Libertarianism is stupid.

[bbqpenguin]

since when do people "deserve" healthcare anyway? for children i can see perhaps a universal system which garantees kids healthcare, but besides that, why? if i personally don't want to pay for my own or someone else's health insurance or medical bills, why should i have to? i know it sounds heartless and cruel, but I at least can't say it is worth sacrificing personal freedom in order to garuntee healthcare for everyone

People deserve healthcare as long as your ideological basis for your country dictates that investing in your human capital will lead to long term gains.

while i support such investments as infrastructure or education which are expensive initially but pay off later, i don't see how costs of universal healthcare wouldn't be more of a burden then a benefit. you can argue that by keeping people alive longer we can get more use and tax money out of them, but the majority of people who use it aren't incredibly productive citizens anyway. the old, the obese, people who smoke or drink too much, people who get hurt doing stupid things... again, i know it sounds inhumane to turn down anyone on healthcare but i don't think it's a legitiamate investment, at least in some terms.

If you do not understand the fact that universal healthcare saves money. (Possibly because you have blocked out all memory of europe or japan out of your mind) Then it's basically futile to argue with you.

If you cannot see how someone getting skincancer because they can't afford to have a mole removed is bad on both a social and economic level, then you are sadly a lost cause.

i can see how it's bad on a social lavel, so let society take care of its problems and leave government out of it. I personally don't want a government enforcing social values. as far as the economic level, well I can see how it might suck for that person, but don't see the economic cost of it. at least from an economic standpoint, if an individual can't afford his or her own health insurance, that person probably is not contributing huge amounts of money.

[thegreekdog]

i can see how it's bad on a social lavel, so let society take care of its problems and leave government out of it. I personally don't want a government enforcing social values. as far as the economic level, well I can see how it might suck for that person, but don't see the economic cost of it. at least from an economic standpoint, if an individual can't afford his or her own health insurance, that person probably is not contributing huge amounts of money.

For economic purposes, it is far cheaper for everyone that has health insurance for someone who does not have health insurance to get preventative care than for that person to get emergency healthcare. While definitely a true statement, when people say, "Everyone can get healthcare for free in the US" what they really mean is that everyone can get emergency healthcare for free in the US.

As an example, someone without health insurance does not get regular checkups, MRIs, x-rays, brainscans, etc. So, if that person has cancer, it's not picked up until that person shows symptoms and goes into the emergency room. At that point, we are all picking up the cost of his care (in the vein of increases costs of healthcare). If the guy had gotten checked, the cancer may have been picked up early and taken care of early, at less cost to us.

[Snorri1234]

i can see how it's bad on a social lavel, so let society take care of its problems and leave government out of it. I personally don't want a government enforcing social values. as far as the economic level, well I can see how it might suck for that person, but don't see the economic cost of it. at least from an economic standpoint, if an individual can't afford his or her own health insurance, that person probably is not contributing huge amounts of money.

For economic purposes, it is far cheaper for everyone that has health insurance for someone who does not have health insurance to get preventative care than for that person to get emergency healthcare. While definitely a true statement, when people say, "Everyone can get healthcare for free in the US" what they really mean is that everyone can get emergency healthcare for free in the US.

As an example, someone without health insurance does not get regular checkups, MRIs, x-rays, brainscans, etc. So, if that person has cancer, it's not picked up until that person shows symptoms and goes into the emergency room. At that point, we are all picking up the cost of his care (in the vein of increases costs of healthcare). If the guy had gotten checked, the cancer may have been picked up early and taken care of early, at less cost to us.

Indeed. And the most paradoxical thing is that even if you can afford healthcare, it is cheaper for you to have universal healthcare. bbqpenguin, why do you think that the US spends more on a per-capita level and as a percentage of the GDP on healthcare than any nation in the entire world? And not simply a little more, it is almost two and a half times as much as everyone else in the industrialized world.

[thegreekdog]

i can see how it's bad on a social lavel, so let society take care of its problems and leave government out of it. I personally don't want a government enforcing social values. as far as the economic level, well I can see how it might suck for that person, but don't see the economic cost of it. at least from an economic standpoint, if an individual can't afford his or her own health insurance, that person probably is not contributing huge amounts of money.

For economic purposes, it is far cheaper for everyone that has health insurance for someone who does not have health insurance to get preventative care than for that person to get emergency healthcare. While definitely a true statement, when people say, "Everyone can get healthcare for free in the US" what they really mean is that everyone can get emergency healthcare for free in the US.

As an example, someone without health insurance does not get regular checkups, MRIs, x-rays, brainscans, etc. So, if that person has cancer, it's not picked up until that person shows symptoms and goes into the emergency room. At that point, we are all picking up the cost of his care (in the vein of increases costs of healthcare). If the guy had gotten checked, the cancer may have been picked up early and taken care of early, at less cost to us.

Indeed. And the most paradoxical thing is that even if you can afford healthcare, it is cheaper for you to have universal healthcare. bbqpenguin, why do you think that the US spends more on a per-capita level and as a percentage of the GDP on healthcare than any nation in the entire world? And not simply a little more, it is almost two and a half times as much as everyone else in the industrialized world.

Some would argue we have better healthcare than anyone else in the world.

[MeDeFe]

i can see how it's bad on a social lavel, so let society take care of its problems and leave government out of it. I personally don't want a government enforcing social values. as far as the economic level, well I can see how it might suck for that person, but don't see the economic cost of it. at least from an economic standpoint, if an individual can't afford his or her own health insurance, that person probably is not contributing huge amounts of money.

For economic purposes, it is far cheaper for everyone that has health insurance for someone who does not have health insurance to get preventative care than for that person to get emergency healthcare. While definitely a true statement, when people say, "Everyone can get healthcare for free in the US" what they really mean is that everyone can get emergency healthcare for free in the US.

As an example, someone without health insurance does not get regular checkups, MRIs, x-rays, brainscans, etc. So, if that person has cancer, it's not picked up until that person shows symptoms and goes into the emergency room. At that point, we are all picking up the cost of his care (in the vein of increases costs of healthcare). If the guy had gotten checked, the cancer may have been picked up early and taken care of early, at less cost to us.

Indeed. And the most paradoxical thing is that even if you can afford healthcare, it is cheaper for you to have universal healthcare. bbqpenguin, why do you think that the US spends more on a per-capita level and as a percentage of the GDP on healthcare than any nation in the entire world? And not simply a little more, it is almost two and a half times as much as everyone else in the industrialized world.

Some would argue we have better healthcare than anyone else in the world.

Two and a half times better? Really?

[Snorri1234]

i can see how it's bad on a social lavel, so let society take care of its problems and leave government out of it. I personally don't want a government enforcing social values. as far as the economic level, well I can see how it might suck for that person, but don't see the economic cost of it. at least from an economic standpoint, if an individual can't afford his or her own health insurance, that person probably is not contributing huge amounts of money.

For economic purposes, it is far cheaper for everyone that has health insurance for someone who does not have health insurance to get preventative care than for that person to get emergency healthcare. While definitely a true statement, when people say, "Everyone can get healthcare for free in the US" what they really mean is that everyone can get emergency healthcare for free in the US.

As an example, someone without health insurance does not get regular checkups, MRIs, x-rays, brainscans, etc. So, if that person has cancer, it's not picked up until that person shows symptoms and goes into the emergency room. At that point, we are all picking up the cost of his care (in the vein of increases costs of healthcare). If the guy had gotten checked, the cancer may have been picked up early and taken care of early, at less cost to us.

Indeed. And the most paradoxical thing is that even if you can afford healthcare, it is cheaper for you to have universal healthcare. bbqpenguin, why do you think that the US spends more on a per-capita level and as a percentage of the GDP on healthcare than any nation in the entire world? And not simply a little more, it is almost two and a half times as much as everyone else in the industrialized world.

Some would argue we have better healthcare than anyone else in the world.

If you approach it from a certain viewpoint, then yes. But since that viewpoint is "the most advanced and expensive treatments for a unbelievably tiny percentage of the people" I fail to see why anyone would take it.

Since you have less CT scanners than most of the west, and have less MRI scanners than Switzerland, Japan, Austria and Finland it's pretty strange to talk about best healthcare. And because denying medical claims a priori is standard bussiness-practice and the leading cause of bankruptcy is medical bills, I wonder why anyone would ever, ever suggest that your healthcaresystem is awesome.

[thegreekdog]

i can see how it's bad on a social lavel, so let society take care of its problems and leave government out of it. I personally don't want a government enforcing social values. as far as the economic level, well I can see how it might suck for that person, but don't see the economic cost of it. at least from an economic standpoint, if an individual can't afford his or her own health insurance, that person probably is not contributing huge amounts of money.

For economic purposes, it is far cheaper for everyone that has health insurance for someone who does not have health insurance to get preventative care than for that person to get emergency healthcare. While definitely a true statement, when people say, "Everyone can get healthcare for free in the US" what they really mean is that everyone can get emergency healthcare for free in the US.

As an example, someone without health insurance does not get regular checkups, MRIs, x-rays, brainscans, etc. So, if that person has cancer, it's not picked up until that person shows symptoms and goes into the emergency room. At that point, we are all picking up the cost of his care (in the vein of increases costs of healthcare). If the guy had gotten checked, the cancer may have been picked up early and taken care of early, at less cost to us.

Indeed. And the most paradoxical thing is that even if you can afford healthcare, it is cheaper for you to have universal healthcare. bbqpenguin, why do you think that the US spends more on a per-capita level and as a percentage of the GDP on healthcare than any nation in the entire world? And not simply a little more, it is almost two and a half times as much as everyone else in the industrialized world.

Some would argue we have better healthcare than anyone else in the world.

If you approach it from a certain viewpoint, then yes. But since that viewpoint is "the most advanced and expensive treatments for a unbelievably tiny percentage of the people" I fail to see why anyone would take it.

Since you have less CT scanners than most of the west, and have less MRI scanners than Switzerland, Japan, Austria and Finland it's pretty strange to talk about best healthcare. And because denying medical claims a priori is standard bussiness-practice and the leading cause of bankruptcy is medical bills, I wonder why anyone would ever, ever suggest that your healthcaresystem is awesome.

Tiny percentage? As far as I know, 6 million Americans do not have health insurance... divde that by 250 million Americans - 98% of people in the United States have health insurance. Of those 2% that do not have health insurance, they all have access to free healthcare, albeit not preventative healthcare. Additionally, my wife has serious headache problems; she has never been denied a medical claim. I don't think popular movies are a basis for saying that standard business practice is to deny medical claims since my wife and I, and no one we know, have never been denied a medical claim.

In any event, I admit that there are flaws in the US healthcare system. I do not think the solution is government-sponsored universal healthcare. I don't know what the solution is, because, well, we'd have to make it up and I'm not a health insurance of healthcare expert.

Finally, I usually don't say this - but can you provide a link or something to where we have less MRI scanners than Switzerland, Japan, Austria and Finland?

[thegreekdog]

And not to fast post, but my brother was in Ireland about 3 years ago. He had appendicitis. He went to the emergency room in Ireland and was placed in some random room with about four other people. He did not receive any care for about 11 hours. Then an administrator approached him and my brother indicated that he had US health insurance. Subsequent to making that statement, he went directly into surgery and received his own room.

I know most of you (especially gottonkaed) hate "personal" evidence, but I'd just like to point that out.

[jay_a2j]

It doesn't work.

Yeah like the Democrats and Republicans have it running like a well-oiled machine.

The longer you people sleep, the worse it gets.

[b.k. barunt]

Tiny percentage? As far as I know, 6 million Americans do not have health insurance... divde that by 250 million Americans - 98% of people in the United States have health insurance. Of those 2% that do not have health insurance, they all have access to free healthcare, albeit not preventative healthcare. Additionally, my wife has serious headache problems; she has never been denied a medical claim. I don't think popular movies are a basis for saying that standard business practice is to deny medical claims since my wife and I, and no one we know, have never been denied a medical claim.

I have Federal Blue Cross/Blue Shield hospitalization, which to my knowledge is one of the best money can buy. After the bike wreck that crippled me in 93, i was left with $30,000.00 worth of medical fees over and above what my hospitalization paid. WTF? If i would have stayed in the hospital as long as the doctors wanted me to, that would have tripled. Denying medical claims is not the only method by which our medical megacorporations are raping us. You've been lucky so far, so i guess you can sit back and tell those of us who haven't been to have a coke and a smile and shutthefuckup.


Honibaz

[StiffMittens]

Tiny percentage? As far as I know, 6 million Americans do not have health insurance... divde that by 250 million Americans - 98% of people in the United States have health insurance. Of those 2% that do not have health insurance, they all have access to free healthcare, albeit not preventative healthcare.

Not according to the CDC:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/FASTATS/hinsure.htm
That's 43 million uninsured (not counting folks 65 and older). The current US population is just over 300,000,000, so we have about 16% with no health insurance at all. Furthermore, according to a 2007 Consumer Reports study on the U.S. health care system, 24% of the U.S. population are described as underinsured and therefore unable to pay for major medical expenses. So in total, 40% of Americans 64 and under have inadequate access to health care.
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2007/08/cu_insurance.html

PS - what free healthcare are you referring to?

[Snorri1234]

As far as I know, 6 million Americans do not have health insurance..

That's really, really weird. Because as far as actual date is concerned about 40 to 45 million Americans do not have health insurance.

. divde that by 250 million Americans - 98% of people in the United States have health insurance.

Seriously, saying this just makes you look ignorant and unaware of the situation in the US. At least 15% of the population does not have insurance at any given time.

Of those 2% that do not have health insurance, they all have access to free healthcare, albeit not preventative healthcare.

Which is awesome but part of the problem.

Additionally, my wife has serious headache problems; she has never been denied a medical claim. I don't think popular movies are a basis for saying that standard business practice is to deny medical claims since my wife and I, and no one we know, have never been denied a medical claim.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-insure9nov09,0,3065397,full.story?coll=la-home-center
Not popular movies, actual and real shit that goes on in your fucking country. Giving some anecdotical evidence as to how your wife has never been denied a claim doesn't mean there isn't a serious fucking problem with companies denying insured people their money.

In any event, I admit that there are flaws in the US healthcare system. I do not think the solution is government-sponsored universal healthcare. I don't know what the solution is, because, well, we'd have to make it up and I'm not a health insurance of healthcare expert.

What you think has nothing to do with it. THe only workable solution is universal healthcare mandated by the government. (This is not the same as government-sponsored healthcare since I still have to pay money for my insurance. I am only obligated to do it and if I couldn't they would give me the means to pay.)

It is both inevitable and needed. It will save you money and it will save countless of lives.

Finally, I usually don't say this - but can you provide a link or something to where we have less MRI scanners than Switzerland, Japan, Austria and Finland?

I will if I can get my computer to not shut down when opening a pdf. Anyway, it's merely a small tangent to my point.

[Snorri1234]

PS - what free healthcare are you referring to?

He means free healthcare that is free because the receivers literally cannot pay for it and therefore go bankrupt and then the insurance-companies have someone else pay for it.


Or he actually believes that emergency care is free....which further proves he doesn't know anything about the actual situation the US is in.

[b.k. barunt]

Sounds like greekdog's been digesting "Reader's Digest". Do you know who subsidizes (that means "owns") them?


Honibaz

[danfrank]

Sounds like greekdog's been digesting "Reader's Digest". Do you know who subsidizes (that means "owns") them?


Honibaz

Unsure but possibly Merril Lynch...

[Juan_Bottom]

My nose is on my cheek because my insurance refused to pay to move it back into the right place. It was a "cosmetic procedure." Every provider that I've had since then has also refused since it was pre-existing.

That's really, really weird. Because as far as actual date is concerned about 40 to 45 million Americans do not have health insurance.

I don't... I'm not eligable for it.... I work 35-40 hrs a week, but am not an employee of my company. I am considred a temp. Nice way around benifits....

As far as I know, 6 million Americans do not have health insurance...

Why is that even an acceptable number? I don't even know what six million of anything looks like.... imagine looking at 6 million people... that's sooo many.

[mpjh]

My nose is on my cheek because my insurance refused to pay to move it back into the right place. It was a "cosmetic procedure." Every provider that I've had since then has also refused since it was pre-existing.

Hmmm, my insurance company would consider that an improvement. Just think what you can lick now without you nose getting in the way.

[Juan_Bottom]

Yeah, noseless guys get all the chicks cause this is opposite day.
Good thing I have great skills.

[mpjh]

Yeah, just too bad you don't make any sense. (good for cheerleaders I guess)

[b.k. barunt]

My nose is on my cheek because my insurance refused to pay to move it back into the right place. It was a "cosmetic procedure." Every provider that I've had since then has also refused since it was pre-existing.

Hmmm, my insurance company would consider that an improvement. Just think what you can lick now without you nose getting in the way.

Evidently you don't know how to use your nose properly.


Honibaz

[thegreekdog]

Apparently, I got my numbers from Reader's Digest. I definitely cannot remember where I heard 6 million. In any event, I stand corrected.

So, a lot of people in the US don't have health insurance and therefore do not have access to preventative health care. I wish I knew more so I could think about a solution to the problem that does not involve universal government healthcare. Apparently, that's the way to go A couple other things I wanted to address:

I have heard from some sources that healthcare in England and Canada is very low quality. Is this true (for those of you living in England and Canada)? There was a story about a veteran in England who couldn't get his eyes checked out and is now blind (I don't know the entire story). Is that true or is there more to the story? I'm just wondering because while I will readily admit some number of Americans (40 million?) don't have health insurance, do people who have access to healthcare still get the treatment they need (in places like England). I'm not trying to be sarcastic; I'm really asking.

Why is that even an acceptable number? I don't even know what six million of anything looks like.... imagine looking at 6 million people... that's sooo many.

It's not an acceptable number. I'm not sure where I indicated that was an acceptable number. I've said it before and I'll say it again, don't put words in my mouth because I'm a Libertarian. It's ignorant.

I have Federal Blue Cross/Blue Shield hospitalization, which to my knowledge is one of the best money can buy. After the bike wreck that crippled me in 93, i was left with $30,000.00 worth of medical fees over and above what my hospitalization paid. WTF? If i would have stayed in the hospital as long as the doctors wanted me to, that would have tripled. Denying medical claims is not the only method by which our medical megacorporations are raping us. You've been lucky so far, so i guess you can sit back and tell those of us who haven't been to have a coke and a smile and shutthefuckup.

I'm sorry about your situtation honibaz. How did you end up taking care of that bill, if you don't mind me asking?

Not popular movies, actual and real shit that goes on in your fucking country. Giving some anecdotical evidence as to how your wife has never been denied a claim doesn't mean there isn't a serious fucking problem with companies denying insured people their money.

Snorri, what is wrong with you? Why do you insist on inserting foul language in nearly all of your posts? Do you have an anger problem? You seem like a smart guy, but using the foul language makes you look like an idiot. (although, I should stop using anecdotal evidence because it makes me look stupid too).

In conclusion, healthcare is a problem, I admit it, I've admitted it before, I'll admit it again. Let's move on from there and see if we can figure out what the solution is. I just wanted to see if it's better in a country like Canada or England or Finland, etc. that has universal healthcare controlled by the government. Or if we can think of another way to do it without having the government run it.

[captain.crazy]

In conclusion, healthcare is a problem, I admit it, I've admitted it before, I'll admit it again. Let's move on from there and see if we can figure out what the solution is. I just wanted to see if it's better in a country like Canada or England or Finland, etc. that has universal healthcare controlled by the government. Or if we can think of another way to do it without having the government run it.

The first thing that would help would be to convince people to be healthier. If you get emphysema after smoking for 40 years, sorry, self inflicted. You get to die. If you weigh 600 pounds and you have a heart attack while walking to the bathroom, and you haven't even tried to go to a gym and improve your diet, sorry... you get a DNR.

The second thing would be to stop frivolous law suits. This can only be achieved, I think, if proper waivers were put into place for the cutting edge technologies in medicine. If a Doctor makes a mistake, and it causes you some harm, when most of the time, the alternative would have been to forgo treatment at all... you will have to live with the consequences. Judges need to be more protective of the doctors imo.

Finally, get all of these pharmaceuticals our of here. They are poisoning our population. The side effects are more often worse than the disease that they "remedy" and you get really odd and unintended consequences when you start mixing these drugs together.

[thegreekdog]

The first thing that would help would be to convince people to be healthier. If you get emphysema after smoking for 40 years, sorry, self inflicted. You get to die. If you weigh 600 pounds and you have a heart attack while walking to the bathroom, and you haven't even tried to go to a gym and improve your diet, sorry... you get a DNR.

I sort of agree with you, but how can we do this? And what happens if someone is 120 pounds and has a heart attack because heart disease runs in the family?

The second thing would be to stop frivolous law suits. This can only be achieved, I think, if proper waivers were put into place for the cutting edge technologies in medicine. If a Doctor makes a mistake, and it causes you some harm, when most of the time, the alternative would have been to forgo treatment at all... you will have to live with the consequences. Judges need to be more protective of the doctors imo.

This is something that needs to be done regardless of the healthcare situation.

Another idea that sort of floats around is to ease restrictions and regulations on health insurance companies so more of these guys get into the business. This could foster competition - why would I want to sign up with your insurance company when I can go to this other company that has better benefits. Additionally, you could also mandate that language in health insurance agreements are simpler (similar to what they are trying to do, or have done, with mortgage agreements).

[captain.crazy]

The first thing that would help would be to convince people to be healthier. If you get emphysema after smoking for 40 years, sorry, self inflicted. You get to die. If you weigh 600 pounds and you have a heart attack while walking to the bathroom, and you haven't even tried to go to a gym and improve your diet, sorry... you get a DNR.

I sort of agree with you, but how can we do this? And what happens if someone is 120 pounds and has a heart attack because heart disease runs in the family?

I think that lifestyle has to be a factor. If you drink a lot and get liver disease, that is your fault. you know the risks. Insurance doesn't pay for you. You can't get life insurance if you commit suicide, you don't get coverage if you commit arson... same thing. It should be considered fraud.

The second thing would be to stop frivolous law suits. This can only be achieved, I think, if proper waivers were put into place for the cutting edge technologies in medicine. If a Doctor makes a mistake, and it causes you some harm, when most of the time, the alternative would have been to forgo treatment at all... you will have to live with the consequences. Judges need to be more protective of the doctors imo.

This is something that needs to be done regardless of the healthcare situation.

Another idea that sort of floats around is to ease restrictions and regulations on health insurance companies so more of these guys get into the business. This could foster competition - why would I want to sign up with your insurance company when I can go to this other company that has better benefits. Additionally, you could also mandate that language in health insurance agreements are simpler (similar to what they are trying to do, or have done, with mortgage agreements).

This is why our corrupt politicians suckle the big companies. They pay big to keep all of that regulation in place. it allows them to be giants in an industry where there is no small business competition.

[Snorri1234]

Apparently, I got my numbers from Reader's Digest. I definitely cannot remember where I heard 6 million. In any event, I stand corrected.

So, a lot of people in the US don't have health insurance and therefore do not have access to preventative health care. I wish I knew more so I could think about a solution to the problem that does not involve universal government healthcare. Apparently, that's the way to go

There is no solution to the problem that does not involve universal healthcoverage mandated by the government, because the problem is capitalism. Or more correctly, people not being good capitalists.

I have heard from some sources that healthcare in England and Canada is very low quality. Is this true (for those of you living in England and Canada)? There was a story about a veteran in England who couldn't get his eyes checked out and is now blind (I don't know the entire story). Is that true or is there more to the story? I'm just wondering because while I will readily admit some number of Americans (40 million?) don't have health insurance, do people who have access to healthcare still get the treatment they need (in places like England). I'm not trying to be sarcastic; I'm really asking.

Yes they get the treatment they need. There are always small fuckups that happen and no system is perfect. But it's not like the same thing doesn't happen in your country.

Snorri, what is wrong with you? Why do you insist on inserting foul language in nearly all of your posts? Do you have an anger problem? You seem like a smart guy, but using the foul language makes you look like an idiot. (although, I should stop using anecdotal evidence because it makes me look stupid too).

I get angry when people know nothing about a topic but instead of just listening to what others have to say they spout some ignorant bullshit. To assume I get my information from "Popular movies" (and I already know which movie you are referring to) is pretty condenscending.

Also, I get angry because this is such a simple issue and a little reading up on it makes the issue completely clear, yet it is precisely because of people like you who just don't know much about it that the system sucks so hard.

In conclusion, healthcare is a problem, I admit it, I've admitted it before, I'll admit it again. Let's move on from there and see if we can figure out what the solution is.

Yeah but you need to understand the scale of it and the reason as to why it is so fucked up before you can do that. That's why your admitting it isn't really telling, because if you admit so fast you obviously don't understand what the real problems are.

I just wanted to see if it's better in a country like Canada or England or Finland, etc. that has universal healthcare controlled by the government.

It is better. No doubt about that.

Or if we can think of another way to do it without having the government run it.

There is no way.
The moral hazard myth
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Susan+Starr+Sered+and+Rushika+Fernandopulle,+Uninsured+in+America:...-a0151099654