I read Brendan's article in last week's Sunday Times with interest, in particular I was intrigued by his comments regarding private health insurers and community rating. Brendan made the point that if community rating were to be introduced across the board (I hope I have remembered this correctly) then it would be only right that smokers should pay increased premia to reflect their increased risk of ill health etc. As a reformed smoker I am very well aware of the risks associated with smoking and on a superficial level at least would tend to be swayed by this argument, namely if you indulge in an activity which has proven negative consequences for your health and will almost ensure your dependance on expensive health care you should pay more for private health insurance. However it poses many other questions- should we also apply the same criteria (higher premia) to people who are overweight, consume alcohol to excess or even people who are just inactive/ lazy? Once we introduce these types of terms and conditions under which cover is offered or how the cost of cover is calculated we could end up with a service that serves only the very healthy or the very wealthy if vast numbers of potential customers are excluded by reason of their lifestyle choice. Then then again I think of life assurance- smokers pay more, I don't know. Does anybody have any thoughts on this? (Of course smokers will argue that they contribute substantially to the cost of running the public health service as it stands by virtue of tax and duties paid each time they buy tobacco products).
VHI, Bupa, Vivas- Community Rating
- Thread starter Carpenter
- Start date
quarterfloun
Registered User
- Messages
- 117
It is very simple to me. As a society we should all be working together for the common good. We should not have to "need" health insurance to hop the queue but we should have a system that provides excellent care for all. And if that means sticking up income tax so be it. What is the cost of administering Bupa, VHI & the rest? It is a waste of money that could be spent directly on care if revenue was collected through our taxes. We should also do away with consultants doing their business in public hospitals. This only diminishes our ability to care for those who require it. If you want private care then pay your money, take your plane and have your op done elsewhere. There is no place in a caring society for fat cat health professionals. This is not to say that they should not be rewarded properly and fairly. If we can waste 150M on PPARS then we can waste 150 million on providing care for those who need it.
Quarterfloun, speak for yourself.
I don't see any reason why I should pay one cent for someone else's healthcare. Of course those who can't pay themselves should be cared for. That is very different from providing care for those who won't pay themselves, or those who prioritise other spending over health insurance etc.
Still, if we just manage to get tax rates high enough, we might, just might someday have a socialist paradise, where crime, poverty, greed, inequality etc. are defeated.
Are you by any chance a first year politics student
I don't see any reason why I should pay one cent for someone else's healthcare. Of course those who can't pay themselves should be cared for. That is very different from providing care for those who won't pay themselves, or those who prioritise other spending over health insurance etc.
Still, if we just manage to get tax rates high enough, we might, just might someday have a socialist paradise, where crime, poverty, greed, inequality etc. are defeated.
Are you by any chance a first year politics student
Hi quarterfloun
I agree with your sentiments, in principle, especially that consultants should not be conducting their private clinics in publically funded accommodation (however is this not being done away with anyway? They must now fund their own PI insurance in respect of their private practice AFAIK). Also it's quite clear that VHI (especially)are spending fantastic amounts of money on admin. and publicity. The advent of private hospitals and clinics was as a direct result of consultants seeing the inefficiencies that existed in a publically funded hospital. Seeing this they knew they could deliver a better service, at a cost naturally but probably cheaper than the real cost of the public hospital alternative- when all costs are considered. The €150 million euro that was blown on PPARS was a disgrace but would this money have have made any significant difference to the public health service, as we know it? The problems with the health service are more deep rooted, as Mata Harney is now discovering and throwing money at it will not alter the fundamental problems which amongst others are top heavy management structure, bureaucracy, lack of "micro managers" (matrons- as borne out by last weeks reports on hospital hygiene) and poor accountability with relation to spending.
I agree with your sentiments, in principle, especially that consultants should not be conducting their private clinics in publically funded accommodation (however is this not being done away with anyway? They must now fund their own PI insurance in respect of their private practice AFAIK). Also it's quite clear that VHI (especially)are spending fantastic amounts of money on admin. and publicity. The advent of private hospitals and clinics was as a direct result of consultants seeing the inefficiencies that existed in a publically funded hospital. Seeing this they knew they could deliver a better service, at a cost naturally but probably cheaper than the real cost of the public hospital alternative- when all costs are considered. The €150 million euro that was blown on PPARS was a disgrace but would this money have have made any significant difference to the public health service, as we know it? The problems with the health service are more deep rooted, as Mata Harney is now discovering and throwing money at it will not alter the fundamental problems which amongst others are top heavy management structure, bureaucracy, lack of "micro managers" (matrons- as borne out by last weeks reports on hospital hygiene) and poor accountability with relation to spending.
quarterfloun
Registered User
- Messages
- 117
I'm not a first year politics student but I am 42 years old, been through 3 breakdowns (2 deaths & a stressful job) and know whats its like to be cast aside by a system that I dutifully paid into for 20 odd years. Were it not for my mother & friends standing by me and my family I would now be considered a waster and of no use. But by the socialist approach of my well chosen friends and supportive mother I stand here today and can fight for natural justice. This is the main reason (along with Iraq) that I returned "home".
Nobody wants to pay for the sick, the infirm, the elderly and those in need even if they have contributed for long or short periods.
I'd love to be selfish and spend my money on me and only me but I have responsibilites to my family and we all in turn have social responsibilities to those around us. For those who choose not to pay - I'm with them (although I do have a VHI policy) as I do not see why as a society we must choose other (sometimes doubtful) beneficiaries of our taxes over health & education.
What do we need the army for? If we get invaded no amount of tin hats will stop it. The banks can escort their own cash around for all I care about their assets. Maybe I could get an army escort when I go to the pub just in case I get mugged
Why do we have the Luas & Dart - they are for Dubliners only.
Why do we bother with grants to minority groups?
Why build roads as they are for car users mainly? If its for transporting goods around let the carriers provide their own routes.
So we can all decide what is important to us as individuals and also what is important to us as a group. Some people choose to be self orientated in their outlook and some choose to look to the common good.
As a country it makes sense that all our people are well educated and healthy. So whist we do have this inefficient system and people choose not to pay I wholeheartedly agree with you about those who "opt out" but for those who cannot opt in it is unfair and why not change the entire system if it is wrong? Look to other health models across the world that work better.
So lets do away with the Luas and you can all cycle to work and get fit.
Nobody wants to pay for the sick, the infirm, the elderly and those in need even if they have contributed for long or short periods.
I'd love to be selfish and spend my money on me and only me but I have responsibilites to my family and we all in turn have social responsibilities to those around us. For those who choose not to pay - I'm with them (although I do have a VHI policy) as I do not see why as a society we must choose other (sometimes doubtful) beneficiaries of our taxes over health & education.
What do we need the army for? If we get invaded no amount of tin hats will stop it. The banks can escort their own cash around for all I care about their assets. Maybe I could get an army escort when I go to the pub just in case I get mugged
Why do we have the Luas & Dart - they are for Dubliners only.
Why do we bother with grants to minority groups?
Why build roads as they are for car users mainly? If its for transporting goods around let the carriers provide their own routes.
So we can all decide what is important to us as individuals and also what is important to us as a group. Some people choose to be self orientated in their outlook and some choose to look to the common good.
As a country it makes sense that all our people are well educated and healthy. So whist we do have this inefficient system and people choose not to pay I wholeheartedly agree with you about those who "opt out" but for those who cannot opt in it is unfair and why not change the entire system if it is wrong? Look to other health models across the world that work better.
So lets do away with the Luas and you can all cycle to work and get fit.