(K15))*(1+(K14))*(1+(K13))*(1+(K12))*(1+(K11))*(1+(K10))*(1+(K9))*(1+(K8))*(1+(K7))*(1+(K6)))-100)/100

It's kind of like if you make 100% one year and lose 100% the next, you don't have a 0% return. You have a loss of 100%. Or if you lose 50% one year and make 100% the next, you are not up 50% but instead at 0%.

They don't add up with compounding.

 

[James48843]

Ah yes.

Kind of like the magic of compound interest.

http://www.banned-books.com/truth-seeker/1995archive/122_3/11miraclegro.html

 

[tsptalk]

EAFE history. It started on December 31, 1969, with a value of 100.

TODAY, it closed at 1461 and change. It hit a high around 2400 before crashing down over the last year and a half.

Doing the math, that would mean the EAFE is up 1361% since 1970 and the Dow during that same time is up 1169%. Interesting. Japan's bubble and burst is obviously a big factor in when the EAFE outperformed the U.S. and when the U.S. outperformed the EAFE, but how it relates to the healthcare systems is beyond my pay grade.

It's an interesting topic. Too bad the original question came from someone who didn't really want the facts, but thanks to you, we got closer to an answer.