• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

SDP - "Universal healthcare consistent with political" by Tan Lip Hong & Paul Tambyah

Cosmos10

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Joined
Jan 18, 2013
Messages
2,096
Points
48
SDP-Universal healthcare consistent with political freedom Tan LipHong & Paul Tambyah

Universal healthcare consistent with political freedom

Added on 18 September 2013

by Tan Lip Hong & Paul Tambyah

tanliphong.jpg


PaulAnanthT.jpg


Dr Tan Lip Hong and Professor Paul Tambyah are members of the SDP's Healthcare Advisory Panel.


[http://yoursdp.org/publ/perspective..._consistent_with_political_freedom/2-1-0-1369

Mr Albert Lim suggests that universal healthcare will restrict individual freedom ("Why we should say no to universal healthcare" Link: http://www.tremeritus.com/2013/09/15/why-we-should-say-no-to-universal-healthcare/). This is not true. In fact, the ideals of universal healthcare and individual freedom are closely linked to each other.

The SDP is of the view that healthcare is a human right, not a commodity to be purchased and sold. A universal healthcare system ensures that all citizens have equal access to preventative and curative care, and protects them, especially the poor, from the vagaries associated with a profit-driven system. (For an in-depth look at how a profit-making healthcare system endangers the health of the poor, please read SDP's National Healthcare: Caring For All Singaporeans. Link: http://yoursdp.org/_ld/0/5_sdp-national-he.pdf)

SDPHealthcarePlan.png


The SDP has long been a firm defender of the fundamental freedoms of speech, assembly and association. Having a system that ensures that all citizens have a voice by respecting individual freedom protects them from the ravages of a dominant (political) elite.

Both of these positions are perfectly consistent. They are also markedly different from the PAP's which has never respected the rights of ordinary Singaporeans. In addition, from the little that has been announced so far, it seems that the proposed healthcare changes will fall short of a truly universal healthcare system.

A related point that Mr Lim makes is that universal healthcare makes people dependent on the government because the people will have to "give up a portion of wealth, by force of law, in exchange for healthcare."

Such an approach is not undesirable. We do it for other essential services such as defence and public security. Users of the country's healthcare must co-pay for certain services to prevent unnecessary usage and abuse. This will help keep costs down and the system sustainable.

The difference is that under the SDP's plan, the portion of the country's total healthcare expenditure paid by patients will be less than the government's – 30 percent to the government's 70 percent. Currently, it is the other way around.

For example, a family with an income of $2,000-$3,000 presently pay an average of $1,680 per year into Medisave. Under the SDP plan, the same family will pay only $600 per year – about one-third of the current amount.

And when we are hospitalised Medisave has many restrictions with the payout, making the out-of-pocket amounts very high. Under the SDP plan, patients pay only 10 percent of the bill (capped at $2,000 per year), the government takes care of the rest.

Read also: Crucial differences between Govt's and SDP's healthcare plans. Link: http://yoursdp.org/publ/perspective...39_s_and_sdp_39_s_healthcare_plans/2-1-0-1363

The SDP calls for everyone to pay into a pool with the government underwriting the major portion of the budget. It is not unlike car insurance where we share our risks so that in the event of an accident we are able to tap the pool of funds. Otherwise, we face financial ruin. (Of course, the difference is that, unlike car insurance, the SDP's healthcare insurance is not a business and the government pays the main bulk of the expenses.)

With the people not having to face the financial burden of high healthcare costs, they can live a higher quality of life. Coupled with a government that respects the citizens' political rights, Singaporeans can finally live in an advanced society, secure in the knowledge that their basic necessities are taken care of while they fulfil their aspirations. These are fundamental freedoms which Singaporeans deserve.

Dr Tan Lip Hong and Professor Paul Tambyah are members of the SDP's Healthcare Advisory Panel.
 
Last edited:
Re: SDP - "Universal healthcare consistent with political" by Tan Lip Hong & Paul Tam

Crucial differences between Govt's and SDP's healthcare plans

Added on 30 August 2013

by Dr Tan Lip Hong

I refer to the article titled "Double standards when criticising PM’s MediShield Life policy" by Mr Albert Lim published in Temasek Review Emeritus (Link: http://www.tremeritus.com/2013/08/22/double-standards-when-criticising-pms-medishield-life-policy/ ), where he said that bloggers and readers practised double standards when they criticised the Government's healthcare proposals but not the SDP's.

Referring to the concept of national health insurance schemes, Mr Lim commented that:

"It is plainly wrong to force people to buy or pay for health insurance or pay for other people’s healthcare, especially if the other is financially irresponsible, could not be bothered to look after his/her health or, abuses free or heavily subsidised healthcare by seeing the doctor just to "chao geng”, as what is happening in Scandinavian countries".

Mr Lim may note that the purpose of an insurance scheme is not to ‘pay for other people’s healthcare’, but to insure oneself against the uncertainty and risk of having to pay for a catastrophic illness that can easily bankrupt a person.

While it is true that abuses can happen in national health insurance schemes, it is also true that these abuses can be better controlled in a well-designed and well-run scheme, compared to the existing non-nationalised fee-for-service schemes.

Profit-based medical practice, especially when covered by insurance or the government, makes medical care so expensive that it cripples the system. Information asymmetry is a major reason for distortion of this practice. The doctor, knowing that some faceless insurance company will pay his bill, regards as "reasonable" whatever sum he can get away with.

Under an insurance scheme, medical practitioners may increase prices as out-of-pocket payments drop. To counter this, SMA Guideline on fees and prices must be re-issued with vigilant policing. Prices in public hospitals will also be fixed, and thereafter linked to inflation level and median wage.

The ‘Buffet Syndrome’

Patients often demand more detailed medical attention, sometimes including unnecessary tests and medications, if their healthcare is insured or prepaid. These increased patient demands will raise the cost of healthcare.

A few measures will be put in place, under the SDP plan to prevent such abuse:

1. The patient co-pays for the tests and treatments. This will discourage unnecessary demand.

2. Acute self-limiting illnesses (common cold or food-poisoning) where the patient feels physically unwell and tends to demand more treatment will not be compensated to the same extent as chronic non-symptomatic illnesses (hypertension or diabetes) where there is greater risk of non-compliance with treatment or medications.

3. All consultations and prescriptions will be logged into the MOH website to identify any abuse of the system e.g. cough mixture addict who doctor shops for cough mixtures or patients who seek third or fourth opinions for the same condition.

Drug cost

The Government will bid for the more expensive drugs to bring cost down, and provide the drug at bid-price to all healthcare sectors, not just to polyclinics and re-structured hospitals, but to all GPs and private specialists on the scheme. With the bargaining power available, drug cost can be reduced tremendously.

Practicing cost-effective medicine


Aggressive cost-containment measures will be established to control prescribing practices, interventional medicine and overly defensive medical practices.

In order to ensure that physicians don't over-treat or overcharge, evidence-based clinical practice guidelines will be refined and reinforced. Treatment norms should be standardized and formalised in tariff tables which will be worked out by an independent panel of doctors and in consultation with the public.

Additional investment in health education, preventive healthcare and early detection will also reduce overall costs. Screening tests that have been economically evaluated to have a high cost-benefit ratio will be encouraged.

Audit and Compliance


Under the SDP proposal, MOH will conduct annual random audits, including field audits where necessary, of invoices in both the public and private sectors. Action will be taken against practitioners if they repeatedly over treat and overcharge patients.

Referring to the SDP Healthcare Plan premium, Mr Lim also stated:

And the "contribution” would have taken up at least 1/6 of the income of workers earning entry level salary, and at least 30% of the income of blue collared and some part time workers, who usually earn salaries between $800 and $1000. Lastly, there is no opting out, at least for the "contribution” aspect in the SDP’s healthcare plan.

This is inaccurate. Under the SDP plan, families whose incomes fall below $2,000 a month do not have to contribute to the scheme. Families with incomes more than $2,000 per month pay between $50 and $150 per month depending on the income level. The premium under the SDP Healthcare Plan will not exceed 4% of a family’s income.

Moreover, in our plan, Medisave contribution will be abolished, as everyone will be insured comprehensively, negating the need for huge one-time bills.

Although the details have not been worked out, the biggest clue that MediShield Life will not be a truly comprehensive national health insurance scheme is the fact that PM Lee Hsien Loong has announced that 'contributions to Medisave will have to increase'.

Government vs SDP Plan

Graphically, the Government's proposed scheme will look something like this:

govt.png


Will this be the only ‘national insurance scheme’ in the world where the ‘co-payment’ component is 10 times the ‘insurance’ component? A true comprehensive health insurance scheme, like the SDP's, should be the opposite, looking something like this:

sdp.png


Under the SDP plan, patients co-pay 10% of hospital bills and the government pays 90%.

Limitations of MediShield Life


It is also obvious that the Community Health Assistance Scheme (CHAS) will continue to operate where patients can receive subsidies for outpatient medical treatments for chronic and/or acute conditions at participating CHAS clinics. CHAS subsidies are, however, subject to a cap of $480 per year. This sum is totally inadequate for proper treatment of chronic conditions like hyperlipidaemia and diabetes.

This means that MediShield Life will not cover outpatient treatment for such illnesses where patients still have to pay out-of-pocket amounts beyond the $480-subsidy.

Also, allowing Medisave to be used for more outpatient treatment and health screening will not solve our healthcare financing problems, as this would only result in even less money left over in our Medisave account when a catastrophic illness strikes.

Conclusion


A truly comprehensive health insurance scheme would necessitate a larger ‘pooled’ contribution to the national healthcare insurance fund in place of contributions to a large ‘unpooled’ individual savings fund.

Until this imbalance is addressed, there can be no peace of mind for Singaporeans where healthcare costs are concerned.

To read the full paper of The SDP National Healthcare Plan: Caring For All Singaporeans, please click here ---> http://yoursdp.org/_ld/0/5_sdp-national-he.pdf

tanliphong.jpg

Dr Tan Lip Hong is a member of SDP's Healthcare Advisory Panel.
 
Re: SDP - "Universal healthcare consistent with political" by Tan Lip Hong & Paul Tam

Comment written by a reader of SDP's website,

Kelvin Tan (31 August 2013 0:11 AM):

Pictures speak a thousand words. That circle illustration explains it all and I now understand the difference between SDP and the government's plan. Albert Lim is just suaku arguing about why he should pay for other people’s healthcare, health insurance is how it works in USA and other western countries. Mr Lim might well not buy auto insurance, home insurance or personal accident insurance as he may then be thinking he is paying for other people's car accident, home break-in/fire or someone involved in a critical accident.
 
Re: SDP - "Universal healthcare consistent with political" by Tan Lip Hong & Paul Tam

SDP wants the defence of the country reduce to a platoon or section-sized army
 
Re: SDP - "Universal healthcare consistent with political" by Tan Lip Hong & Paul Tam

SDP's Response to PM Lee's National Day Rally Speech 2013

Secretary-General Chee Soon Juan delivers the SDP's video response to PM Lee Hsien Loong's National Day Rally speech.

Dr Chee points out that the announced changes do not tackle the root cause of our people's problems.

[video=youtube;ZA_dyJmBTQU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZA_dyJmBTQU&feature=c4-overview&list=UU_6ZBBzLo-jVQKxlcB8uj_g[/video]
 
Re: SDP - "Universal healthcare consistent with political" by Tan Lip Hong & Paul Tam

SDP wants the defence of the country reduce to a platoon or section-sized army

Hi bro. steffychun, I would appreciate it very much if you could kindly read the articles/posts in this thread before giving your comments. The topic of this thread is about the healthcare situation in Singapore, not about the defence situation in Singapore. And whatever you say about the SDP, please substantiate it with proof and evidence. Please do not spread half-truths. Free speech is not the same as irresponsible speech. Thanks :)
 
Re: SDP - "Universal healthcare consistent with political" by Tan Lip Hong & Paul Tam

Hi bro. steffychun, I would appreciate it very much if you could kindly read the articles/posts in this thread before giving your comments. The topic of this thread is about the healthcare situation in Singapore, not about the defence situation in Singapore. And whatever you say about the SDP, please substantiate it with proof and evidence. Please do not spread half-truths. Free speech is not the same as irresponsible speech. Thanks :)

do not insult me. Chee wants to cut military cost all the way down to pay for his stupid healthcare plan
 
Re: SDP - "Universal healthcare consistent with political" by Tan Lip Hong & Paul Tam

do not insult me. Chee wants to cut military cost all the way down to pay for his stupid healthcare plan

I have no intention to insult you. It would be a waste of my time. Thanks. :)
 
Re: SDP - "Universal healthcare consistent with political" by Tan Lip Hong & Paul Tam

I sincerely cannot understand why the WP supporters cannot leave me alone. For what reasons do I deserve to receive an infraction from you?

There are four long WP threads in this SBF political forum. Ask yourself, have I ever gone over to the WP threads and create havoc there?

--------------------
Dear Cosmos10,

You have received an infraction at Sam's Alfresco Coffee - The most Offensive and Politically Incorrect Forum ever!.

Reason: Off topic
-------

-------

This infraction is worth 2 point(s) and may result in restricted access until it expires. Serious infractions will never expire.

Original Post:
http://www.sammyboy.com/showthread.php?p=1651920
Quote Originally Posted by steffychun View Post
SDP wants the defence of the country reduce to a platoon or section-sized army
Hi bro. steffychun, I would appreciate it very much if you could kindly read the articles/posts in this thread before giving your comments. The topic of this thread is about the healthcare situation in Singapore, not about the defence situation in Singapore. And whatever you say about the SDP, please substantiate it with proof and evidence. Please do not spread half-truths. Free speech is not the same as irresponsible speech. Thanks
All the best,
Sam's Alfresco Coffee - The most Offensive and Politically Incorrect Forum ever!
 
Re: SDP - "Universal healthcare consistent with political" by Tan Lip Hong & Paul Tam

Dear brother boss Leongsam, I would appreciate it very much if you could look into this infraction matter for me. Thank you very much. :)
 
Re: SDP - "Universal healthcare consistent with political" by Tan Lip Hong & Paul Tam

Dear brother boss Leongsam, I would appreciate it very much if you could look into this infraction matter for me. Thank you very much. :)


Someone else already reversed the infraction. If another chap infracts you without good cause, I would also reverse it.
 
Re: SDP - "Universal healthcare consistent with political" by Tan Lip Hong & Paul Tam

It is heartening to see opposition parties taking a more proactive stance nowadays. I agree that it is time for us to change our policies. But should we really introduce a whole new radical system? For e.g., the change in healthcare system will require the government to increase it expenditure on healthcare from 30% to 70%. That is a huge increase. The pie is only so big, if we cut a bigger portion for healthcare, other areas may get compromised. Just my 5 cents worth. :)
 
Re: SDP - "Universal healthcare consistent with political" by Tan Lip Hong & Paul Tam

It is heartening to see opposition parties taking a more proactive stance nowadays. I agree that it is time for us to change our policies. But should we really introduce a whole new radical system? For e.g., the change in healthcare system will require the government to increase it expenditure on healthcare from 30% to 70%. That is a huge increase. The pie is only so big, if we cut a bigger portion for healthcare, other areas may get compromised. Just my 5 cents worth. :)

Hi bro underMIND, welcome to the SBF forum
says-hi-smiley-emoticon.gif


This SBF forum is not called the "most Offensive forum" for nothing, you know that, right? ;):) If you need any help, like how to post pictures etc. let me know and I can try to help. When I was new to the SBF, I went to the pictures/videos folder, and several helpful SBF brothers like Sinkie, Conqueror and po2wq were very patient to teach and guide me there.

I like your question. The truth is our present government is spending very very little of our taxpayers money on healthcare. Recently, Leong Sze Hian and Paul Tambyah spoke at a public forum and they presented some solid numbers to prove that. I am busy today. As soon as I have more time, I will find the links and videos and post them here for your reference.

Meanwhile, here is to your "happy posting time in SBF"
smileys-cheers-222480.gif
 
Last edited:
Re: SDP - "Universal healthcare consistent with political" by Tan Lip Hong & Paul Tam

Someone else already reversed the infraction. If another chap infracts you without good cause, I would also reverse it.

Hi bro TFBH, yes, someone reversed the infraction. Thank you for your concern. :)
 
Re: SDP - "Universal healthcare consistent with political" by Tan Lip Hong & Paul Tam

do not insult me. Chee wants to cut military cost all the way down to pay for his stupid healthcare plan

I am sure you are right! :D
 
Re: SDP - "Universal healthcare consistent with political" by Tan Lip Hong & Paul Tam

Hi bro underMIND, welcome to the SBF forum
says-hi-smiley-emoticon.gif


This SBF forum is not called the "most Offensive forum" for nothing, you know that, right? ;):) If you need any help, like how to post pictures etc. let me know and I can try to help. When I was new to the SBF, I went to the pictures/videos folder, and several helpful SBF brothers like Sinkie, Conqueror and po2wq were very patient to teach and guide me there.

I like your question. The truth is our present government is spending very very little of our taxpayers money on healthcare. Recently, Leong Sze Hian and Paul Tambyah spoke at a public forum and they presented some solid numbers to prove that. I am busy today. As soon as I have more time, I will find the links and videos and post them here for your reference.

Meanwhile, here is to your "happy posting time in SBF"
smileys-cheers-222480.gif

Hi bro Cosmos10!
I know this is the "most offensive forum". :) i like this thread as this is something constructive for us to work on. I believe healthcare is important for Singaporeans and the costs of healthcare is ridiculously high. Many people wont be able to afford it. The government is really too detached from commoners so they do not feel our PAIN! LAstly, Thanks for your recommendation. :)
 
Back
Top