Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Elysium

Regulars
  • Content Count

    59
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Elysium

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Previous Fields

  • Country
    United States
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Relationship status
    No Answer
  • Sexual orientation
    No Answer
  • Real Name
    Tony
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted
  • School or University
    UPenn
  • Occupation
    I work as an internal consultant to the Dept of Health and Human Services. I'm passionate about saving tax payer money and reducing government waste. I'm part of the solution because I'm saving you money and part of the problem because your tax dollars are paying my salary. :P

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    Washington DC
  1. You are right that insurance pricing includes the costs of those other factors you described, such as medicine, hospital infrastructure, doctors' salaries. However, those are on a contractual basis between whatever insurance company they have in the private sector with the respective drug manufacturers, hospitals, doctors, etc. That information is essentially fed to insurance companies and negotiated over; those services are not rendered by the insurance company unless you're in an HMO (or similar construct where delivery of healthcare and insurance for it are under 1 roof). Insurance ulti
  2. Richard, do you do government contracts? I didn't see in your services human resources calls. Do you guys do that?
  3. Lastly, I'd just like to say that in this topic I feel like Dagny. Everyone else: "YOU'RE STUPID YOU'RE STUPID NEENER NEENER" Dagny: "NO THE WORLD IS STILL WORTH SAVING I WILL DO IT JUST BELIEEEEEEVE IN LIFE AFTER LOOOOOOOVE" Let my... optimism run its course. Either I'll wise up and realize the US isn't worth saving, or I'll fix it. In either case, you win.
  4. Size, influence, and accessibility. Like I said earlier, I think insurance companies by design in the US are fundamentally broken. Their business model is to take your money and not pay for your care. That's what drives up their profits. And they are for profit companies, and their upper management gets paid a lot more than government workers. Take away all those factors and put in place a rock solid SOP for healthcare payment issuance and you have a cheaper system overall. Similar models exist in the private sector; local individuals like NJ Motor Corp (I think was the name) form non-prof
  5. ^ Selective reading? Naw... I wrote earlier: To summarize again what I said above: nothing changes except insurance. Not medicine, not medical research, not doctors, not hospitals / facilities, etc. That all stays the same. I'm not sure how much clearer I can make it. Not everyone is happy with their healthcare right now. If you think all the rich people are, you clearly haven't seen the numbers: http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Ne...19-Percent.aspx Are you happy paying paying more than double what you paid a year ago (after accounting for inflation)?
  6. For NYC, I dunno man. I always thought the piles of garbage late at night on all the residential streets, the constant litter and flyers on the ground, and the puddles of garbage water to be unattractive. And don't get me started on its subways. As for Chinese cities (not going to discuss whether HK and Taiwan are part of China), they're all so polluted and disgusting, they make NYC seem cleaner in comparison. :/
  7. Let's define everything! "Opt out" to me means you can choose to not go with the government program, and can elect to pursue whatever other insurance methods you want. The government program covers only those who did not opt out, and is funded only by those who do not opt out. You are essentially choosing to buy a government bond or not, only your annuities throughout are in the form of healthcare. Of course this is all in "Ely's Fantasy America" where I get exactly what I want. I also want a unicorn but I probably won't get that in real life America either.
  8. So there are 2 thoughts: principle and action/result. In principle, it is wrong. In action/result using that example, it is illustrated to also be wrong. I find it's easier to just make my case using the latter. Clearly, I don't need to make it so easy on this board.
  9. Ahh, New York, Hong Kong, and most heavily industrialized cities: incredibly beautiful by night, digustingly disgusting by day.
  10. The simple answer, guys, to the "$1 vs. $1 million" question is cost of living. If we're using extreme examples, consider this: The penniless man gains $1. He is able to buy food and live another day. The rich man loses $1. He earns $1 million a month and his mortgage is $1 million a month (work with me here). He is not able to make his mortgage payment that month. In that extreme example, the penniless man has violated the rich man's right to live and use his money to do so.
  11. Hey man I think I was editing my post while you posted yours. I said: From a practical perspective, I would prefer an automatic enrollment system at the national level, and you have to specifically choose to opt out. Upon enrollment, you're locked in for a 5 year period, and if you chose to opt out, you can't get yourself back in for the full 5 years. Would I prefer a mandatory system? Yes, because I know there's going to be more administrative headache with allowing people to opt out and back in, which would drive up the overall program costs. However, to acknowledge the full defi
  12. Medicine =/= healthcare. See below. We have the right to life, meaning that when we are born, we have the unfettered right to live our lives and not impinge on other people's rights to do the same. The question for me comes down to does "healthcare" get bundled into the same category as "life," and I say yes. With the option to opt out. Now, does that right to "life" impinge on other people's rights to do the same? I say no, to the same extent that law enforcement; it is a preservation of life. As for whether taxation should be mandatory or voluntary to do that (e.g. the v
  13. Hey, thanks for correcting some of my posts guys. I will apologize that I was tired and wasn't forming the words correctly. Since it looks like I can't edit stuff after people have posted, so I'll repost some of what I said earlier here. I will say that people should have the right to opt out of the above system, but that they should sign a waiver when they opt out that they will not try to check into the public plan hospitals. Wow, that's something retardedly expensive. Thanks for making my goal of saving $20 million in taxes / year look inconsequential in comparison.
  14. We're all in agreement on an individual level - no one has the right to make you do something you don't want to do. That said, insurance is one area that I would make a strong case for that everyone should have for a number of reasons: - You can get other people sick if you choose to not go to a hospital when you're sick. You're directly contributing to other people's lack of productivity in doing so. From an individual perspective, people should individually make judgments on whether they'll get other people sick if they are sick, but many times people don't make the right judgments. I
  15. You are right about my not having a right to make them give me that info. This is going to be fun! I never said that, buddy. Yawn. Okay, how much does an MRI scan cost you at Kaiser Permanente in New York? Call your HMO and ask them how much it will cost. Try to get them to send you a price list and you'll get laughed at. They will answer with "it depends on your copay, the specific Kaiser office you're going to, etc." Ask them if you will actually get the MRI scan if you request it to be paid under your insurance program. They will answer "it depends on your past cla
×
×
  • Create New...