1) Mandatory health care fees from everyone living in America,
2) Unhealthy choice taxes,
3) Luxury taxes,
4) Current amounts of Medicare and Medicaid funds,
5) The significant savings from adopting a single payer system,
6) Control of price paid for service and product through tough, fair negotiation between health care businesses and the single payer,
7) Reduction of philanthropy to other countries.
All of this is discussed in detail in chapter 3 of the book. There are many other concepts throughout the book, such as A) mandatory utilization of advanced health care directives, B) requirement of federally approved (within a Department of Homeland Medicine) CON, certificate of need, for new health care construction, C) electronic record keeping across the entire country with the submitted records: office progress notes; hospital discharge summaries; operative and procedure reports, all functioning as part of the ongoing medical record, open for review by quality assurance, and as a bill, which generates immediate payment of a standardized fee and D) multiple other ways of operating, including malpractice tort reform, which will control spending at different levels.
Remember what I am proposing: clear and equal access to sound, ongoing, independent-from-payer-influence doctor—patient relationships for everyone, i.e., good health care without receiving a bill for same (this includes medicines as well). Everyone has already paid upfront. To actually achieve this will take a lot more than just funding. It will require that Americans change their behavior and force their politicians to do the same. If they are unable to do this, then maybe they deserve the mess that is our current health care system.

Employers are out of the loop and health insurance companies, HMOs, and the like are assigned a place in the history of medicine textbooks: “Mistakes Not To be Repeated.”

Everyone pays for the health care system, which I propose, not just current taxpayers. Indeed, if my system results in a surplus of money, I would think it might be a good thing to reduce the amount of payroll tax that goes toward Medicare and perhaps shift that to Social security. I want our health care system to be independent from the social security system.

I do not believe that Senator Obama’s plan will result in much except a huge increase in spending because he leaves the insurance companies in charge.

Currently, I think we are up to $2.3 trillion dollars in annual spending on health care. The previous data that I used for the book indicated that around $1.9 trillion was the figure. I believe the way to fund the system is to collect that amount of money, about $2.0 trillion dollars, and then make the system function within that budget. This making will not include obstructing the demand but rather removing greed from the system. I have outlined many different ways of doing that. Over time with my system, I expect to see either stabilization of our annual health care expenditure (with necessary changes indexed to inflation) or even a decrease in expenditure. Hospitals, drug companies, and technology companies and their mechanisms of doing business are a big part of the problem. These mechanisms need to change. They need to be subordinated to the concept that the ultimate goal is not increasing profit but rather enhancing the penetration of sound, ongoing, independent-from-payer-influence doctor—patient relationships into every American community. A single payer can accomplish this. And no matter what “-ism” is applied to this last statement, I believe that it is the right way to go.

R. Garth Kirkwood MD
http://www.equalhealthcareforall.org
doctor_k@equalhealthcareforall.org

How is it funded? Employers or taxpayers?

Are insurance companies still in the loop?

And all of that said, it seems that Obama is going to with and Kennedy’s plan will be adopted. Have you looked at that?

CANADIAN SYSTEM: This system keeps costs in check in part by controlling the supply of certain services—for example, imaging and surgical facilities and the specialist physicians necessary to carry out the procedures. The result is the growth of waiting lists, which have become a real problem. (See Dr. Angell’s article, the link to which is provided in comment #4 above)

In the Canadian system, the dollar bill is determining patient treatment, even though it is a single payer system.

EQUAL HEALTH CARE FOR ALL: The doctor—patient relationship, the mutual trust developed bewteen the doctor and the patient, is the decider of medical therapy. The single payer simply pays the bill, without interference or obstruction, i.e., the waiting lines.

If waiting lines develop in my system, it will be because of increased demand and not because of the single payer’s efforts to control costs, by obstructing that demand. I see increased demand as a good thing, i.e., anyone being able to go to the doctor and being treated properly, as defined by that individual doctor—patient relationship.
Cost control in my system occurs not by efforts to obstruct the demand but rather by controlling, through a process of fair, tough negotiation, the price paid for services and product. This negotiation will be made much easier by removing business greed from the system, while achieving good, acceptable profit margins for health care businesses and generous payment to health care professionals.

The difference between EQUAL HEALTH CARE FOR ALL and the CANADIAN SYSTEM is that for the former, the doctor—patient relaationship is in charge of determining health care, while the single payer views itself and the dollar bill as in a supportive role. For the latter, the single payer is in charge of determining health care, which becomes subordinate to the dollar bill.

This new structure for our American health care system is the foundation of its potential success. And back to Dr. Angell’s article, a change for our entire system is necessary. I believe that the structure, which I have proposed, defines that change.

R. Garth kirkwood MD
http://www.equalhealthcareforall.org
doctor_k@equalhealthcareforall.org

But for purposes of this discussion do you have a brief comparison of your plan versus Canada’s?

R. Garth Kirkwood MD
http://www.equalhealthcareforall.org
doctor_k@equalhealthcareforall.org

Except for the corporations that outsource, and there we should sock it to them.

And having been in international sales, I sympathize with you. I hated foreign travel. Could never get caught up until it was time to leave….

And, check the URL I posted for the share of corporate taxes in federal revenue (hit the blue “data” button at the bottom): 14.4% of 2007 revenues.

.

And, let me add that as someone with 25 years experience dealing with international business I appreciate your comments.