The Proposed $5 fee to visit GPs/Emergency Rooms

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

When will the private health industry be asked to make savings ? They are innefficient and being propped up with government subsidies
If the Private health industry has subsidies removed, then at the same time the artificial handicaps on them should go as well. E.g. not being allowed to charge more based on age and other things. Let them survive or fail as an industry without government help OR handicap.
 
If the Private health industry has subsidies removed, then at the same time the artificial handicaps on them should go as well. E.g. not being allowed to charge more based on age and other things. Let them survive or fail as an industry without government help OR handicap.

Good point - many who criticise PHI industry for the Government support it recieves fail to recognise the benefits of community rating.

Regards

S. Pete
 
Good point - many who criticise PHI industry for the Government support it recieves fail to recognise the benefits of community rating.
The community rating is a mixed bag. It's good in that charging people more if older (if they have had private insurance the whole time) isn't allowed. They should be able to charge more based on 'lifestyle' issues though. By that I mean not being able to charge more for genetic based ones, that are effectively a crap shoot who ends up with them, but they should be able to charge more for cover if you're obese, smoke, drink etc.
 
The greasing of the slippery slope is well underway

With an ageing population something was always going to have to be done. Luckily for Australia Keating did excellent work with the Medicare card so we are miles better off than somewhere like the UK with the free at the point of service system.
 
What happens when the aging fogies get smart and vote tactically....

It has to happen

Pess, I reckon you are spot on. Howard was always dead keen to look after them. So will others.
Gen Y hasn't quite cottoned on to it yet but they are going to get thoroughly shafted to foot the bill.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Boomers, the original me generation are quite used to being selfish.

Ironically, the one area where largess seems to flow the other way, gonski, looks like it will get quietly shafted.

I chuckle to myself when pollies who probably had a completely free education come out with gems like 'the age of entitlement is over'
 
Back on health, who is the winner ?

The person who gets more value out of the health insurance, private and public but has poor health, or the person who has a gets very little back, but enjoys good health ?

Anyone else see the ironing of being charged more from doctors visits, to help stop wasting their time, when the victorian govt seems to be going down the track where doctors notes will be erquired for pupil absences ?
 
Boomers, the original me generation are quite used to being selfish.

Ironically, the one area where largess seems to flow the other way, gonski, looks like it will get quietly shafted.

I chuckle to myself when pollies who probably had a completely free education come out with gems like 'the age of entitlement is over'
The richest and fattest generation in human history are also the ones that seemingly complain the most when things don't got their way.
 
The richest and fattest generation in human history are also the ones that seemingly complain the most when things don't got their way.

Definitely not rich but comfortable after working full time/paying taxes for over 47 years.
Have a touch of a pot belly but otherwise am quite slim & trim.
Do tend to complain a bit though no matter if i get my way or not.
 
My 70 year old Father in law has a net wealth of around $8 mill but outside his private health he doesn't pay a cent for medical/health care. He's also a hypochondriac who demands antibiotics at the hint of a runny nose. I lean to the right on most things economically, but this is clearly wrong.
 
Respondents to today's Nielsen Poll have responded 49% yes to a $6 co-payment, 49% against.

Also 52% are in favour of bulk billing being means tested.

Seems the electorate is moving in the same direction government as the on these issues - and campaigning hasn't even started.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/fed...-to-make-the-hard-choices-20140316-34vn1.html
I was shocked by this.

That being said, it isn't surprising because many people either can afford the $5 or don't think it will effect them.

Personally, putting a value on a service makes sense to me. My issue is that I do believe that we need to provide universal health care and the impacts of this levy on that.
 
Lara to Corio aint that bad, really, Pazz. But you are right that bulk-billing clinics are few and far between. Most people who can only afford bulk-billing have to travel a fair way to get there. What is weird about the whole thing is that I think everyone agrees that a nominal fee is a good idea (so long as those who have to go to the doctor a lot - i.e. pensioners - can still get it free), but the way the Liberals keep saying "5 or 6 dollars" seems to be because they are trying to charge the highest low fee they can. $5 sounds simple and relatively easy, $7 obviously seems too close to $10 to still sound cheap, so they instead say this odd "5 or 6 dollars" thing. I suspect waaay too many expenditure decisions are based on what number will play best through the media, rather than being actually economically-justified.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top