Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 23, 2014, 05:00:36 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Politics
| |-+  Individual Politics (Moderators: Grad Students are the Worst, Torie, Sheriff Buford TX Justice)
| | |-+  Which of these four health care system models do you prefer and why?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print
Poll
Question: Which health care system model do you prefer?
The Beveridge Model   -12 (28.6%)
The Bismarck Model   -12 (28.6%)
The National Health Insurance Model   -12 (28.6%)
The Out-of-Pocket Model   -6 (14.3%)
Show Pie Chart
Total Voters: 42

Author Topic: Which of these four health care system models do you prefer and why?  (Read 1355 times)
Swedish Cheese
JOHN91043353
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3803
Sweden


Political Matrix
E: 2.71, S: -4.00

View Profile
« Reply #25 on: August 01, 2012, 04:30:38 am »
Ignore

Bismarck model with a National Health Insurance model-esque public option

Sounds like a good combination
Logged

So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!
Rockingham
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 526


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: August 01, 2012, 07:10:36 am »
Ignore

I prefer the Singaporean model, and am annoyed that it wasn't included.
Logged
ozona and sonora
Ghost_white
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3702


Political Matrix
E: -3.87, S: 6.61

View Profile
« Reply #27 on: August 01, 2012, 07:22:42 am »
Ignore

national health insurance model financed through taxes on things like natural resources.
Logged


That has got to be one of the most retarded proposals I have read on this forum.

Don't worry, I'm sure more will crop up shortly.
Senator bore
bore
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2707
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: August 01, 2012, 10:48:33 am »
Ignore

The Beveridge model for me, but the NHI and the Bismarck system would also be better than what the US has at the moment.

I voted Out-of-Pocket, since that's closest to what I want, though I don't believe in denying healthcare to someone who can't pay (who should then be indebted to the hospital, except for a few special groups which could be provided insurance by the government -- veterans, the elderly who cannot provide for themselves, children under 18 whose parents cannot provide for them, and pregnant women who cannot provide for themselves).

The fact that you "don't believe in denying healthcare to someone who can't pay" doesn't change the fact that that is the practical effect of the policies you support.

I've already pointed out that universal healthcare pretty much always causes a degradation in quality, which is why I think the solution to the healthcare crisis would be to reform the way you pay hospitals, not to have the government do it for you, which not only do I think would cause quality to decline but would also set a very dangerous precedent. It is better, and fairer, to have some people have better-quality care than others instead of everybody having the same mediocre care. But let's finish the gay Republican debate first -- this is something both of us have argued dozens of times, whereas that one is more outlandish.

What's your source for this?
Logged
Sibboleth
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 56829
Saint Helena


View Profile WWW
« Reply #29 on: August 01, 2012, 11:35:11 am »
Ignore

At some point an obnoxious know-it-all is going to point that 'the Beveridge Model' is a nonsensical term in the context of health policy as William Beveridge had very little to do with the design or implementation of the NHS.
Logged

"I have become entangled in my own data, and my conclusion stands in direct contradiction to the initial idea from which I started. Proceeding from unlimited freedom, I end with unlimited despotism. I will add, however, that there can be no solution of the social formula except mine."
Acting like I'm Morrissey w/o the wit
Leftbehind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3181
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: August 01, 2012, 11:52:54 am »
Ignore

Bevan must be rolling in his grave. Obviously the NHS model.


A move to the National Health Insurance model would be my ideal system, despite the glorification of the NHS at the Olympic Opening Ceremony.

A Tory wanting to do away with the NHS - despite the "glorification" of being included in an opening ceremony - imagine my surprise.
Logged

Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31195
France


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #31 on: August 01, 2012, 12:32:07 pm »
Ignore

Yeah, I noted that as well but didn't bother pointing that out. I referred to as the NHS model, anyways.
Logged

Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

It really is.



"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28457
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #32 on: August 01, 2012, 01:17:01 pm »
Ignore

At some point an This obnoxious know-it-all is going to point that 'the Beveridge Model' is a nonsensical term in the context of health policy as William Beveridge had very little to do with the design or implementation of the NHS.

Fixed that for you, altho I think of you more as curmudgeonly than obnoxious.
Logged

My ballot:
Ervin(I) Gov.
Sellers(D) Lt. Gov.
Hammond(R) Sec. of State
Diggs(D) Att. Gen.
Herbert(D) Comptroller Gen.
Spearman(R) Supt. of Education
DeFelice(American) Commissioner of Agriculture
Hutto(D/Working Families) US Sen (full)
Scott(R) US Sen (special)
Geddings(Labor) US House SC-2
Quinn(R) SC House District 69
TBD: Lex 1 School Board
Yes: Am. 1 (allow charity raffles)
No: Am. 2 (end election of the Adj. General)
No: Local Sales Tax
Yes: Temp Beer/Wine Permits
Redalgo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2549
United States


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: August 01, 2012, 01:23:59 pm »
Ignore

I went with Bismarck, but would someone mind listing the pros and cons of these?

This is a fantastic (and easily read) book if you're interested: http://www.amazon.com/The-Healing-America-Global-Cheaper/dp/1594202346

Alternatively, although I am sure this is far from being complete and is less authoritative, here are some basic points I picked up during health care debates in my time as an undergrad student:



Canada (National Health Insurance Model)

- Its method is arguably centre-left and typical of social liberalism
- Average waiting times don’t seem markedly longer than in the States
- State price bargaining lowers the cost of treatments but hinders R&D
- Physicians have more time for patients yet less for each, individually
- Administrative costs and complexity are much lower than in the U.S.
- Queues are not always first come, first serve
- One is basically stuck with using this system



France (Mixed / Bismarck Model)

See Antonio’s post for a basic breakdown of the system.



Germany (Bismarck Model)

- Its approach is more or less centrist and typical of ordoliberalism
- Numerous private, but non-profit health insurers / sickness funds dominate the market
- Insurers compete yet are regulated to avoid unjust discrimination
- Funds redistributed from sickness funds with the healthiest folk to those with the least
- Patients inefficiently use up hospital beds for almost twice as many days as in the U.S.
- Health care costs per capita are markedly higher than in the U.K.
- Opting out is a choice but very few people actually want to do so



United Kingdom (Beveridge/NHS/Whatever Model)

- Its method is arguably left-of-centre and typical of social democracy or socialism
- Health care costs per capita are 60% lower than in the U.S.
- New and/or expensive tests and treatments get rationed for budgetary reasons
- Physicians have more time for patients yet less for each, individually
- Use of resources benefits the young and those with minor ailments
- Yet olds and sufferers of dire ills often get the short end of the stick
- Quality of care can greatly vary by location (i.e. the NHS is a “postcode lottery”)



 United States (Mixed / Out-of-Pocket Model)

- Its method is right-of-centre and vaguely reminiscent of low-GDP countries
- Private insurers compete in a regulated market; patients buy what they want
- People have very low rates of mortality from many treatable diseases
- Physicians have less time for patients yet more for each, individually
- Administrative costs are high and interactions with insurers complex
- Costs are rising but at rates somewhat similar to in other high-GDP countries
- The VHA offers its best quality of care yet uses the Beveridge/NHS/Whatever Model


Logged

"I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to see realized." ~ Nelson Mandela
Scott
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18805
United States
View Profile
« Reply #34 on: August 01, 2012, 01:56:48 pm »
Ignore

Thanks.  Looking at that, it seems that either the Bismarck or Beveridge system is the best option.
Logged
SJoyce
sjoycefla
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8988
United States


Political Matrix
E: -3.03, S: -8.96

View Profile
« Reply #35 on: August 02, 2012, 08:35:56 am »
Ignore

From Redalgo's information, I'd be willing to support a Bismarck or out-of-pocket system as the superior options.
Logged

Pages: 1 [2] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines