Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)
16667 messages, Last post on Nov 10, 2009 at 3:38 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: lumoy (Jan 10, 2009 1:46 pm) All he is doing is pointing out what we all know. He gives no practical solutions to rising health care cost. There is no way that a government run health care will cut costs. A close examination of the rampant fraud in Medicare/Medicaid should make that clear. So how would you bring those costs down? How would you cut the malpractice insurance premiums down to a reasonable level? I have heard of certain specialties like OBGYN that pay more in Malpractice than the doctor nets per year. Drugs could be cut way back by people using generics. My wife's prescriptions from Kaiser are all generic. Costs her $5 copay for as much as 90 days of prescription. Every time tort reform is mentioned the Congress quickly shut that door as they are all attorneys and may end up back out on the road chasing ambulances. As I gave you data we have over 10 times the facilities per person that Canada has. For just twice the price. That makes me wonder where all the money is going in Canada. Do you think we should get rid of 8000 MRI machines so we have the same coverage as Canada. Give us some solutions. If you do not want to pay your own health care. That means you expect the government to pay the premiums without raising your taxes. How do you suppose that will work? The money has to come from somewhere. We are running out of ink with all the funny money being printed. PS If you are holding your breath until they squeeze the money out of the fat cats like Bill Gates, Buffett or Oprah. You are going to die from lack of oxygen. The rich have never given up their money in the history of the country. They are not going to start now. |
|
|
Replying to: lumoy (Jan 10, 2009 1:46 pm) Since the Democrats control the executive and legislative branches, then the Democrats and could pass national health care without a single Rep.vote. Aren't you then blaming the Dem. for selling out to the insurance lobbyists? Could you also explain if all the uninsured do get insurance, the total cost of healthcare goes up. Or does the total system cost stay the same, and everyone gets less healthcare per person? I can see how GM would be happy not having to pay for the UAW and its white collar employees health insurance anymore. But how would this help the UAW worker who will either pay more taxes to fund the 45 million to be covered, OR receive less care?
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kernick (Jan 10, 2009 2:21 pm) Our research indicates that the United States spends $650 billion more on health care than might be expected given the country’s wealth and the experience of comparable members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Why_Americans_pay_more_for_health_care_2275 The US health care payment system, which processes $1.9 trillion a year, is ripe for transformation. The system is inefficient, consuming 15 percent or more of each dollar spent on health care, compared with about 2 percent for the payment system in retailing. Expenditures on the processing of bills, claims, and payments; bad debt; and other transactions total more than $300 billion a year. http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Health_Care/Hospitals/Overhauling_the_US_health- _care_payment_system_2012
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Jan 10, 2009 12:22 pm) Last time Bank of Japan intervened in the currency market was March 2004. And that was to counter a very sharp appreciation of the Yen (breaching 100Yen/USD). Today it is more like 90 Yen / USD - So it has been appreciating in the last four years, with no intervention by BOJ. And if we go back further, in 1985 Yen was 240/USD. Thus in the last 23 years, it has appreciated against the USD by 266%. So if Japan is manipulating its currency, then it is not doing a very good job of it. The Auto industry blogs repeatedly bring up this issue (without any specific data to back it up....), however one has to consider a) If companies like Toyota keep on moving production outside Japan, how relevant is Yen manipulation?; b) If Japanese manufacturing is benefiting from currency manipulation, how is it that Mazda or Isuzu (domestic production only) are not "benefiting" (in terms of improving profitability), but Toyota and Honda (moving production overseas) are?
|
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Jan 10, 2009 3:53 pm) A criminal's perspective on easy fraud In a recent interview with NBC News, a man who made millions of dollars by defrauding Medicare before his arrest explained how easy it was to steal from the government. "First of all, you create a corporation," he said. "There are some people who are like facilitators, who tell you what it is that Medicare requires." One requirement is to buy some props -- medical equipment and office furniture -- that can help make the corporation appear legitimate during rare inspections by Medicare officials. "A lot of times an inspector doesn't visit a corporation more than once a year," he claimed. One thing he found shocking was how agreeable Medicare was in paying his phony claims, even after patients whose names were used without permission filed complaints. "Why is Medicare paying" he asked. "Medicare keeps on paying, so who's at fault? I think the government is at fault, the government doesn't have any control of this." The man said stealing from Medicare can be a very lucrative endeavor. "If in a year you want $6 million or $8 million you can do it." One Medicare fraud suspect, who is now a fugitive, used to drive a $200,000 Phantom Rolls Royce. "Everyone should be outraged by it," said Ogrosky, "and should be concerned about their taxpayer dollars going to fund this personal wealth that we're seeing in these people who are a really just thieves." Federal law enforcement official said they've seen other Medicare criminals also living extravagantly from their ill-gotten gains. "We've seized luxury homes on waterfront properties. We've seized boats, we've seized bank accounts, jewelry worth thousands of dollars," said Delaney. "They're just killing the Medicare program and living the high-life off of it." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22184921/page/2/ The Federal government needs to fix their broken Medicare program, before they expand further. I don't think they are capable of doing that with so many levels of incompetence in our government. They have managed to hose up the banking system, now we want them to totally destroy our health care system.
|
|
|
Replying to: manegi (Jan 10, 2009 4:15 pm) You have to consider that article was written by a UAW leader with an agenda. He would like to dump the blame for the mess in the Auto industry, he and his colleagues have created, onto anyone or any country. The UAW would say anything to deflect from their own part in the collapse. The 4 Horsemen was a very lame attempt, with little or no truth in fact, mostly fiction. Just one example: In the late 1990s a barrel of oil sold for $10. The Big 3 enjoyed strong sales and consistent profits GM did not make a decent profit throughout the 1990s when they were selling SUVs and PU trucks as fast as their little fingers could go. Of course it did not help that the UAW decided to strike right in the middle of a chance at making a decent profit. Wagoner is to blame. When the UAW went on strike in 1998 he could have gotten rid of the UAW millstone around his neck for good. He could have just shut down and moved every plant out of the country. It would have cost a few billion, while they still had a few billion in the bank. Now they are so broke they will have to borrow money just to pay the bankruptcy attorneys. |
|
|
Replying to: manegi (Jan 10, 2009 4:15 pm) Sorry, a typo - it is 166%
|
|
|
Replying to: manegi (Jan 10, 2009 4:36 pm) |
|
|
I am by no means an expert here (some other posters here seem to have a much deeper understanding of this issue), but Japan has a National Health Insurance scheme (we all have to pay into the scheme, and then our medical expenses - or 70% of them - are covered by the insurance) which seems to satisfy the definition of a "socialized health service". You pay as a % of your income, but the returns you receive are based on your usage of the system. Thus high income groups pay a lot more than they get (since usually they also maintain better health)(I must have paid 20x more than what I have received from the system....). This system, while great for the below median income group, suffers from two major disadvantages (and this is not just my opinion, but a debate going on in Japan) : 1. It encourages inefficiencies. Hospitals have an incentive to keep people in hospitals for as long as possible (to increase occupancy rate - like a hotel...), since they can then charge National insurance for that. When my daughter was born, my wife was ready to go back home after two days (she was in the hospital because a C-section was required), but the Doctor told me "What is the hurry? She can stay here for another five days (the Insurance cover is for a maximum of seven days), so why go home and wash dishes? Here every thing is take care of, ha ha!". You get the point. 2. It is (like the US SS system) a sort of a ponzi scheme, in the sense that the insurance payments are based on the assumption that the population will keep on growing. Now that it is actually declining, the system is in a crisis, and they are starting to reduce the coverage (so the Government is now implementing a "cap" - where costs above a certain amount will require a larger percentage payment by the patient). Obviously for those who are healthier than average, the benefits of this scheme will continue to decline. There is a third (longer term) disadvantage too - Because this system can encourage the Hospitals and Pharmaceutical companies to gang up and gouge the insurance, Japan mandates a reduction in pricing for prescription drugs (e.g "7% lower this year than last year"). While this may solve the problem of over pricing, this reduces the returns Japanese pharmaceutical companies can get on their investments (since the price will always go down), and thus cannot compete with the likes of Glaxo Smith Kline (who are not mandated to reduce drug prices - and thus can charge whatever the market can bear). I am not sure which system is better, but just thought that since I live in a socialized system, this perspective might be helpful.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
