Should Private Health care exist in a democratic society/ Pros and Cons of PMI

DundalkDuffman · 16-06-2010 11:24PM

Teutorix wrote: »

Good money is paid for the use of the public facilities, as i said in my previous post, private fees are instrumental is keeping public hospitals running.

How do private fees fund public hospitals? I know from experience that any private fees are for the consultants only, the hospital doesn't get any slice of it. The reasoning that some of these consultants can use equipment, resources, staff on a public hospital is that it is built into their contracts, they are then only allowed to do a certain percentage of private in addition to their contracted public work.

ascanbe · 16-06-2010 11:24PM

Teutorix wrote: »

Good money is paid for the use of the public facilities, as i said in my previous post, private fees are instrumental is keeping public hospitals running.

Private companies are obviously getting a very good deal on using public facilities; otherwise they would develop their own.
Separate the two systems and there is no reason that the two won't sustain themselves; at the moment, what we have is a mess.

Teutorix · 16-06-2010 11:27PM

ascanbe wrote: »

Private companies are obviously getting a very good deal on using public facilities; otherwise they would develop their own.
Separate the two systems and there is no reason that the two won't sustain themselves; at the moment, what we have is a mess.

I dont think the government could afford to support all of the public hospitals given the current state of our finances.

ascanbe · 16-06-2010 11:34PM

Stinicker wrote: »

The attitudes towards this industry is asymptomatic what is wrong in the very core of Irish society, the troglodtyes in this country have no sense of any responsibility or striving to better themselves, all they care about is begrudging anyone better than him and backing the marxist sh1te that emanates from liberal politicans and trade unions.

In America if a person has a nice house, nice car, hot wife, successful job or business the average person will think well fair play to him, I wish I could better myself as well as he did.

In Ireland the caveman mentality is; someday, someday I'm going to get that c*nt and teach him a lesson, plus tis all borrowed money, I probably have money than him.

This is what is wrong in Ireland, and the oafs perusing Universal Healthcare are only helping destroy our freedom, liberty and successfulness.

Amateur psychology and libertarian posturing; there's already plenty of that on boards.

ascanbe · 16-06-2010 11:42PM

Teutorix wrote: »

I dont think the government could afford to support all of the public hospitals given the current state of our finances.

The government can't afford to do anything given the current state of our finances; that doesn't mean that people discussing how the country should be run should abandon all aspirations.
What i'm proposing could only be implemented when/if the country esatablishes a sound financial footing and could only be run successfully if accompanied by sound financial managememt; a coherent fiscal policy, in other words.
I'm not suggesting it could be implemented tomorrow.

Don Keypunch · 17-06-2010 11:59AM

Do people die because Consultants favour working in theie private practice over public hospitals?

Prof.Badass · 17-06-2010 12:33PM

Don Keypunch wrote: »

Are we destined to have a two tier system forever?

Yes. However that does not mean there should not be public healthcare.

Healthcare should be a basic right, paid for by taxpayers and guaranteed to every citizen (rich and poor). However, people should also have the right to provide and avail of private healthcare should they wish (this is basic freedom). The % of people using the public system should be taken as an indicator of how good it is (however, no matter how good the actual healthcare is, some people will always be willing to "go private" for a more spacious room/better food/ tv to themselves (with more channels) and whatnot).

In case you think this means increased taxes, not neccesarily. Ending the farce that is the war on drugs would free up loads of money we could use on a decent, free public health system

.

eightyfish · 17-06-2010 12:43PM

Don Keypunch wrote: »

Should Private Health care exist in a democratic society?

People should be able to use their money for whatever they want in a democratic society.

twinQuins · 17-06-2010 12:53PM

Stinicker wrote: »

the oafs perusing Universal Healthcare are only helping destroy our freedom, liberty and successfulness.

You can't make this shit up.

thebigbiffo · 17-06-2010 01:03PM

abolish the HSE and essentially pay the entire health budget to a privately operated company - or a few of them.

the hse is run like **** and full of wasters (on the administrative side) and is nothing short of wasteful. it should be run like any private company, end of.

RATM · 17-06-2010 01:32PM

There was a report out only 8 weeks back that said for an extra 3% in taxation the nation could viably pursue a policy of universal health care along the lines of the European model. Harney outright rejected it because her political ideology is in favour of the American model, which has so far proven to fail many milions of Americans.

Private healthcare is always going to be present and so it should be. But at the core of this whole problem is the way in which the HSE is run- if it was in any way efficient and the public had confidence in being treated quickly and without difficulty then the demand for private insurance would be less. But as it stands it appears to me that people are almost scared into taking private healthcare when they read about such horrific injustices in the health care system such as that of Susie Long.

thebigbiffo · 17-06-2010 01:35PM

RATM wrote: »

There was a report out only 8 weeks back that said for an extra 3% in taxation the nation could viably pursue a policy of universal health care along the lines of the European model. Harney outright rejected it because her political ideology is in favour of the American model, which has so far proven to fail many milions of Americans.

Private healthcare is always going to be present and so it should be. But at the core of this whole problem is the way in which the HSE is run- if it was in any way efficient and the public had confidence in being treated quickly and without difficulty then the demand for private insurance would be less. But as it stands it appears to me that people are almost scared into taking private healthcare when they read about such horrific injustices in the health care system such as that of Susie Long.

that'd be another 3% of my money wasted by imcompetent, lazy and selfish civil servants, no thanks

eightyfish · 17-06-2010 01:50PM

RATM wrote: »

There was a report out only 8 weeks back that said for an extra 3% in taxation the nation could viably pursue a policy of universal health care along the lines of the European model.

Where did you read that? Let's just presume that, as all things in Ireland, this would fall over budget and say a more realistic figure is 5%. Can you imagine the reaction to a 5% increase in taxes in the current... ahem... "economic climate". There'd be uproar.

The HSE is a stinking mess, though. I don't blame Mary Harney really as she inherited an already dysfunctional system and she probably has the least-rewarding job in the country.

HavingCrack · 17-06-2010 02:24PM

eightyfish wrote: »

Where did you read that? Let's just presume that, as all things in Ireland, this would fall over budget and say a more realistic figure is 5%. Can you imagine the reaction to a 5% increase in taxes in the current... ahem... "economic climate". There'd be uproar.

The HSE is a stinking mess, though. I don't blame Mary Harney really as she inherited an already dysfunctional system and she probably has the least-rewarding job in the country.

To be honest if a 5% increase in taxes led to an Ireland that coudl be considered a world leader in health/education/public transport etc I'd actually say quite a few people might actually support it. However, this is Ireland and our current government has proven time and time again that they just squander hard earned tax payers money so this is a non starter.

Stinicker wrote: »

This is what is wrong in Ireland, and the oafs perusing Universal Healthcare are only helping destroy our freedom, liberty and successfulness.

While I can support some Libertarian standpoints this is just ridiculous. I personally know a family who have a child with Down syndrome. Without the support of public healthcare they would never have been able to cover the costs of their childs educational and healthcare needs. It literally was not an option. If you can explain to me what the Libertarian view would be on this individual case (remember you support everyone for themselves) Id be satisfied.

vinylmesh wrote: »

Yes. However that does not mean there should not be public healthcare.

Healthcare should be a basic right, paid for by taxpayers and guaranteed to every citizen (rich and poor). However, people should also have the right to provide and avail of private healthcare should they wish (this is basic freedom). The % of people using the public system should be taken as an indicator of how good it is (however, no matter how good the actual healthcare is, some people will always be willing to "go private" for a more spacious room/better food/ tv to themselves (with more channels) and whatnot).

In case you think this means increased taxes, not neccesarily. Ending the farce that is the war on drugs would free up loads of money we could use on a decent, free public health system .

eightyfish wrote: »

People should be able to use their money for whatever they want in a democratic society.

Agreed 100% with both.

Paddy Samurai · 17-06-2010 02:38PM

Don Keypunch wrote: »

Should ones ability to pay have an influence on the type and ease at which they access health care?

No..... proper healthcare should be a right for all citizens(rich and poor alike) in any developed country.

Should we not all be treated the same?

Yes.....Access/treatment should be based on medical need ,not on your wealth.

Private healthcare is about making profit from peoples illness.

Banned Account · 17-06-2010 02:44PM

Paddy Samurai wrote: »

Private healthcare is about making profit ..........nothing else.

Not necessarily - imagine our current tax rates of 20% and 41% with all tax monies going into a central pot with a large chunk of this being used to pay for the public healthcare system.

Now imagine dropping the rates to 15% and 36% respectively and introducing an additional 5% compulsory health insurance charge. This money is used to procure private healthcare for all those working and also to subsidise the same for those not working - now we are all private patients so there is no two tier system.

The providers of the heathcare insurance now ensure that the system is operating with minimum wasteage whilst a seperate body (like HIQA) ensures that the service granted meets expectations.

With a little imagination, a private healthcare system can work.

RATM · 17-06-2010 03:03PM

eightyfish wrote: »

Where did you read that? Let's just presume that, as all things in Ireland, this would fall over budget and say a more realistic figure is 5%. Can you imagine the reaction to a 5% increase in taxes in the current... ahem... "economic climate". There'd be uproar.

The HSE is a stinking mess, though. I don't blame Mary Harney really as she inherited an already dysfunctional system and she probably has the least-rewarding job in the country.

The report was produced by the Center for Health Policy and Management at Trinity College. It was backed up by the Irish Medical Council and Fine Gael & Labour also backed it to some extent.

article on it here http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2010/04/18/story48668.asp

Personally I wouldn't mind paying an extra 3% in tax each year for a universal system based on medical need rather than the ability to pay. There's a thread in another forum at the moment of a person who needs to go to a GP but just can't afford it yet the state places them outside of the medical card system. There's lots of cases now where people have to ask themselves if they can afford to visit a GP and that situation is not what an equitable society is about.

I do take your point about it costing more than 3% though- I'd only support such a measure if it could be proven we would finally be delivered a health system that works for all citizens. People would still be given the option to go private if they wished but at the moment access to public patients to the health services is in a deficit. There's a lot more than just throwing money at the problem to be done though, the HSE is undoubtedly in dire need of a root and branch reform. But perhaps a reform along the lines of a universal system could go some way in trying to make that happen. Harney's had 6 years of her 2 tier model and its shown to fail people as a whole so perhaps its time for a change of tack?

Stinicker · 17-06-2010 03:05PM

HavingCrack wrote: »

To be honest if a 5% increase in taxes led to an Ireland that coudl be considered a world leader in health/education/public transport etc I'd actually say quite a few people might actually support it. However, this is Ireland and our current government has proven time and time again that they just squander hard earned tax payers money so this is a non starter.

While I can support some Libertarian standpoints this is just ridiculous. I personally know a family who have a child with Down syndrome. Without the support of public healthcare they would never have been able to cover the costs of their childs educational and healthcare needs. It literally was not an option. If you can explain to me what the Libertarian view would be on this individual case (remember you support everyone for themselves) Id be satisfied.

Agreed 100% with both.

I would favour abortion in this case but seeing as the child has already been born then this is where charities come in, I will re-iterate once again I am totally opposed to Public healthcare and to our current taxation model. We need to pay far less in tax and help encourage an entrepreneurship spirirt in Ireland.

Public healthcare is a manifest of communism and all people are not created equal, I am better than alot of people but am also well behind others this is how the world is, there will never be equality nor should there be, the egalitarian standpoint of Europe has plunged the continent into a crisis and wrecked many peoples personal fortunes, hopes, dreams and aspirations.

We need a laissez faire system in Ireland with absolute minimal government function, elimenate all the government quangos and about a quarter million jobs that exist as drones in the public sector.

All we need to prosper are:

Good private Education
Minimal Taxation
Proper 1st World Infrastructure
Proper policing and natural justice, including the death penalty and a right to firearms. Scumbags, chavs and other detritus should not be given a second change when they misbehave.

We have nothing like it and to make things worse the leftist greens with their egalitarian ideals now want to grant Irish travellers status as an ethnic minority. This country is sickening.

Nijmegen · 17-06-2010 03:59PM

Public healthcare is fine, but why punish those who want to use their money to get private healthcare?

At the end of the day, we all pay our taxes - PRSI, VAT, the whole schebang - and are entitled to a certain minimum as provided by the government in return for these taxes.

But what I do with the money in my pocket after taxes is my business.

RATM · 17-06-2010 04:07PM

Stinicker wrote: »

I would favour abortion in this case but seeing as the child has already been born then this is where charities come in, I will re-iterate once again I am totally opposed to Public healthcare and to our current taxation model. We need to pay far less in tax and help encourage an entrepreneurship spirirt in Ireland.

So now assuming you haven't got the chance to abort the kid with Downs Syndrome and his care throughout life is going to cost many hundreds of thousand euro. And you say charites will look after this. Are the public, on a voluntary basis, going to fund charities to the tune of many many billions per year to fund our health service?

You see there's a contradiction flowing right throughout your argument -on the one hand you condone a dog eat dog type of world where that kid with Downs Syndrome would be dependent on voluntary charitable donations instead of having a government legislate for his care throughout life. By proceeding in this manner you then create a society whereby those within it develop that same dog-eat-dog mentality and if contributing to charity to fund sick children is voluntary then the society you've created through such social conditioning won't bother doing so. Humans are greedy by nature- the recent banking/property crisis is just another in the long list of examples. So explain to me how greedy humans would in any way be incentivised to voluntarily donate thousands of their income per year to charities in order to fund other people's healthcare problems?

Stinicker · 17-06-2010 04:20PM

RATM wrote: »

So now assuming you haven't got the chance to abort the kid with Downs Syndrome and his care throughout life is going to cost many hundreds of thousand euro. And you say charites will look after this. Are the public, on a voluntary basis, going to fund charities to the tune of many many billions per year to fund our health service?

You see there's a contradiction flowing right throughout your argument -on the one hand you condone a dog eat dog type of world where that kid with Downs Syndrome would be dependent on voluntary charitable donations instead of having a government legislate for his care throughout life. By proceeding in this manner you then create a society whereby those within it develop that same dog-eat-dog mentality and if contributing to charity to fund sick children is voluntary then the society you've created through such social conditioning won't bother doing so. Humans are greedy by nature- the recent banking/property crisis is just another in the long list of examples. So explain to me how greedy humans would in any way be incentivised to voluntarily donate thousands of their income per year to charities in order to fund other people's healthcare problems?

Charity is a voluntary thing and there could be certain tax breaks but they would be minimal or non existent as taxation should be minimal to begin with.

The parents and family must carry the burden or else the child must do without those treatments then. The average lifespan of a down syndrome person is around 45 years which allows for his care to be carried out by the family up until before the death of the parents considering the average woman would be giving birth around 30 so she could expect the downs child to die on her 75th birthday.

The same 30 year old today can expect to live to be at least 90 with modern medicine presuming they lived a healthy life, there will also maybe be other normal healthy sibilings to help look after their downs syndrome sibling throughout his or her life.

RATM · 17-06-2010 04:55PM

Stinicker wrote: »

Charity is a voluntary thing and there could be certain tax breaks but they would be minimal or non existent as taxation should be minimal to begin with.

So now you're arguing for taxation to fund healthcare for the most vulnerable ? You still haven't explained to me how greedy self -serving humans (which we are, like it or not) are going to adequately fund health care through voluntary charitable donations. The reason we don't have precisely that model is because its well known it wouldn't be funded adequately enough for those who are in dire medical need.

The parents and family must carry the burden or else the child must do without those treatments then.

.

And then what do you think is going to happen? A parent will do anything, absolutely anything to ensure their child stays alive and well. So now that parent who cant pay for the health care of their Downs Syndrome kid decides to turn to crime to fund it. Why wouldn't they? They've nothing to lose relative to the loss they'll feel at seeing their child die due to the lack of your voluntary charitable donations. So then the whole of society begins to break down- the poor rise up on a crime wave because the costs of getting caught are far outweighed by the benefits of not. You'll force desperate people into desperate measures with that kind of policy and what will ensue is anarchy.

I'd a big admirer of Ron Paul but this particular brand of libertarianism you espouse can only serve to destroy the very fabric upon which society depends as people turn on each other just to survive.

Don Keypunch · 17-06-2010 07:34PM

Should communism exist in healthcare?

N8 · 17-06-2010 07:47PM

Paddy Samurai wrote: »

Private healthcare is about making profit from peoples illness.

Wrong - all healthcare provides a profit.

Can you name a profession involved in healthcare doing it for free? Can you name a drug provided free to the HSE?

Don Keypunch wrote: »

Should communism exist in healthcare?

No because some pigs become more equal than other pigs.

Paddy Samurai · 17-06-2010 09:30PM

N8 wrote: »

Wrong - all healthcare provides a profit.

Public hospitals don't make profit for shareholders/owners,all their income is spent on patient care.

N8 · 17-06-2010 10:04PM

N8 wrote: »

Wrong - all healthcare provides a profit.

Paddy Samurai wrote: »

Public hospitals don't make profit for shareholders/owners,all their income is spent on patient care.

thats because you and I the taxpayer throw money in an unabandoned and unchecked fashion into an ever failing system of healthcare provision...

Dr. No · 17-06-2010 11:13PM

Stinicker wrote: »

I would favour abortion in this case but seeing as the child has already been born then this is where charities come in, I will re-iterate once again I am totally opposed to Public healthcare and to our current taxation model. We need to pay far less in tax and help encourage an entrepreneurship spirirt in Ireland.

Public healthcare is a manifest of communism and all people are not created equal, I am better than alot of people but am also well behind others this is how the world is, there will never be equality nor should there be, the egalitarian standpoint of Europe has plunged the continent into a crisis and wrecked many peoples personal fortunes, hopes, dreams and aspirations.

We need a laissez faire system in Ireland with absolute minimal government function, elimenate all the government quangos and about a quarter million jobs that exist as drones in the public sector.

All we need to prosper are:

Good private Education
Minimal Taxation
Proper 1st World Infrastructure
Proper policing and natural justice, including the death penalty and a right to firearms. Scumbags, chavs and other detritus should not be given a second change when they misbehave.

We have nothing like it and to make things worse the leftist greens with their egalitarian ideals now want to grant Irish travellers status as an ethnic minority. This country is sickening.

It was the laissez faire system and minimal goverment regulation of banks and other financial institutions that got us into the financial crisis in the first place. Friedman style of economics should have nothing to do with healthcare. As other posters have said healthcare is a RIGHT of all citizens.

HavingCrack · 17-06-2010 11:29PM

RATM wrote: »

So explain to me how greedy humans would in any way be incentivised to voluntarily donate thousands of their income per year to charities in order to fund other people's healthcare problems?

Couldn't agree more.

Stinicker wrote: »

The parents and family must carry the burden or else the child must do without those treatments then. The average lifespan of a down syndrome person is around 45 years which allows for his care to be carried out by the family up until before the death of the parents considering the average woman would be giving birth around 30 so she could expect the downs child to die on her 75th birthday.

The same 30 year old today can expect to live to be at least 90 with modern medicine presuming they lived a healthy life, there will also maybe be other normal healthy sibilings to help look after their downs syndrome sibling throughout his or her life.

Thanks for being quite clear in your views. A lot of supposed Libertarians can be quite vague and waffely.

I think you're taking my example of Downs Syndrome too specificly. It was only meant to illustrate a point. Sorry I wasn't clear in my earlier point. A better example would probably be an innocent member of the public who happens to work in a low paid part time job eg student in McDonalds who is mugged by a junkie with a syringe and infected with Hepatitis B for example. There is clearly going to be a massive ongoing cost for treatment to this person who was not at fault for their condition at all and for whom private health insurance simply isn't affordable. Do you really think this person is goign to be able to rely on charities for the rest of their life alone??? I very much doubt it.

RATM wrote: »

And then what do you think is going to happen? A parent will do anything, absolutely anything to ensure their child stays alive and well. So now that parent who cant pay for the health care of their Downs Syndrome kid decides to turn to crime to fund it. Why wouldn't they? They've nothing to lose relative to the loss they'll feel at seeing their child die due to the lack of your voluntary charitable donations. So then the whole of society begins to break down- the poor rise up on a crime wave because the costs of getting caught are far outweighed by the benefits of not. You'll force desperate people into desperate measures with that kind of policy and what will ensue is anarchy.

I'd a big admirer of Ron Paul but this particular brand of libertarianism you espouse can only serve to destroy the very fabric upon which society depends as people turn on each other just to survive.

+1

N8 · 18-06-2010 12:21AM

Dr. No wrote: »

As other posters have said healthcare is a RIGHT of all citizens.

how is healthcare a right? Is that a constitutional right? what sort of "right" do you mean exactly?

Should you be asked to pay for the end of life care of your next door neighbour - an alcoholic, smoker, non nutritional eater, chronic prescription user with multiple trauma past history?

What if it costs €100K over the last 4 weeks?

Shouldn't there be incentives via the healthcare system toward health care upkeep?

Dr. No · 18-06-2010 12:50AM

N8 wrote: »

how is healthcare a right? Is that a constitutional right? what sort of "right" do you mean exactly?

Should you be asked to pay for the end of life care of your next door neighbour - an alcoholic, smoker, non nutritional eater, chronic prescription user with multiple trauma past history?

What if it costs €100K over the last 4 weeks?

Shouldn't there be incentives via the healthcare system toward health care upkeep?

Yes I would as that person probably paid for my (and yours) education through all the excise he was paying through his habits.

Should Private Health care exist in a democratic society/ Pros and Cons of PMI

Comments