Why are Americans scared of Health Reform?

[Rossdobby]

One of the most important issue's for Americans in the past few years has been healthcare. Up to 15,000 Americans lose their Health coverage everyday provided by there private insurer or Employer. Leaving a large number of Americans with out health coverage and in this economy the number is only getting larger. From what I have seen and read most Americans are against A universal healthcare my question is why?

Im a Canadian citizen where ever I am no matter what has happened to me I can walk into any hospital in this country tell them my name (not my insurance provider) and I get treatment even if your a non citizen you still get treated just like everyone else. Lets say I goto The USA I get sick or injured and I have no health coverage there. Doesnt matter The canadian government will pay my bill and if its a long term issue I go back to Canada for Treatment. Now all the Americans Must think I pay alot for this but I don't I don't pay anything for healthcare not one cent. Sure I get taxed 7% more but Its worth it to have health coverage whereever I go. Waiting times are not that bad and if your not that hurt you really dont mind waiting.

So here is my question to there American members of this board. Why are so many of you scared by health reform it works great in Canada there government is almost not involved here they foot the bill other then that its all doctors in charge.

Remember Before nixon you had Universal Health care I never heard anything bad about that.

I think the richest country in the world can shell out 200 billion a year for healthcare. (Canada pays aprrox. 20 billion)

[Hollis]

I have watched several CBC's productions on the health care in Canada. No system is perfect. Problem with health care, is politics, self serving needs of some, the entitlement mentality, and some other issue. Canada has those issues too but addressed them differently in the states.

I think most people are afraid of change. One problem in the states, is one person has to work harder to pay for some one elses health insurance who doesn't feel like working. Other problem is health care on special needs, should a committee decide if you are worth for treatment?

Example some Canadians denied treatment (according to the CBC) traveled to the US and paid out of their own pockets for the treatment.


Then you have the health care industry and the Insurance companies and their self interests.

I don't see any country with a Ideal health care system. Socialize medicine is not necessary the best choice for all people same with the system in the states.

BTW, I don't think the US is the richest country in the world.

[Universal_Soldier]

BTW, I don't think the US is the richest country in the world.

which country is it?

[Derbedeu]

Because the insurance and pharmaceutical companies will stand to lose billions of dollars of profits. I'm all for a single-payer system, and contrary to what others might say, I do believe that it would work and also cut down on the ridiculous cost of healthcare here in the US. Also as a matter of principle, healthcare deals with the well-being of people, and thus to me is as much of a right as getting an education is. Just my opinion. Others obviously don't agree.

HOLLiS hit it on the head though. People are scared of change, and it doesn't help that there are interest groups who have a large stake in this. As a result they're not going to go down without a fight. Also, as sad as it is to say, out legislature all too often waters-down bills with numerous addendum's (some not even within the original scope of the bill), and as a result you get some half-assed compromise that satisfies nobody and is as ineffective as it gets. Yet if there's no compromise, the bill gets shot down immediately. Like any other country, doesn't matter what the experts say, politics eventually ruins everything.

[tercio67]

which country is it?

If adjusted for size and population I think Luxemburg would qualify for that.

[RamQan]

which country is it?

1 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/47/Flag_of_Liechtenstein.svg/22px-Flag_of_Liechtenstein.svg.png Liechtenstein (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liechtenstein) 145,734 2007 2 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/65/Flag_of_Qatar.svg/22px-Flag_of_Qatar.svg.png Qatar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar) 141,733 2008 est. 3 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/da/Flag_of_Luxembourg.svg/22px-Flag_of_Luxembourg.svg.png Luxembourg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxembourg) 118,538 2008 est. 4 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d9/Flag_of_Norway.svg/22px-Flag_of_Norway.svg.png Norway (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway) 103,586 2008 est. 5 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/45/Flag_of_Ireland.svg/22px-Flag_of_Ireland.svg.png Ireland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Ireland) 68,574 2008 est. 6 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9c/Flag_of_Denmark.svg/22px-Flag_of_Denmark.svg.png Denmark (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denmark) 67,387 2008 est. 7 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f3/Flag_of_Switzerland.svg/20px-Flag_of_Switzerland.svg.png Switzerland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland) 64,974 2008 est. 8 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ce/Flag_of_Iceland.svg/22px-Flag_of_Iceland.svg.png Iceland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceland) 62,490 2008 est. 9 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/Flag_of_Kuwait.svg/22px-Flag_of_Kuwait.svg.png Kuwait (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuwait) 61,499 2008 est. 10 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Flag_of_the_United_Arab_Emirates.svg/22px-Flag_of_the_United_Arab_Emirates.svg.png United Arab Emirates (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Arab_Emirates) 58,424 2008 est. 11 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4c/Flag_of_Sweden.svg/22px-Flag_of_Sweden.svg.png Sweden (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden) 56,703 2008 est. — http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1c/Flag_of_Jersey.svg/22px-Flag_of_Jersey.svg.png Jersey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jersey) 56,231 2005 est. 12 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg/22px-Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg.png Netherlands (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands) 54,640 2008 est. 13 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Flag_of_Finland.svg/22px-Flag_of_Finland.svg.png Finland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finland) 53,616 2008 est. 14 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/41/Flag_of_Austria.svg/22px-Flag_of_Austria.svg.png Austria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austria) 52,696 2008 est. 15 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b9/Flag_of_Australia.svg/22px-Flag_of_Australia.svg.png Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia) 50,887 2008 est. 16 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/92/Flag_of_Belgium_%28civil%29.svg/22px-Flag_of_Belgium_%28civil%29.svg.png Belgium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgium) 47,617 2008 17 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a4/Flag_of_the_United_States.svg/22px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States)
Source: CIA World Factbook (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World_Factbook)

USA is nr. 17, which is good considering they are in debt and have spent a lot of money on war.

[Hollis]

which country is it?


There was a thread on this a while back, Depends on what you mean rich, per capita, aver income, GP etc. Try Google. If memory is right, the US was down the list a bit.


OPPS A minute late, See the post above................

[Policía Loco]

Personally, I pay about $20 a year for an annual checkup. My employer pays the rest. No additional taxes. I get treatment when I want and by whoever I want. It also provides for foreign travel.

[Silent Reader]

Because the insurance and pharmaceutical companies will stand to lose billions of dollars of profits.


well the pharmaceutical companies are probably one of your biggest problems... the US is afaik the only country in the world where drug prices are not regulated... and nobody - not even the president of change will dare to oppose the pharmaceutical industry in this matter.

the problem here is that many companies have to keep low prices anywhere else and get most of their profits in the US because of the missing regulation... so there is lots of money at stake for them

we've had an exchange associate professor here from the US.. and she had to get some medicine at a pharmacy... and although she knew that this was cheaper over here she still was surprised that she just had to pay €6 or something instead of €60 or whatever she was expecting...

[SOG]

1. Because our government is the biggest cluster@&^% in the world.
2. Our politicians would let special interest in which would burden a government health care system with bureaucracy, misfunding and a host of special interest mangement.
3. We can't even run medicare or social security, why add another multi-billion government funded soon to fail project to the list? How about we fix what we @&^% before we get somebody else pregnant?
4. So for from the "sparse" details of Obama and company, there is no solid foundation to officially achieve long term what they are talking about. The sky is made of cherry pie. Feel good liberalism at its best.
5. We, the citizens are already heavily taxed. Me as a citizen cannot take any more @&^%ing taxes especially in California. Anyone who wants to argue that, you can have my job and I'll take yours. Put up, or shut the @&^% up. Unless everyone under a certain income bracket would just get free medical care! That would rock! And I am sure those with money that are just getting by would love to pay for Joe Retard and his medical expenses!
6. Our government is in enough debt, inner fighting and over-spending. Why make it worse? If a dam has 30 leaks to you hit it with a sledge hammer to stop it from leaking? Do you think our government will magically change its proven record and just run this wonderful healthcare system beautifully and in utter harmony? FACE @&^% REALITY. Just face it. Even in instances where the Democrats have the entire run of a senate or house or state they @&^% it up just like the Republicans. That is reality.
7. You want to fund universal healthcare? How about you take the money Bush and Obama gave to the financial sector which will end up in the trillions. I thought Bush was a real anal their for doing that. Obama gets in, first thing he does is fully back it and push it through. I am so glad we voted for CHANGE.
8. Our government has trouble maintaining a budget on every single front. Would you give a crack addict your life savings to trustedly invest? Why would you trust or give our government anything when they have a horribly negative track record of long term failing?
9. The US is arguably the largest melting pot of a country in the world, total daily chaos running a razors edge in all large cities. To clarify, our country IS NOT your country. What works good for one, does not work good for another. Your country has a different kind of personality. America's is very different. It's like wondering why Christianity or Islam doesn't work for everybody. Some countries need democracy. Others need socialism or communism. Different strokes for different folks.
10. Obama is simply pushing icing on the cake. As a modern liberal he he reaches out to the poor and despondent, grabs all the sad and bad stories he can and plays on the base emotions of the public to help these poor poor people. Look at welfare. Maybe 5% of the people it helps actually need it. The system is rife with abuse, lack of oversight and once people get on it, it is hard to forcefully remove them. Again, a huge financial system run on feel good dogma and despondent emotions will crash.

We already have a large health care system in place. Why not pass better regulation laws so the doctors can operate more freely with less threat of lawsuit, force the medicine producers to lower prices on medicine across the board and help bring about more local competition so prices start to drop and are affordable for all.

And for the Obama Admin, how about doing something useful like passing regulation laws against the row after row after row of fast food disease joints in poor neighborhoods? How about distributing healthy foods or government assisted funding for anyone who purchases them? how about higher taxes on snacks and soda? What about going after fast food, candy, snacks and soda which cause more long term harm and cost to the healthcare system than smoking ever will? How about actually addressing the problem at its very base in a simple manner?

No offense but you are totally outside, looking in.

Next topic: Why don't we just go dancing in with no guns and totally save the whole of Africa with condoms and rice and western education? :roll:

[XShipRider]

No one is afraid of reform. Most don't want a government takeover or government managed system.

Frankly, the government doesn't do well when it comes to holding the line on costs. But if anyone thinks this won't balloon out of control in the first 5 years of operation -- have your Congressional rep's vote for it.

[West Texican]

I'm an American and I'm not scared of health reform. I'm also not scared of spiders or snakes or the dark either. Seriously, I don't know of anyone who is "scared" of health reform and I don't really understand why someone from another country would think that we are scared of such things. Maybe they watch to much TV?

[Mastermind]

Americans don't like the idea of a nationalized health care system for two reasons.

First and foremost, Americans really dislike anything that is socialist. From Social Security to Welfare, these kinds of things rankle the American conscience.

Second, they completely distrust government to do anything right except national defense and (perhaps) the interstate transportation systems).

From the post office to collecting taxes to all the little phony political wars (War on Drugs, War on Crime, War on Terrorism, War on Poverty, War on XXX) the government does nothing but screw it up, inflate the cost of government and expand the power of government over the people. We envision the massive Federal bureaucracy and it's infinitely complex machinery getting it's talons between us and our doctors....that alone is a nightmare of vision.

We foresee (and I think correctly) that the petty tyrants in the disguise of Congresspersons and Senators will try to extend their personal agendas into the health care system...excess taxes on anything that can possibly be conceived to harm a persons health, such as soda pop to ice cream to hamburgers to jet skis and roller blades will be annually added the list of banned things to control our lives. Outright banning of certain products and lifestyles will be on the political agenda as health statistics begin to show where "savings" can come from.

We also don't trust our government to deny health care to certain groups that may deemed "cost ineffective" as some moronic politicians have already espoused...such as the elderly...how long before government sponsored euthanasia is allowed in the name of saving costs? And don't laugh...if they can sponsor the murder of babies in the womb, they can sponsor the murder of elderly persons who need expensive treatments to extend their lives only a few years longer.

And, one of my personal sticking points (along with a great many) is the fact that already the liberals have stated they will make this massive tax payer burden available to non-citizens on an equal basis...this is intolerable to me and a deal breaker in the extreme.

The tax burden to pay for socialized medical care is also already being grossly misaligned, with the socialistic Democrats saying they will put the cost burden primarily on the million-dollar plus citizens. This, in my firm estimation, will drive the wealthy to do all they can to further avoid incomes...the only real way to avoid such confiscatory and unfair taxes (take a look at what happened to the incomes of the wealthy class as Britain did this same thing). This will dramatically increase unemployment, dampen entrepreneurial spirit and set classes apart as never before in this country.

Another point; my doctor and my wife’s doctor have both stated they will retire before they work for the government or be told by the government bureaucrat how and who they treat. In my world, that’s 100% of interviewees…I have to wonder how many others are out there who will go elsewhere to ply their art of medicine?

Where do the provision for "Elective Surgeries" rest within such a cost conscious and price limited system? What a bout the kids born with disfigured faces and limbs or people who need extensive reforming surgeries after accidents...not medically necessary, but certainly necessary! What about breast augmentations, ***** enlargements and *** changes...all perfectly solicited by liberals...will those be given precedent over liver transplants for alcoholics and drug addicts...or will heart transplants for a teens who get a deadly virus that kills the heart lining be put secondary to that to avoid political pressure from gay groups claiming discrimination?

What will happen to the “underground” medical services that will spring up? Will the government ban them or allow them grudgingly? If Canadians are flocking here at their own personal expense for medical treatment on time critical diseases, such as tumors and heart disease rather than wait the ungodly waits for treatment as we have heard, then where will Americans go when our own waiting lines exceed the tolerable time-to-life line? Asia? Mexico?

Of course, here is one last intolerable gnaw on us about the Nationalized/Socialized/Obama Care…Congress and Senate people have all said they would not give up their plush government paid health care systems in favor of their little medical monster legislations…no…they are above all that petty “for the people” stuff. One has to wonder, then…”Why?” If it is so damn good, why are they avoiding it?

That’s my answer in a nutshell, naming just a few of the primary points why Americans are resisting this Frankenstein Legislation for Socialized Medicine in America.

[TheBelgian]

The US if obviously free to choose its own healthcare system, but what I can't stand is how right-wing media outlets (Fox News in particular) blatantly missrepresent what a state run healthcare looks like. I especially can't stand the "Socialized healthcare means you have to wait for a bureaucrat to decide which doctor you can go see" etc etc. I've been dealing with the Belgian gov't health service a lot over the past few years, for matters ranging from a dislocated shoulder, to tinnitus to my father's leukemia, which dragged on for 14 months. I've never had to talk to a bureaucrat or do anything else vis a vis the government except for send me receipts for reinbursement. I see what doctor I like, for whichever ailment I might suffer from, and the lionshare is reimbursed. No bureaucrats, no Ministery of Health red tape.

There are tons of things I hate about Belgium, but we're really lucky to have such a great healthcare system.

[Mastermind]

My Belgian friend, your health care system is not what kind of system our petty tyrants in Washington have in store for us...not even close!

[Eye]

the US is afaik the only country in the world where drug prices are not regulated...
"Regulated prices" mean expensive and shortage - more or less.

[Mackie]

If this health care reform is so profitable for Politicians I wonder about the opposition in the congress?
I believe that the current system still has the problem everybody fears. A ****ing lobby and politicians now fighting for them.
The arguments against this reform could be used against the defence sector 1:1.
Why should social security don't create more jobs than the defence sector?
The Pfizer HQ is still in NewYork and not in Dubai f.e.

[LineDoggie]

Lawyers


as Long as Lawyers are allowed to rack up Millions in profit from Malpractice suits, the cost is always going to explode upwards.

[California Joe]

We have decent medical insurance through the DoD....At my wife's insistance, I finally went to see a doctor last year for a physical after having blown it off for about 5 years. She made the appointment in September, they got me in in December. Not life threatening or anything. I filled out a family medical history, discussed former health issues with the Dr., had blood taken etc... got rectally invaded, he told me I was fine. It was supposed to be covered 100% by insurance as a "wellness visit"...I got a bill for 450.00. Seems the discussion I had with the Doc was entered into the system with various "diagnostic codes" that flagged my insurance as not being covered under my normal yearly checkup. I've been fighting with them for almost a year. What the f*ck good is a diagnosis that doesn't need treatment or a referral from the Dr? It's like charging me extra for chatting with him. I got so pissed off I called them up at one point and told them if I wanted to pay 400 bucks to have somebody stick a finger up my ass I'd go up to St. Catherine street and find a 22 year old blonde with big **** to do it for me...

I took my daughter in for a shot. She's naturally very thin. She eats like a horse and is an athlete. The Dr. gave her a shot and then observed on paper that my daughter is "underweight". I got a bill for 90.00 for a diagnosis of my daughter being "underweight". WTF? I simply brought her in for a shot...I was never consulted by the Doctor, my daughter is not bulemic or anorexic, she is perfectly healthy, and yet because of a notation I'm expected to pay extra? I don't think so...

[Mackie]

"Regulated prices" mean expensive and shortage - more or less.
Not really. If your national department only allows the use of an cheaper replica have the same effect.
Pharma industry is too powerful to offer you a efficient system.

[c62]

SOG & Mastermind covered way better than I ever could(nice job guys). To expand a little.

Public Housing:
Goal: To provide cheap housing to those that can't afford it at taxpayer expense.
Result: Sending in SWAT teams on a regular basis to clear out the drugs, gangs, and prostitutes. I'm not sure what the costs are, but I'm quite confident they've gone up, not down. And all we have to show for it is another generation of couch potatoes living off the government tit.

Public Retirement (aka Social Security)
Goal: To provide retirement for all the people
Result: This system will collapse(it's really a ponzi scheme), when, around 2020(the exact data isn't important) or something like that? Costs have skyrocketed, and services(and payments) are being cut.

Public Education
Goal: To provide education opportunities for all
Result: Costs(such as college tuition) ha ve skyrocketed and the standards have fallen apart. We spend more per student/per year than any other industrialized nation on earth yet....How many US students can't find Mexico on the map?

Public Health care(Medicare & Medicaid)
Goal: To provide health care to the poor and elderly
Result: Cost explosion and service are far below what would be considered adequate. Why are there so many "supplamental" insurance programs out there? To date Congress has never been able to rein in spending or accurately forecast costs of this program


Now looking back at these examples, does any realistically think this "National Health Care System" is going to be any different. It looks good on paper, but reality is a different story. Costs(taxes) will explode or medical care will be rationed.

[c62]

I got a bill for 450.00. Seems the discussion I had with the Doc was entered into the system with various "diagnostic codes" that flagged my insurance as not being covered under my normal yearly checkup. I've been fighting with them for almost a year. Be glad you're fighting with an insurance company and not a gov't bureaucrat.

[Soldat_Américain]

I think there needs to be reform...we don't necessarily need the government paying the bill, however there needs to be more competition as well as more regulation as well as tort reform for malpractice. I am not affected as being a service member I have TRICARE, my mother is lucky with her employer, a university and they get a pretty good deal.

A system I don't like is Kaiser...I don't want to have to do everything at one of their freakin' bases...it's literally a base.

[vinny_121_ND]

Im a Canadian citizen where ever I am no matter what has happened to me I can walk into any hospital in this country tell them my name (not my insurance provider) and I get treatment even if your a non citizen you still get treated just like everyone else. Lets say I goto The USA I get sick or injured and I have no health coverage there. Doesnt matter The canadian government will pay my bill and if its a long term issue I go back to Canada for Treatment. Now all the Americans Must think I pay alot for this but I don't I don't pay anything for healthcare not one cent. Sure I get taxed 7% more but Its worth it to have health coverage whereever I go. Waiting times are not that bad and if your not that hurt you really dont mind waiting.

...

I think the richest country in the world can shell out 200 billion a year for healthcare. (Canada pays aprrox. 20 billion)

Although we are grateful to have a universal healthcare system, but don't forget we have a massive shortage of doctors. The wait time to see a physician could be weeks to months. The number of graduating MD's is not enough to counter the turnover rate of doctors retiring here. Outside the canadian medical association in ottawa has this big sign saying "Help Wanted: More Doctors' www.moredoctors.ca

Now, Canadians are now turning towards naturopathic doctors to help them with their medical issues, but at the same time paying out of pocket for it.

[Rossdobby]

Looking back scared should not have been the title but its stills serves for my point. Yes I am an outsider looking in but I am also American I have alot of family in The states and they all seem to be against health reform but I can understand why there all financially set.

Here is a good point my friend who has lympphoma gets 1 needle every week that costs $2718.00. How much does he pay? Nothing. Why is this? Because in Canada we are socialist and yes it does have a burden on us sometimes. But not a single Canadian goes with out healthcare that is a basic human right defined by the UN. Now In America where one of the most famous slogans for the country is every man is created equal. If this is true how can your Healthcare system refuse people who need to be treated roughly 40 million Americans.

In Canada our healthcare is run by the Province with health boards in many different regions a de-centralized form of Universal Healthcare will not only benefit the health and well being of many it will keep the Federal Gov't from screwing anything up. While reducing costs over the whole system.

I think another worry is how much would this effect the economy. While yes a whole industry would see a huge loss in profit how many americans wouldn't have to gointo debt to get treatment. One of this biggest problems facing the American financial sector is bankruptcies doesnt this count for 60% of those in the states (I could be wrong)

And yes America should put a tax on anything deemed hazardous to your health it only has to be like 5% that would easily cover healthcare costs. For Americans against tax you guys can get real I pay more tax than any american making the same amount not only that Anything I buy I get taxed on so you can't bitch about it.

Hypothetical situation smoking kills so if you put a $3 increase on smokes youw ould not only reduce the amount of smokers but lets say there is 70 million american smokers they buy a pack a day so.

70 million x $3 = 210 million a day
Now lets say 210 million x 365 = 76.6 billion

There more the half your of your health bill is covered with out even spending any money.

Not to be mean but America Needs a Canadian to lead them.

[click]

We wouldnt need health care if medicine wasnt so farking expensive.

[Rakki]

An essential flaw of a socialized health system in my opinion is that...

poor people probably have the same or higher incidence of expensive-to-treat expensive diseases compared to rich people.

And there's a lot more poor people.

[subotax]

One of the problems is that a health system is seen as a "Cost" when it should be seen as an "investment" in the productivity of the people it treats, the more productive a country, the more wealthy it becomes.

Having citizens who can't be healthy is more expensive in the longterm, as they aren't productive. You invest in the health of everyone, to make the most people apt at being more productive (be it in which ever field they choose, that is obviously up to them to choose).

In the end, that should be the objective of any health system, to keep as many of it's citizens as healthy as possible.

[vinny_121_ND]

...
Having citizens who can't be healthy is more expensive in the longterm, as they aren't productive. You invest in the health of everyone, to make the most people apt at being more productive (be it in which ever field they choose, that is obviously up to them to choose).

In the end, that should be the objective of any health system, to keep as many of it's citizens as healthy as possible.

What you are saying is ideal, but not how it works in reality. Our conventional healthcare system isn't designed to deal with chronic problems like the ones I list below. It's there to help acute, life threatening problems, not chronic problems that suck the life out of people which manifest into bigger problems that cause disease.



chronic illnesses

chronic fatigue
allergies and environmental illnesses
arthritis, fibromyalgia
digestion, constipation, irritable bowel syndrome
eczema, acne and other skin problems
cystitis, prostate concerns, impotence





acute conditions

colds and flus
ear and throat infections
headaches and migraines
intestinal upset


women’s concerns

menopause
PMS and menstrual disorders
fibrocystic breast disease
enhancing health during pregnancy
infertility
endometriosis, uterine fibroids





other

mental or emotional stress
anxiety, depression
insomnia
attention deficit disorder
hyperactivity

[Zoomie]

Looking back scared should not have been the title but its stills serves for my point. Yes I am an outsider looking in but I am also American I have alot of family in The states and they all seem to be against health reform but I can understand why there all financially set.
So, what are you then? You say you're an American, but here, you clearly talk as if you're not one:


Now In America where one of the most famous slogans for the country is every man is created equal. If this is true how can your Healthcare system refuse people who need to be treated roughly 40 million Americans.
Oh wait, you're Canadian:


In Canada our healthcare is run by the Province with health boards in many different regions a de-centralized form of Universal Healthcare will not only benefit the health and well being of many it will keep the Federal Gov't from screwing anything up. While reducing costs over the whole system.
Quit being a poser.



And yes America should put a tax on anything deemed hazardous to your health it only has to be like 5% that would easily cover healthcare costs. For Americans against tax you guys can get real I pay more tax than any american making the same amount not only that Anything I buy I get taxed on so you can't bitch about it.
So, who decides what's "Hazardous"? Hell, living, driving to work, and walking for exercise all can be deemed as being hazardous to one's health. It's our country, and we have something called freedom of speech, so we can bitch about anything we want.


Not to be mean but America Needs a Canadian to lead them.
Canada does not equal America, you need to realize that. We're three times the size of Canada in population, and that means a whole heck of a lot more bureaucracy and infrastructure that what Canada has.

[Fat Lazy American]

It's very simple:

Most Americans like their health coverage. Period. Many, of course, don't have health coverage or don't like theirs. But they're the minority.

Now, do most Americans believe more people should have access to health care? Yes.

Do they understand that our current health care system is a drag on our economy? Sure.

But any reform is a potential threat to THEIR health care. And people are afraid of that. And it's not an entirely unreasonable fear.

[sepheronx]

I find it funny that Americans tell me what Canadians are doing. If you ask any joe blow off the street if they want a socialized or private health care system, they would say socialized. Why? Because they are not paying crap loads for it.

I find it funny that you people will believe whatever you hear or see on TV/Radio. I have had occasions where I had to go to the hospital, as well as my friend who had a blood clot. And guess what our bill was? Nothing. So beat that (I was in the hospital for 1 day, and my friend in for 3 days).

As for these people going over the boarder to get medical aid, it is because they are impatient and have more money then brains (yes, we have those people as well), and they want aid not in 20 mins, but now, and they want private doctors looking after them, because they think they will have special treatment and alike.

[Zoomie]

I find it funny that Americans tell me what Canadians are doing. If you ask any joe blow off the street if they want a socialized or private health care system, they would say socialized. Why? Because they are not paying crap loads for it.


And guess what our bill was? Nothing. So beat that.
So, where does all the money for health care come from, if your bill was truly nothing?

[sepheronx]

So, where does all the money for health care come from, if your bill was truly nothing?

Tax payers.

In Alberta, the province pays for the Alberta health care. Taxes where raised a small amount (barely even seen by my last paychecks before, when I had to pay 30$ a month for health care), and now I get regular check ups.

In BC and Ontario (If Ontario even does this anymore), it was 30$ a month for health care, and it would cover mostly everything excluding some prescriptions (which would otherwise cost me 10$ or less (inhalers)), and ambulance.

Edit: As our health care system is not perfect, it definitely beats paying a 10,000$ bill after getting rushed to a hospital and having to stay a night (and I am low balling it).

[AOCBravo2004]

The US if obviously free to choose its own healthcare system, but what I can't stand is how right-wing media outlets (Fox News in particular) blatantly missrepresent what a state run healthcare looks like. I especially can't stand the "Socialized healthcare means you have to wait for a bureaucrat to decide which doctor you can go see" etc etc. I've been dealing with the Belgian gov't health service a lot over the past few years, for matters ranging from a dislocated shoulder, to tinnitus to my father's leukemia, which dragged on for 14 months. I've never had to talk to a bureaucrat or do anything else vis a vis the government except for send me receipts for reinbursement. I see what doctor I like, for whichever ailment I might suffer from, and the lionshare is reimbursed. No bureaucrats, no Ministery of Health red tape.

There are tons of things I hate about Belgium, but we're really lucky to have such a great healthcare system.

I have a PPO through work that I pay $30 a month for. I absolutely love it, I go to any doctor I want at any time that I want, and I have unlimited coverage. I pay ZERO out of pocket whenever I go to the doctor. I love this plan, and hope to never lose it! It beats anything that the Federal Government will attempt.

[WKD]

I have a PPO through work that I pay $30 a month for. I absolutely love it, I go to any doctor I want at any time that I want, and I have unlimited coverage. I pay ZERO out of pocket whenever I go to the doctor. I love this plan, and hope to never lose it! It beats anything that the Federal Government will attempt.

So what happens if you lose your job?

[Rossdobby]

Im a Dual citizen Canadian-American But I was obviously raised in Canada. Also you said We're three times the size of Canada in population, and that means a whole heck of a lot more bureaucracy and infrastructure that what Canada has. Now last time I checked the population if Canada was 30 million that would make the population of the United States 90 million. So is that you being really stupid and not even knowing your own countries population or is it ignorance and not knowing much about the outside world from America?

I was placing the comparison of our countries in population correctly we pay around 20 billion for health care for a population of 30 million. Now America's population which is ten times larger then that of Canada being 330 million or so that would make the cost for America 250 billion. Thats not that much considering you spent 10 billion a month in iraq blowing **** up. your defence budget is over 500 billion for what whos is even close to having your military capabilities? no one.

How much money do you waste on the DEA prohibition doesnt work it never did its useless legalize it tax it.

You spend how many billions of dollars do you spend busting potheads and incarcerating them? There much more productive selling drugs moving money to help with the recession.

But this issue is not about money its about healthcare and providing it to all your citizens because a healthy population is a happy one and a happy population means more productivity.

Your country brings in 13 Trillion a year I think you can spend atleast 1/40th on keeping your people healthy.

[Zoomie]

Now last time I checked the population if Canada was 30 million that would make the population of the United States 90 million. So is that you being really stupid and not even knowing your own countries population or is it ignorance and not knowing much about the outside world from America?
It was just an honest mistake. For some reason I thought Canada had a population closer to 100mil. Whooptteefreakingdoo smartass.


**Aimless Rant**
Yeah, if we just spend/toss the money at healthcare, everything will be fixed, and everyone will live happily ever after. . . .

[Hilbert]

Yes I am an outsider looking in but I am also American I have alot of family in The states and they all seem to be against health reform but I can understand why there all financially set.

Okay, let me understand something here. Are you a United States Citizen? You say that you are an outsider and then say your an "American?" Are you implying that you are a United States citizen living in Canada or possess dual citizenship are you suggesting that I am an "American" in the continental context (i.e. someone in a European country claiming that he or she is "European" or someone in an Asian country saying that he or she is "Asian")?

EDIT: Just read the part about you having dual citizenship. Thanks for clarifying that.


But not a single Canadian goes with out healthcare that is a basic human right defined by the UN.

Here's a note. Under the United States Constitution, healthcare is not a right. With that in mind, not being a right, it becomes an option or a privelege. Now you say the U.N. defines Healthcare as a basic human right, that's dandy. But the U.S. is not govorned by the United Nations. I remember during the U.S. Presidential Debates last year when Obama and McCain were going at it, Obama stated he believed healthcare to be every American's "Right" which Constitutionally speaking, simply isn't so.


Now In America where one of the most famous slogans for the country is every man is created equal. If this is true how can your Healthcare system refuse people who need to be treated roughly 40 million Americans.

"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal...etc." This is part of the U.S. Declaration of Independence. And, as you said, the equality line is often used. Personally, I believe that this applies to our humanity (human-ness); that I am equal in my human(ness) and my Constitutionally acknowledged not granted Rights to my neighbor whether he be taller, shorter, darker, or paler than I am. Some people will be created, born with lower intelligences, some may be born mentally deficient, others may not; at least on the genetic level, we are certainly not equal. Indeed, after all, no matter what some people are always going to have things that others do not; my neighbor may have a beautiful sports car while I possess a beat up pick up truck. One person may be of the "social elite" or upper class while another of the middle or lower class. Rich poor, etc. And to finally answer your question, just as some people possess things others do not, some people have health care while others do not.


And yes America should put a tax on anything deemed hazardous to your health it only has to be like 5% that would easily cover healthcare costs.

How in the world would you determine whether something is "hazardous to your health?" For aguements sake, like Zoomie said, simply walking down the street could be hazardous to your health. Granted, that was an extreme example, use it as a reductio absurdum if you will. But I think it should establish the grounds that that will leave a HUGE amount of room for interpretation and politicians to push their own self serving agendas with.


For Americans against tax you guys can get real I pay more tax than any american making the same amount not only that Anything I buy I get taxed on so you can't bitch about it.

Three things:
1.) You paying more taxes then we do is your problem.
2.) Are you or are you not a United States citizen?
3.) As Zoomie said, we have the right to free speech and can "bitch" about what we please.


Not to be mean but America Needs a Canadian to lead them.

That's your opinion, and it seems to suggest that you believe America should be modeled after Canada, or at least certain parts of it. America is not Canada, and like myself I believe most American's don't want to turn America into Canada.

[Derbedeu]

Here's a note. Under the United States Constitution, healthcare is not a right. With that in mind, not being a right, it becomes an option or a privelege. Now you say the U.N. defines Healthcare as a basic human right, that's dandy. But the U.S. is not govorned by the United Nations. I remember during the U.S. Presidential Debates last year when Obama and McCain were going at it, Obama stated he believed healthcare to be every American's "Right" which Constitutionally speaking, simply isn't so.



"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal...etc." This is part of the U.S. Declaration of Independence. And, as you said, the equality line is often used. Personally, I believe that this applies to our humanity (human-ness); that I am equal in my human(ness) and my Constitutionally acknowledged not granted Rights to my neighbor whether he be taller, shorter, darker, or paler than I am. Some people will be created, born with lower intelligences, some may be born mentally deficient, others may not; at least on the genetic level, we are certainly not equal. Indeed, after all, no matter what some people are always going to have things that others do not; my neighbor may have a beautiful sports car while I possess a beat up pick up truck. One person may be of the "social elite" or upper class while another of the middle or lower class. Rich poor, etc. And to finally answer your question, just as some people possess things others do not, some people have health care while others do not.


Hate to break it to you, but the Constitution is not the end-all be-all of anything. Need I remind you that in that very same document African Americans were viewed as 3/5ths of a person at one time? That women did not have a right to vote?

Times change. At one time if you weren't a landowner you had no right to vote, and this view was completely accepted pretty much universally. I'd like to think that we've progressed to a point where healthcare is accepted to be a right.

[Zoomie]

Hate to break it to you, but the Constitution is not the end-all be-all of anything. Need I remind you that in that very same document African Americans were viewed as 3/5ths of a person at one time? That women did not have a right to vote?

Times change. At one time if you weren't a landowner you had no right to vote, and this view was completely accepted pretty much universally. I'd like to think that we've progressed to a point where healthcare is accepted to be a right.
rofl Thanks for that, I needed a good laugh. The word 'right' is most likely the most overused word in the present day, as everyone thinks that they have some certain inalienable right to something, even though it's not on the books anywhere.

[bono]

Canada's health care system works because it can unload its surplus load on US. Its not my opinion but that of Doctors in Canada.

A Canadian Doctor Describes How Socialized Medicine Doesn't Work (http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/_ibd-canadian_doctor_describes_how.htm)

Hanging By A Thread (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRBS-YXSknk)(Youtube Video)

Timely Medical Alternatives Inc. (http://www.timelymedical.ca/)

(This company finds doctors for Canadian patients in US. Seriously ill patients use this company run by Richard Baker to save their lives)

http://i26.tinypic.com/2aj2mhf.gif






Im a Dual citizen Canadian-American But I was obviously raised in Canada. Also you said We're three times the size of Canada in population, and that means a whole heck of a lot more bureaucracy and infrastructure that what Canada has. Now last time I checked the population if Canada was 30 million that would make the population of the United States 90 million. So is that you being really stupid and not even knowing your own countries population or is it ignorance and not knowing much about the outside world from America?

I was placing the comparison of our countries in population correctly we pay around 20 billion for health care for a population of 30 million. Now America's population which is ten times larger then that of Canada being 330 million or so that would make the cost for America 250 billion. Thats not that much considering you spent 10 billion a month in iraq blowing **** up. your defence budget is over 500 billion for what whos is even close to having your military capabilities? no one.

How much money do you waste on the DEA prohibition doesnt work it never did its useless legalize it tax it.

You spend how many billions of dollars do you spend busting potheads and incarcerating them? There much more productive selling drugs moving money to help with the recession.

But this issue is not about money its about healthcare and providing it to all your citizens because a healthy population is a happy one and a happy population means more productivity.

Your country brings in 13 Trillion a year I think you can spend atleast 1/40th on keeping your people healthy.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

SOG & Mastermind covered way better than I ever could(nice job guys). To expand a little.

Public Housing:
Goal: To provide cheap housing to those that can't afford it at taxpayer expense.
Result: Sending in SWAT teams on a regular basis to clear out the drugs, gangs, and prostitutes. I'm not sure what the costs are, but I'm quite confident they've gone up, not down. And all we have to show for it is another generation of couch potatoes living off the government tit.

Australian experience on public housing is much much different to the US

Public Retirement (aka Social Security)
Goal: To provide retirement for all the people
Result: This system will collapse(it's really a ponzi scheme), when, around 2020(the exact data isn't important) or something like that? Costs have skyrocketed, and services(and payments) are being cut.

Australian workers pay for their own retirement. System appears to be working quite well. Remember once all the baby boomers die off, population growth will become sustainable and the population will slowly get younger

Public Education
Goal: To provide education opportunities for all
Result: Costs(such as college tuition) ha ve skyrocketed and the standards have fallen apart. We spend more per student/per year than any other industrialized nation on earth yet....How many US students can't find Mexico on the map?

Government should put caps on how much universities can charge for a degree. Maybe another approach is also needed how universities bills are paid. Here in Australia the government pays the university bill, you pay back the government through extra income tax once you start earning above a certain amount.

Public Health care(Medicare & Medicaid)
Goal: To provide health care to the poor and elderly
Result: Cost explosion and service are far below what would be considered adequate. Why are there so many "supplamental" insurance programs out there? To date Congress has never been able to rein in spending or accurately forecast costs of this program

Whilst health insurance is a good idea the problem is that in the US where you can sue a person for simply spilling their coffee on there shirt litigation has driven the cost of insurance up to a point where many can no longer afford it. Getting a million dollar lawsuit for an accidental burning from a pot of coffee come on.


Now looking back at these examples, does any realistically think this "National Health Care System" is going to be any different. It looks good on paper, but reality is a different story. Costs(taxes) will explode or medical care will be rationed.

Whilst the US does have major structural problems as a nation by far the biggest problem in the US is the idiots who live there.

Chick gets a million dollars for a waitress accidentally spilling coffee.

A government that has virtually been taken over by big business

A society where it is all about the individual good at the expense of the common/collective good.

[Derbedeu]

rofl Thanks for that, I needed a good laugh. The word 'right' is most likely the most overused word in the present day, as everyone thinks that they have some certain inalienable right to something, even though it's not on the books anywhere.

Glad I could give you a laugh. Like I said, a lot of things weren't on the books at one point. But I'm glad to see the me-first mentality is still alive and kicking. Who cares about one's fellow man anyways, right? People don't have healthcare than clearly it's their fault, and their fault alone. :roll:

[California Joe]

This thread isn't about taking a sh*t on Canada's healthcare system.

Why don't some of you experts tighten the f*ck up and come up with a decent alternative. I don't have one. Everyone pays lip service to the fact that something should be done to ensure universal coverage, but no one has any clue how. We're all good at assigning blame to profit making enterprises like drug companies and insurance companies, we all fear government control due to their poor track record, but no one is willing to take the hit, especially the politicians that have been sidestepping doing anything for more than 30 years.

[Hilbert]

Hate to break it to you, but the Constitution is not the end-all be-all of anything. Need I remind you that in that very same document African Americans were viewed as 3/5ths of a person at one time? That women did not have a right to vote?

Indeed, it is flawed as it is written by men not Gods, and we are inherently flawed creatures. But since then the 13th and 21st Amendments. Which is why I went into the whole "equality" thing. I believe that with the 13th and 21st Amendments we came closer achieving "equality" in the spirit of "...that all men are created equal..." Or at least have come closer to as "equal" as were going to get without trying to make everyone clones (and even that wouldn't solve anything except at a genetic level).


Times change. At one time if you weren't a landowner you had no right to vote, and this view was completely accepted pretty much universally. I'd like to think that we've progressed to a point where healthcare is accepted to be a right.

Yes times change. But at the same time do we not take certain things for granted as enduring such as religious freedom, freedom of speech, press, assembly, petition (1st Amendment). Just some food for thought.

[SoftLion]

Hate to break it to you, but the Constitution is not the end-all be-all of anything. Need I remind you that in that very same document African Americans were viewed as 3/5ths of a person at one time? That women did not have a right to vote?

Times change. At one time if you weren't a landowner you had no right to vote, and this view was completely accepted pretty much universally. I'd like to think that we've progressed to a point where healthcare is accepted to be a right.

Fail, pure and simple.

On another note, health care reform could be great if structured properly. Massive deficit spending in a recession, however, is another thing.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

This thread isn't about taking a sh*t on Canada's healthcare system.

Why don't some of you experts tighten the f*ck up and come up with a decent alternative. I don't have one. Everyone pays lip service to the fact that something should be done to ensure universal coverage, but no one has any clue how. We're all good at assigning blame to profit making enterprises like drug companies and insurance companies, we all fear government control due to their poor track record, but no one is willing to take the hit, especially the politicians that have been sidestepping doing anything for more than 30 years.

Minardiau's US Health Care plan

1. Nationalise hospitals which will be run by state/region/area health services.
2. Encourage doctors to establish local family practices in the burbs
3. Limit excessive compensation payments
4. Insurance companies only allowed to operate smaller/specialised hospitals without emergency departments for those that have private health insurance. All other forms of health service delivery will not be allowed to be owned or influenced by insurance companies
5. Limit the amount health providers can charge for services
6. Introduce a gap system. If you earn below x amount a trip to the local family doctor does not cost anything. Above x amount you only pay the difference that the government does not pay.
Example: standard 15 minute checkup costs 100 bucks. Government pays the first 50, you the second 50 and have it on a sliding scale.
7. Make the cost of attending medical school cheaper. Cheaper education means more people entering the medical field, more people in the field means more competition for doctors which means more competition. It may well end up where doctors forgo charging even the rich and "bulk bill" the government and only take the 50 bucks a patient from the government


Well it's a start

[sct1886]

Given the past track record of US government terminal stupidity why would we trust them? The "failure" of our health care system is failure by design. It will do nothing but put too much power in the hands of too few. This country was made great by a small government and competition, this is the anti-thesis of what the founders envisioned. My government is too big and intrusive already, why give them more power to regulate even more?

[Derbedeu]

Indeed, it is flawed as it is written by men not Gods, and we are inherently flawed creatures. But since then the 13th and 21st Amendments. Which is why I went into the whole "equality" thing. I believe that with the 13th and 21st Amendments we came closer achieving "equality" in the spirit of "...that all men are created equal..." Or at least have come closer to as "equal" as were going to get without trying to make everyone clones (and even that wouldn't solve anything except at a genetic level).


well put, however...


Yes times change. But at the same time do we not take certain things for granted as enduring such as religious freedom, freedom of speech, press, assembly, petition (1st Amendment). Just some food for thought....at one point none of these were seen as rights, and chances are one would have been imprisoned or even put to death for saying so. Just take a look at religion for instance. It never even crossed people's minds that religious freedom should be a basic right of everyone. People were persecuted for their beliefs in the Middle Ages, and this was seen as the normal thing to do, since the idea of religious freedom was simply unfathomable. People viewed the world through the lens of the Bible, or Koran.

I honestly believe that a few generations from now everyone will look on healthcare as being a universal right, and not a privilege or just an opinion.Already there is a shift in this direction as evidenced by the UN accepting healthcare as a right (not to mention various other countries).

[Policía Loco]

In order to do this you will need to move almost an entire country from a sense of accomplishment to a sense of entitlement. Second, I think way too many Americans are hypochondriacs for the system to run smoothly.




7. Make the cost of attending medical school cheaper. Cheaper education means more people entering the medical field, more people in the field means more competition for doctors which means more competition. It may well end up where doctors forgo charging even the rich and "bulk bill" the government and only take the 50 bucks a patient from the government



That is one thing I can agree with you on. Its not really the amount entering the field but, that too many medical students are avoiding what is needed the most, which is family practice doctors, for more lucritive careers as specialists.

[Derbedeu]

Given the past track record of US government terminal stupidity why would we trust them?

I actually agree with that. The only thing that makes me hesitate when it comes to universal healthcare is the incompetence of our government. That's why I think we need a major restructuring of our government.


The "failure" of our health care system is failure by design. It will do nothing but put too much power in the hands of too few. This country was made great by a small government and competition, this is the anti-thesis of what the founders envisioned. My government is too big and intrusive already, why give them more power to regulate even more?

You can't turn back the clock. Just the military part of the government today (i.e. Pentagon, etc), is probably larger than all of government back 120 years ago. Big doesn't equate with bad. A small, but corrupt and inefficient government is worse than a big but efficient one.

[Hilbert]

well put, however...

...at one point none of these were seen as rights, and chances are one would have been imprisoned or even put to death for saying so. Just take a look at religion for instance. It never even crossed people's minds that religious freedom should be a basic right of everyone. People were persecuted for their beliefs in the Middle Ages, and this was seen as the normal thing to do, since the idea of religious freedom was simply unfathomable. People viewed the world through the lens of the Bible, or Koran.

In that historical context, absolutely.
However, I was speaking more of since the Johne Locke theory on Natural Rights and how the United States took on to that and how we've stuck to (or at least, in theory, treid to) the Constitution or at least various parts of it. I used the 1st Amendment as an example of that because unlike the 2nd Amendment and the 4th Amendment (patriot act, etc.) others that are deemed "controversial" most people still seem locked in belief of First Amendment recognized freedom. I appoligize for not being clearer there.

[Derbedeu]

In that historical context, absolutely.
However, I was speaking more of since the Johne Locke theory on Natural Rights and how the United States took on to that and how we've stuck to (or at least, in theory, treid to) the Constitution or at least various parts of it. I used the 1st Amendment as an example of that because unlike the 2nd Amendment and the 4th Amendment (patriot act, etc.) others that are deemed "controversial" most people still seem locked in belief of First Amendment recognized freedom. I appoligize for not being clearer there.
Gotcha. Thanks for clarifying.

[DS73]

There are tons of things I hate about Belgium, but we're really lucky to have such a great healthcare system.

Judging by what you write, you are Flemish.
USA is not Flanders: it is not populated by flemish people. USA is "slightly" bigger than Flanders. Like 50+times. This difference is translated in very different organizational and financial requirements.+ USA have extremely different type of work force with key difference being the total lack of social cohesion.
Americans don't treat each other as Flemish or dutch do.
Besides everything else your system is based on the expectation that the vast majority of people will do the right stuff, and the wrong doers are small minority. This is important moment as the accounting and control are always expensive.


Most important difference is political one: USA politics is officially governed by lobbies. It's european example is EU bureaucracy. I wonder what variant is less efficient. Any new federal program will lead just to another black hole. Like DoD or DHS are already.
Until political decision process will be modernized and proper lobby control is installed, anything "federal" is equated to "bad".


OT:
This "I want candy like he has" crap is extremely ridiculous.

Medical or political systems are not candies and cann't be just copied or taken&given.

[sinophile]

I haven't seen one person on this thread get this issue right.

Demographics.

The developed world (ie. Canada, US, Japan) is rapidly aging and those old folks are the biggest reason healthcare costs will skyrocket in the coming year.

Whatever positive experiences you're having now in your nationalized healthcare countries good luck when the demographic time bomb explodes.

This is the key point... there will soon be more demand in the system than the system can provide. This isn't about insuring 49m uninsured Americans. Its about relieving the government of the burden of millions of new senior citizens requiring expensive near end of life treatments.

To summarize... the guy on this thread complaining about his $10,000 emergency visit bill may no longer have to pay it. But there will be a thousand other people whose benefits will decline, and thousands more paying more for less for each story of hardship.

National healthcare in this demographic reality is a ponzi scheme. Without huge pro-business policies and massive immigration of young productive workers there is no healthcare plan that can work.

[Van Gogh]

americans are scared of having a health system that compares to canada or england, americas privatized healthcare has been more competitive providing the latest medicines ahead of england or canada. us going with a government owned health system is going backwards, considering england and canada people come to US for better care.

[vryhpyammoadded]

Why the scared usage?
Most people I speak with concerning this topic aren’t scared at all. What they are is pissed. Pissed that the government can’t be trusted one damn bit doing anything right. They’ve lost trust in government and big business and pretty much feel any changes this bunch of screw heads in DC or the corporate mafia lobby will result in yet another screw up to suck precious wealth away paying more for worse service.
Americans in general are far from rich yet appear so being deep in debt.

[ZeroZen]

We need a real heathcare plan no gov't involve-Self preventive maintenance and watch what you eating.

[stonecutter]

While it is true that in Canada you will have to wait a while to get elective or non-emergency care, and people wanting hip replacements, etc, are indeed crossing the border because of this, anything serious gets looked at right away, and for free. I have worked with and spoken to a few American friends who are now living here about this, and they say they prefer the Canadian system by far. One of them was diagnosed with cancer and received prompt and full range of treatment, and was able to beat it into remission. Another one I am working with now; a few days ago he started experiencing chest pains on the job. He was rushed to the hospital, got an EKG and complete check-up (lasted 6 hours), was ok'd, and came back to work the next day not having paid a thing out of pocket.

We have to pay for drugs though. But they're cheaper up here!

One thing that does need to be fixed with Canada's system is how you have to be referred to a specialist by your family physician beforehand. It can take months before you get in. We're looking at changing that, there's been noise of following France's system which is a mix of public/private medecine, and recognized as the best in the world.

[Derbedeu]

I haven't seen one person on this thread get this issue right.

Demographics.

The developed world (ie. Canada, US, Japan) is rapidly aging and those old folks are the biggest reason healthcare costs will skyrocket in the coming year.

Whatever positive experiences you're having now in your nationalized healthcare countries good luck when the demographic time bomb explodes.

This is the key point... there will soon be more demand in the system than the system can provide. This isn't about insuring 49m uninsured Americans. Its about relieving the government of the burden of millions of new senior citizens requiring expensive near end of life treatments.

To summarize... the guy on this thread complaining about his $10,000 emergency visit bill may no longer have to pay it. But there will be a thousand other people whose benefits will decline, and thousands more paying more for less for each story of hardship.

National healthcare in this demographic reality is a ponzi scheme. Without huge pro-business policies and massive immigration of young productive workers there is no healthcare plan that can work.

Population is the big elephant in the middle of the room that nobody really wants to mention, yet is the root of global warming, scarcity of resources, housing, hunger, and pretty much anything else.

[c62]

Hate to break it to you, but the Constitution is not the end-all be-all of anything. Need I remind you that in that very same document African Americans were viewed as 3/5ths of a person at one time? That women did not have a right to vote?

Times change. At one time if you weren't a landowner you had no right to vote, and this view was completely accepted pretty much universally. I'd like to think that we've progressed to a point where healthcare is accepted to be a right.
Hate to break it to your right back, but yes it is the "end-all-be-all", it is the supreme law of the land, nothing can override it. The examples of African Americans & women, while true, doesn't take into the account that we can amend the Constitution(which we did).

And no health care isn't a right. As a society we fallen in love with the word "rights", everything is right. Oddly enough education isn't a "right", now does this mean I don't want education or health care for everybody? Of course not. It's just that these things have to "earned", not given away like candy. Every couple of years Congress gets together to pass the "<Really Important Issue> Billl Of Rights", which is usually a bunch of laws saying how people can sue somebody if the screw up. It's crap, only meant to get the meat-head reelected.

[Derbedeu]

Hate to break it to your right back, but yes it is the "end-all-be-all", it is the supreme law of the land, nothing can override it. The examples of African Americans & women, while true, doesn't take into the account that we can amend the Constitution(which we did).

That was my whole point. Constitutions change (in this case are amended) or eventually are superseded all together by something else. I'm not blinded by hubris, I realize that everything on this planet is transitory, and that includes nations and constitutions.


And no health care isn't a right. As a society we fallen in love with the word "rights", everything is right. Oddly enough education isn't a "right", now does this mean I don't want education or health care for everybody? Of course not. It's just that these things have to "earned", not given away like candy. Every couple of years Congress gets together to pass the "<Really Important Issue> Billl Of Rights", which is usually a bunch of laws saying how people can sue somebody if the screw up. It's crap, only meant to get the meat-head reelected.

Once again, you fail to see my point. 700 years ago nobody had any rights. 300 years ago only the landed gentry had any rights. 100 years ago only men had rights (I'm referring specifically to voting rights here). Already in parts around the world, education and healthcare are seen as basic human rights. You are correct in that the challenge is in the divide between declaring something (e.g. healthcare for all) and actually being able to provide it (what's more, providing it in an efficient manner). It is something that we should strive for though, IMO.

[bono]

US has one of the best healthcare systems in the world.

1> Kick out the bloodsucking, lobbyist peddling brokers such as insurance companies.
2> All healthcare payments made by the Government. Unlimited.
3> Stop the crazy juries handing out millions in malpractise awards.
4> Instead of jury deciding the malpractise, each medical accident should be investigated by a Federal Board just like the NTSB.
5> Accidents happen in each area of human life, there is no reason to award millions in a healthcare accident lottery.
6> The victims of healthcare accidents should be supported by an organization such as the VA.
7> Doctors responsible for healthcare accidents need to be monitored and evaluated like car drivers. Their previous record should be under constant monitoring.

[khaz]

The Democrats have saved The US from skyrocketing health care costs before. Medicare was designed to keep costs down and cover those in need. HMMMM maybe it didnt work out that way...has any goverment run program saved money hhhmmmm...

[Holycrusader]

"Regulated prices" mean expensive and shortage - more or less.

You are simply wrong here...

[Eye]

You are simply wrong here...

Ask your parents about communistic times. There was shortage of everything and almost all prices were regulated.

BTW. Why only doctors should be in system? Why not lawyers, bakers and many others important professions. Isn't food more important for our life than any treatment? I demand equal food for everybody and law service for free!

[Holycrusader]

Ask your parents about communistic times. There was shortage of everything and almost all prices were regulated.

BTW. Why only doctors should be in system? Why not lawyers, bakers and many others important professions. Isn't food more important for our life than any treatment? I demand equal food for everybody and law service for free!

Propably im older than you so I do not need to ask anybody...

Do you know anything about how pharmaceutical market works? Believe this is not free market... Monopolists are everywhere. Not regulating the prizes mean lots of dead people...

As to the lawyers, you know that you have a right to public defender in criminal cases. So very wrong example...

[Eye]

Do you know anything about how pharmaceutical market works? Believe this is not free market... Monopolists are everywhere. Not regulating the prizes mean lots of dead people...
I know very well it's not free market and it is the cause why we have monopolists here.


As to the lawyers, you know that you have a right to public defender in criminal cases. So very wrong example...
But I want them for free in civil trials and many other cases. And what about national system supporting food for free? Food is for me much more important than healthcare.

[Holycrusader]

I know very well it's not free market and it is the cause why we have monopolists here.

But I want them for free in civil trials and many other cases. And what about national system supporting food for free? Food is for me much more important than healthcare.


Do you see people dieing from hunger in Poland? No, because food for free actually exist. You can get free food here if you do not hve money for it. Another bad example...

Basically your arguments do not add any value to discussion.

[a_very_ex_STAB]

This just about sums it up ;-)

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/study_most_children_strongly?utm_source=infocus

[Jobu]

Americans are not afraid of health care reform.

Americans simply recognize that government is incompetent and we're not always so willing to give them more responsibility over our lives.

[sct1886]

That was my whole point. Constitutions change (in this case are amended) or eventually are superseded all together by something else. I'm not blinded by hubris, I realize that everything on this planet is transitory, and that includes nations and constitutions.



Once again, you fail to see my point. 700 years ago nobody had any rights. 300 years ago only the landed gentry had any rights. 100 years ago only men had rights (I'm referring specifically to voting rights here). Already in parts around the world, education and healthcare are seen as basic human rights. You are correct in that the challenge is in the divide between declaring something (e.g. healthcare for all) and actually being able to provide it (what's more, providing it in an efficient manner). It is something that we should strive for though, IMO.
Your so called "rights" have bankrupted this country. Taxpayer funded programs generally only apply to minorities and useful idiots of the left. Nothing is free, except the air we breath, until a government fool figures an angle to tax that. My last trip to the doctor cost me $1000 out of pocket with insurance. (This was caused by frivolous law suits) A total reform of the health care system INCLUDING reforming the A.M.A. is a good start. We are what we ingest in any manner. Is it any wonder why Western societies are unhealthy? I took a friend to a Laser back surgery center. The diagnosis was he ate, smoked and drank too much. It was payed for with medicaid. This is not what I desire my hard earned taxpayer dollars to be allocated for. In my 47 years I have yet to see a government program that was objectively run for the greater good. You cannot build a strong house from a deck of cards. Allowing Washington's morons to control health care is a recipe for disaster.

[ting]

AFAIK the US will go bankrupt if they do not change their system. IIRC they use 2 times as much on health care(per capita GDP) as number two on the list(Norway).

AFAIK one big problem the US system has is that primary care(going to your doctor regularly etc) is usually funded by insurance or your own pocket. Planned surgery functions the same way. However if it is an emergency you get treatment weather you can pay or not. You get the bill later and can pay it for the rest of your life or go bankrupt?

What happens is that most people avoid doctors like they are the IRS. Like California Joe says: They suck you dry when you are not looking.

This means they go only when they see no other option, and this usually means hugely expensive treatment. This can be payed for in a number of different ways, and sometimes the tax payer pays.

Take a hypothetical example: I have a cyst in my knee, it hurts a bit, but I take painkillers, and I'm OK. I don't have 600 bucks to remove it. After about 3 months of pain, it gets infected. I don't know that since I still haven't been to the Doctor. After another 2 months I get a fever, and the pain becomes unbearable. I am taken to the Hospital in an ambulance, and I need intensive treatment, and a hugely complicated surgery. I am lucky, since they are able to save my leg, however due to the life threatening infection I have spent two weeks in hospital under intensive care. This was a county? run health facility, however the bill of 50 000 usd is too much for me and I go bankrupt. The hospital never sees their money, and the tax payer foots most of the bill in the end.

A problem that could have been solved for 600$ now costs 50 000$ and the tax payer takes most of the hit, lets say 40 000$.

If the tax payer had a brain he would have forked out the 600$ and avoided paying out the 40 000$. As far as I have understood it this is a quite common occurrence in the US.

As far as I see it this situation can be solved in two ways.

1. If you can not pay, you don't get treatment. This might be difficult if the person is unconscious, and his wallet(with insurance info) has been stolen by the guy who beat him unconscious. But, thats just bad luck, and won't happen that often. Perhaps you could tattoo your name and insurance details on your body(don't change your insurance company to often:lol:) or perhaps a microchip implant like dogs have? That might work.
In any case you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.

This method would bring the costs down dramatically.

2. The government takes the bill for the hole thing(adjust for system preferences). I go to the doctor before something bad happens and save the tax payer 39400 usd. Well I know what I prefer, but you amerikans like to do things your own way.p-)

Another problem you have is that health is often based on your employer. This is hugely expensive for companies, and results in workers staying in their job, even though they would be more productive in a different job. If you loose your job you loose your ability to finance health care. Likewise if your company goes bankrupt, you loose your health care. I find it incredible that US companies can remain competitive when they have to finance the health care of their employees.

One thing I have noticed in several discussions is that people in the US suffers from a fear of paying for the bum next door. The fact is that this is how the current system works. Either through your insurance premium or your tax dollars.

Add to that you have an insane bureaucracy that figures out who pays what part of the bill, and then you do most of the work with collecting receipts, and filling out all the forms your insurance company requires. :cantbeli:

I fill out one form a year, and that entails that I sum up all my covered medical bills, my name and bank account number and send said form and medical expenses card to the welfare authority. After a few weeks I see the money which is above a certain number on my account. This year the magic number is 1740 Norwegian crowns (282usd) Every thing above this number goes to my bank account. I then get a card that says I have payed all I have too to this year. For the rest of the year I show this card instead of giving money when I visit the doctor etc. Yes we have bureaucracy too, but I usually don't see any of it.


To sum it up, the US can not continue with the present system for more than a few more years, it is to expensive both on the tax bill and the insurance premium. You need something instead, and If you want no government you will have to allow hospitals to refuse emergency treatment if patients can not pay/show insurance up front.

If you cut your per capita GDP spending on health care by half you would have to settle for a system like this(number two on the spending list):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4L6-0WRfSA&feature=related

Everything in there is factually correct, though he did not go digging for some problems in the system. Compared to what you guys have I honestly don't think it's even worth mentioning.

[Jobu]

There are ways to lower costs without letting the government take control over the health care industry.

Co-ops, tort reform, etc.

Government takeover should always be the "LAST" option.

[Eye]

Do you see people dieing from hunger in Poland? No, because food for free actually exist. You can get free food here if you do not hve money for it.


So we can do the same with healthcare. You can can get some basic healthcare if you can't pay for it. Like with food - you can get some cheap food if you have not money.


Another bad example...
Another? Do you mean argument with lawyers was bad? So can I go to lawyer for some advice for free? I don't think so. Very often lawyer's help is essential for our life, not only in criminal cases.

[sct1886]

Ayn Rand:When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion - when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing - when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors - when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you - when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice - you may know that your society is doomed.

[ting]

There are ways to lower costs without letting the government take control over the health care industry.

Co-ops, tort reform, etc.

Government takeover should always be the "LAST" option.

Co-ops, tort reform etc. seems to me like a band aid on a corps. I know americans like to sue each other but I doubt it's going to save as much money as they need to save.

[Sarig]

Here's a note. Under the United States Constitution, healthcare is not a right. With that in mind, not being a right, it becomes an option or a privelege. Now you say the U.N. defines Healthcare as a basic human right, that's dandy. But the U.S. is not govorned by the United Nations. I remember during the U.S. Presidential Debates last year when Obama and McCain were going at it, Obama stated he believed healthcare to be every American's "Right" which Constitutionally speaking, simply isn't so.

The US was one of the founders of the UN, the US was one of the countries that defined the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Elaenor Roosevelt wrote part of it!), and it is binding for all member states.

So no, the US is not governed by the UN, but the Universal Declaration of Human Rights do apply to the US as well, as long as they choose to be a member of the UN.

[AOCBravo2004]

So what happens if you lose your job?

Well unless I have *** in my patrol car, or show up to work high on cocaine it's really hard to lose my job.

[GerLatvia!]

i live now in germany and here is the healthcare absolutly awesome!

[Bootneck]

The French system sounds like a good model - http://bit.ly/qOFtA

[Hilbert]

The US was one of the founders of the UN, the US was one of the countries that defined the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Elaenor Roosevelt wrote part of it!), and it is binding for all member states.

So no, the US is not governed by the UN, but the Universal Declaration of Human Rights do apply to the US as well, as long as they choose to be a member of the UN.

In Reid vs. Covert it was determined that no international agreement may supercede the authority of the United States Constitution.

[Sarig]

In Reid vs. Covert it was determined that no international agreement may supercede the authority of the United States Constitution.

But it doesn't contradict it, does it?

In Norwegian law, the human rights are placed beneath the constitution, but above the normal laws. As long as the international agreement doesn't contradict the Norwegian constitution, it's law. I'd imagine it would be similarly implemented in the US?

[Jobu]

Co-ops, tort reform etc. seems to me like a band aid on a corps. I know americans like to sue each other but I doubt it's going to save as much money as they need to save.

It's a start and that's better than nothing. It's also a better cost option than socialized health care which will save nothing and only add trillions more to our national debt. Government health care will not lower costs, it will increase costs. That's guaranteed. Look at Medicare/Medicaid. Look at Social Security. Look at practically every large program the government runs. It is horribly incompetent, inefficient, and our country is bankrupt because of it.

I believe the only answer is to find ways to lower the costs of private health care.

[California Joe]

Does "lowering costs" translate to everyone taking a pay cut? Or maybe simplifying the system so you don't need 14 admin people for every doctor.

[ting]

It's a start and that's better than nothing. It's also a better cost option than socialized health care which will save nothing and only add trillions more to our national debt. Government health care will not lower costs, it will increase costs. That's guaranteed. Look at Medicare/Medicaid. Look at Social Security. Look at practically every large program the government runs. It is horribly incompetent, inefficient, and our country is bankrupt because of it.

I believe the only answer is to find ways to lower the costs of private health care.

Your country must be incompetent. My country gets full health care for everybody for half the money you spend and we are twice as rich.

I really don't know that much about the nitty gritty of the US system(s), but the more I learn about it the more more I'm amazed at how inneficient it is. I just learned a few weeks ago that people often have to spend a lot of time arguing with the insurance bearacracy. It's insane! People in the US are afraid of government beauracracy yeat are perfectly willing to put up with an insurance company that earns money if they don't give you what you payed for. If they can make you give up your claim because you have to fill out 20 forms in triplicate, they make money!:cantbeli:

[ting]

Unraveling ObamaCare
By Charles M. Madigan
July 26, 2009

As sure as Hillary Clinton was elected president of the United States . . . whoops! That was supposed to happen but didn't. This is an important object lesson for those who are lining up with the doubters about President Barack Obama's health-care push.

It surely looks dark for the forces of health reform, with opponents shouting "socialism" and enemies trotting out stories they heard from people who heard from people who heard from Canadians about a good elderly fellow who couldn't get the procedure he needed to keep him alive because the system just decided he was too danged old and not worth the cost and so he was put on an ice floe and pushed into a lake someplace, dying alone. Damn those socialists!

There will be lots of that ahead of us.

Hyperbole is one of the most interesting products of any kind of big political change. Just now the verbiage is robust in Congress and on talk radio and on conservative blogs. It's why some people deeply believe we are about to mutate into a big version of Norway, land of sardines and social democratic policy.



All of this needs to be kept in some context.

Remember this: Barack Obama was the force behind the most audacious presidential campaign in modern history. The effort simply did not roll the way people expected it to, because not only does Obama have the best three-point shot in political history, he does not give up.

These days his opponents paint him as a socialist. A few months ago, he was said to be cuddling up to terrorists and hiding his true Muslim heart.

That didn't work in the campaign for a couple of reasons. First, people really wanted change and second, Obama really knows how to campaign.

The same forces are at play in the health-care battle. People really want to make a change of some kind, but they aren't sure quite how or what, and Obama remains a brilliant campaigner.

The president has watched from the sidelines as Congress wrestled with the question of what kind of health reform America actually needs. He's not doing that to be passive. The answers range from "none" to "complete" and touch on most points in between.

Remember President Bill Clinton's health-care debacle? He handed it to his wife and she emerged with a proposal crammed full of meticulous detail and dropped it on Congress like a cow pie in a hot pasture. People shifted away from it very quickly. Obama is not having any of that.

You didn't hear many specifics from the president, either at the news conference last week or when he hopped out to Shaker Heights, Ohio, to gather people around him and push the case for reform. That's because he doesn't have any.

It would be misleading to say there is an ObamaCare plan, although the media have settled on that as though it were a description of something real. I don't think Obama has an actual plan. He has an idea, and he is letting the specifics work themselves out in various committees on the hill, where just about everyone has his or her own plan too.

He wants to do two things that are easy to explain but hard to achieve: control health-care costs, which are terrible and promise to get worse, and get just about everyone covered, somehow. Getting everyone covered somehow is nice, fluffy campaign-trail talk, but costs are where the real action is in this battle. It's the kind of thing that points right to an array of special interests who make a fortune from health care. They don't like it. Hence the fight.

This is good strategy on Obama's part.

The opposition is fairly boneheaded about the smoking-out process. They simply latch on to the side of their special interests like lampreys and start sucking, a process that makes them highly visible. It doesn't take long to tell who is hauling water for various health-care providers. One White House aide told the story of discovering why it will be hard to cut the price of oxygen containers, which apparently have their own member of Congress to make sure that is not a part of reform. It's that gritty on the Hill.

Instead of getting specific, which would be fatal because it would let his enemies know exactly where to stick the knives, Obama is pulling on the levers of public opinion to create pressure to force Congress to make some difficult decisions.

Out in the Cleveland suburbs, health-care reform became just as important as the mission to the moon 40 years ago. His message was that for America to move forward, it must not be afraid of change.

Then he did exactly what he did so effectively on the campaign trail. He reached out to the audience and asked people to start sending their health-care stories to Congress and calling for reform. Lots of people are likely to respond to this, so Congress will be hearing a lot of horror stories.

I suspect Obama will weather the storm by sailing directly into it and enlisting the support of the electorate that sent him to Washington and put Congress in the hands of the Democrats.

Even as that process plays out, clarity will be developing. The actual shape of health-care reform will begin to emerge in some detail.

Then the president will embrace what he likes, what he can support, and send very clear signals about what he doesn't want. He is letting Congress do the very messy part, which includes all those predictions of failure.

In the end, I suspect, Obama will find a way to give Congress all the credit (or blame, whichever is called for) on health reform. If it works, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) will have his name all over it.

If it doesn't, then we'll find out whether Obama can be suitably ugly in addition to being engaging.

Charles M. Madigan is a presidential writer in residence at Roosevelt University.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-perspec0726healthjul26,0,6250374.story

I found this article interesting. I hope Obama can navigate the mine fields, their seems to be a lot of them.:-(

[MrPilikia]

Your country must be incompetent. My country gets full health care for everybody for half the money you spend and we are twice as rich.

I really don't know that much about the nitty gritty of the US system(s), but the more I learn about it the more more I'm amazed at how inneficient it is. I just learned a few weeks ago that people often have to spend a lot of time arguing with the insurance bearacracy. It's insane! People in the US are afraid of government beauracracy yeat are perfectly willing to put up with an insurance company that earns money if they don't give you what you payed for. If they can make you give up your claim because you have to fill out 20 forms in triplicate, they make money!:cantbeli:

You're right, our health care system (and many of my fellow Americans support for it) is well and truly insane. The more research I do the more envious I become of the European health care and social systems. While nothing's perfect they are way better than ours.

Standing by for the pithy "then why don't you move there" comments...

[Jobu]

People in the US are afraid of government beauracracy yeat are perfectly willing to put up with an insurance company that earns money if they don't give you what you payed for.

Wrong. People are fed up with the insurance companies.

But we don't want to simply replace the insurance beaurocracy with the government beaurocracy. Government is very likely to be much worse.

[Sarig]

Wrong. People are fed up with the insurance companies.

But we don't want to simply replace the insurance beaurocracy with the government beaurocracy. Government is very likely to be much worse.

Do a revolution, isn't that why you're allowed to keep guns? ;)

(Not an entirely serious comment)

[Jobu]

Do a revolution, isn't that why you're allowed to keep guns? ;)

(Not an entirely serious comment)

Our revolution will likely be at the ballot box in 2010.

[sinophile]

You're right, our health care system (and many of my fellow Americans support for it) is well and truly insane. The more research I do the more envious I become of the European health care and social systems. While nothing's perfect they are way better than ours.

Standing by for the pithy "then why don't you move there" comments...

As I keep pointing out, but few seem to get, demographics are going to kill Euro healthcare. You can brag all you want about how great European healthcare is while there are enough productive members of society to pay for it, but as Europe's population ages demand and costs will exceed supply and resources. Brag about something SUSTAINABLE, not a party that is coming to an end.

Moreover, developed nations likely cannot pay for healthcare and compete against developing nations economically.

[Sarig]

As I keep pointing out, but few seem to get, demographics are going to kill Euro healthcare. You can brag all you want about how great European healthcare is while there are enough productive members of society to pay for it, but as Europe's population ages demand and costs will exceed supply and resources. Brag about something SUSTAINABLE, not a party that is coming to an end.

Moreover, developed nations likely cannot pay for healthcare and compete against developing nations economically.

Actually, more and more people are working at an age when they could have already retired. Because they're healthy enough to do so...

Of course, killing everyone when they turn 65 would be a lot more economical.

[Hilbert]

But it doesn't contradict it, does it?

In Norwegian law, the human rights are placed beneath the constitution, but above the normal laws. As long as the international agreement doesn't contradict the Norwegian constitution, it's law. I'd imagine it would be similarly implemented in the US?

That's an interesting point. I'm not exactly sure where it would fall in line with the U.S. Constitution. I could see it easily being argued both ways

[Mastermind]

The problem is, there are just too damn may people to stand to gain from Obama Care....and not enough of them are American Citizens who will end up at the wrong end of the stick...mainly the folks suffering illnesses in this country.

Our congress needs to get the hell out of the picture...our senate needs to step aside also....as does the President. They are the very people screwing this up.

There should be an independent commission set up to solve the problem made up of proportionate number of people involved (Ie, The People!)...and no excuses from the damn politicians not to pass the result...and they should have to participate in the plan like everyone else. Then, I might (MIGHT) get on the band wagon. But, this whole thing right now looks to me like a giant buffet set to serve only the politicians in Washington and their cronies.

[Lt-Col A. Tack]

I'm not necessarily endorsing this proposal (and I do have a few issues with it) but it is interesting, and I think much better than single-payer.


Bipartisan Health Bill Still Gets No Respect

by Julie Rovner
July 24, 2009

What would you say about a health overhaul bill that promises to provide health insurance to virtually every American, to add not a single penny to the federal deficit and to claim supporters ranging from conservative Republican Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire to liberal Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow of Michigan?

On Capitol Hill, they're saying it doesn't have a chance.

That's the dilemma faced by Sens. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Bob Bennett (R-UT), sponsors of the so-called Healthy Americans Act.

Roundly Ignored

Despite being the darling of health policy bloggers and the first bill to be certified by the Congressional Budget Office as covering nearly everyone and fully paying for itself, the measure is being roundly ignored by those actually trying to put together a health overhaul measure on Capitol Hill and in the White House.

That's frustrating for its sponsors, who spent years refining its finer points.

The concept is fairly simple.

The plan would change the tax treatment of health insurance provided by employers in a way that would likely prompt many, if not most, to stop offering coverage. That appeals to Republicans, who say the current tax-free status of employer-provided insurance is unfair and encourages overuse of the health care system.

But the bill would also require employers to give workers back what they're spending now on health insurance in the form of a raise. Workers would also get new tax credits, and those who were previously uninsured or did not have insurance on the job would get government subsidies.

Everyone would then take that money and be required to buy insurance, from a new, government-regulated marketplace offering an array of private plans that would compete on the basis of quality and price.

Wyden says it only makes sense to start to move people away from the employer-based health insurance.

"Today the typical worker changes jobs 11 times by the time they're 40," Wyden said. "Right now, health coverage today isn't portable. In fact, when you lose your job, you go into something called the COBRA program, which a bunch of us say is the only federal program named after a poisonous snake."

That's a joke — COBRA is an acronym for the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985, the law under which the insurance continuation provisions were enacted.

Bringing The Parties Together

Bennett says one reason he thinks the measure hasn't caught on is that neither he nor Wyden is senior enough on the committees charged with writing the health overhaul bills.

"I've discovered that hell hath no fury like a committee chairman whose jurisdiction is being challenged," Bennett said. "They weren't interested in a couple of guys out in the hall."

But Len Nichols of the non-partisan think tank New American Foundation, an early backer of the measure, says there's another reason the bill isn't up for serious consideration. As with single-payer health insurance, it would simply represent too big a change for most people.

"Too many people were afraid of giving up their employer coverage," said Nichols. "It turns out employers weren't as ready to run away from it as some people thought. And unions were deathly afraid of removing it from their ability to recruit and retain workers."

Nichols, however, says Wyden and Bennett have accomplished something major for the health care debate: "They showed you can get Republicans and Democrats around two core ideas: Cover everyone, but be serious about costs."

And Bennett hasn't quite given up on the bill for this year: "We're hoping that when everyone finishes throwing his or her hands up in horror, and saying, 'What do we do now?' the two guys standing out in the hall can say, 'Look, will you let us in the room and let us get in the discussion and tell you what we've done?"

Link (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106979677)

[Lt-Col A. Tack]

A little more on the Healthy Americans Act

Healthy Americans Act (Senator Wyden's .gov site) (http://wyden.senate.gov/issues/Legislation/Healthy_Americans_Act.cfm)

[Mastermind]

The "Good Health Care bill" is being ignored because it leaves no room for the hundreds of personal pork-project, personal agenda, personal entrenching, personal power enhancing, crony pay-back, ACORN enhancing, cash scheming, vote robbing, electorate enslaving, Republican isolating partisan Bull Scatology Health Care the rest of the politicians want to pass.

[WarriorMonk]

Do a revolution, isn't that why you're allowed to keep guns? ;)

(Not an entirely serious comment)

You do realize that killing people for ideas is a serious matter...more so than out of self defense...right?

[SoSo]

Americans are afraid of rationing, and that the elderly will be denied treatment, even euthanized, under a government-managed system. This fear may or may not be justified. But in any case, it's what we're afraid of.

[James]

Personally, I pay about $20 a year for an annual checkup. My employer pays the rest. No additional taxes. I get treatment when I want and by whoever I want. It also provides for foreign travel.

Good for you. I pay about $600/month for me, my wife, and our baby daughter.


Americans are afraid of rationing, and that the elderly will be denied treatment, even euthanized, under a government-managed system. This fear may or may not be justified. But in any case, it's what we're afraid of.

BS. I (speaking for Americans in general) don't want to pay for other people, especially illegals. No one is going to be euthanized. As lazy as the post office or your local DMV is, do you think they could effectively kill someone? :cantbeli:

I've been planning for health care and retirement for more than a decade (i.e. investing money, and I'm only 35 now). If you aren't, shame on you. It's too bad, but I don't want to pay for your dumb ass.


Your country must be incompetent. My country gets full health care for everybody for half the money you spend and we are twice as rich.

I really don't know that much about the nitty gritty of the US system(s), but the more I learn about it the more more I'm amazed at how inneficient it is. I just learned a few weeks ago that people often have to spend a lot of time arguing with the insurance bearacracy. It's insane! People in the US are afraid of government beauracracy yeat are perfectly willing to put up with an insurance company that earns money if they don't give you what you payed for. If they can make you give up your claim because you have to fill out 20 forms in triplicate, they make money!:cantbeli:

What is your tax rate?

For all the bitching you might hear about from Americans, we generally pay less in overall taxes than a lot of other nations.

[Policía Loco]

Good for you. I pay about $600/month for me, my wife, and our baby daughter.



I wasn't trying to come across as being a smartass about it. I was giving the reason I don't want anything to change for me as an individual. As for others, yes. My brother is in the same boat as you with a 15 month old girl.

[AOCBravo2004]

Good for you. I pay about $600/month for me, my wife, and our baby daughter.

Holy crap James! And I bet it's for a crummy HMO?


BS. I (speaking for Americans in general) don't want to pay for other people, especially illegals. No one is going to be euthanized. As lazy as the post office or your local DMV is, do you think they could effectively kill someone? :cantbeli:

I second this, I do not want to pay for the medical care of illegal aliens. This damn cycle needs to end. The other day I went on an assault call, the victim was an illegal alien, he has to be transported to the ER. He has a fractured orbital, and a compression fracture of the T-spine. How much do you think his care is going to cost?

[szr]

Your country must be incompetent. My country gets full health care for everybody for half the money you spend and we are twice as rich.

I really don't know that much about the nitty gritty of the US system(s), but the more I learn about it the more more I'm amazed at how inneficient it is. I just learned a few weeks ago that people often have to spend a lot of time arguing with the insurance bearacracy. It's insane! People in the US are afraid of government beauracracy yeat are perfectly willing to put up with an insurance company that earns money if they don't give you what you payed for. If they can make you give up your claim because you have to fill out 20 forms in triplicate, they make money!:cantbeli:With all due respect to Norway (I love Norway), you're comparing a country with barely half the population of New York City to a country of over 300 million people spread over 3.79 million square miles?

[Scarren]

How much autonomy does the different states have in the US..??

(Maybe they could test out different Health reform in various states ??)

[szr]

How much autonomy does the different states have in the US..??

(Maybe they could test out different Health reform in various states ??)A considerable amount, and that autonomy is dear to most centrist, conservative and libertarian Americans. The Federal government has been eroding that independence since the Civil War, but especially since the New Deal era.

If there were to be any kind of government-managed health care, I believe it should occur at the state level where the management is closer to the people. And like with taxes, regulations, employment opportunities, gun laws or the weather, if a resident doesn't like their particular state's setup they can vote with their feet and move to another state.

[ting]

As I keep pointing out, but few seem to get, demographics are going to kill Euro healthcare. You can brag all you want about how great European healthcare is while there are enough productive members of society to pay for it, but as Europe's population ages demand and costs will exceed supply and resources. Brag about something SUSTAINABLE, not a party that is coming to an end.

Moreover, developed nations likely cannot pay for healthcare and compete against developing nations economically.

This is really an entire different debate. Europe is not one entity. Some countries will have more problems with the baby boomers than others. IIRC the worst of are Italy. I think most politicians have this under control. We have just gone through a huge pension reform, to adapt to this new reality. But having more babies is a good way to solve the problem. Thats why some of us europeans have maternity and paternity leave, subsidized kindergardens etc.;-)


The "Good Health Care bill" is being ignored because it leaves no room for the hundreds of personal pork-project, personal agenda, personal entrenching, personal power enhancing, crony pay-back, ACORN enhancing, cash scheming, vote robbing, electorate enslaving, Republican isolating partisan Bull Scatology Health Care the rest of the politicians want to pass.

I'm glad you got that of your chest.rofl
:hug:

[Elbs]

I've been planning for health care and retirement for more than a decade (i.e. investing money, and I'm only 35 now). If you aren't, shame on you. It's too bad, but I don't want to pay for your dumb ass.


Damn right. As a country we're becoming more and more accustomed to feeling entitled to things. Government should give me health care, give me a home, give me this, give me that. Government has a knack for making everything more complex, more costly and much more inefficient than it has to be.

[Eye]

But having more babies is a good way to solve the problem. Thats why some of us europeans have maternity and paternity leave, subsidized kindergardens etc.;-)




It makes taxes bigger and worsen competitiveness. And in the end it lowers our incomes and does not encourage to have baby.

[ting]

What is your tax rate?

For all the bitching you might hear about from Americans, we generally pay less in overall taxes than a lot of other nations.

I'm the wrong person to ask, I'm a student and will remain so for quite some time. We have a lot of different taxes. I think an average income tax is about 35 percent or something. Then you get a lot of deductibles. It's all adjusted for income of course. We have 25% vat. The last comparison I read was that Norway has a lower tax rate than our neighbours. It could be due to oil revenue, then again we save most of it.

The US might have less tax, but then again your tax pays for a lot less. If you call the 600$ a month your family spends on insurance a tax, what would your tax rate be? If you or someone in your family gets sick how much would you need to pay your selves? How much will the tuition fees in college cost you for your daughter? (I pay about 200$ per year) All these items need to be added up, before you can get a good sense of what your taxes are compared to ours.


With all due respect to Norway (I love Norway), you're comparing a country with barely half the population of New York City to a country of over 300 million people spread over 3.79 million square miles?

The US could in theory do all we do cheaper, due to the scaling. (You get more JSF for your dollar if you purchase 1000 instead of 100). An example would be obscure treatments. We have to maintain capabilities for treatments that are extremely rare, even though it makes no sense from an economical point of view.

As for the distance, Norway is more scarcely populated than the US:
List of countries and dependencies by population density

177 United States of America
211 Norway
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_density

So in theory you should be set.
PS. I love America too, but don't tell anyone since I'm trying to maintain an anti-American image;-)

[ting]

It makes taxes bigger and worsen competitiveness. And in the end it lowers our incomes and does not encourage to have baby.

Taxes get bigger, yeat you get more back. As for competitivness I don't agree, and most of the stuff I read about competitivness says that my country is very competitive. AFAIK Italy and Spain have the worst support for parents in Europe. Their birth rate is among the lovest. On the opposite end you have France and the Nordic countries with good support and higher birth rates.

[toki]

Wrong. People are fed up with the insurance companies.

But we don't want to simply replace the insurance beaurocracy with the government beaurocracy. Government is very likely to be much worse.

We have mandatory healthcare with a combination of private and public insurance companies. Not everything has to become government only. It's still a market and it's not tax financed. Tax and health insurance are still two things here.

[szr]

The US could in theory do all we do cheaper, due to the scaling. (You get more JSF for your dollar if you purchase 1000 instead of 100). An example would be obscure treatments. We have to maintain capabilities for treatments that are extremely rare, even though it makes no sense from an economical point of view.No doubt, the cost of maintaining the ability to perform obscure treatments is expensive--especially for a country that doesn't perform a lot of them--but not nearly as expensive as pioneering those treatments.

The United States churns out research, new drugs and new treatments like no other. And as much as we demonized them, much of that is made possible by the private capital generated by for-profit pharmaceutical and medical equipment companies. In the case of the pharmaceutical companies, the heavy lifting is done by the American medical consumer who pays for that research while the rest of the world benefits from it by circumventing compensation for that product through local laws that allow domestic producers to create generic copies of those drugs.

I'd love it if everyone, everywhere, could have access to all the medical care they could ever need, but there's no such thing as a win-win situation in a zero-sum game. The price of dramatically slashing the cost of medical care in the United States would be felt most at the vanguard of medical research. Would it be worth it? It would be a godsend for some (those with well understood disorders for which treatments are readily available), but a great loss for others (those for whom the prognosis hangs on the rate at which research into their ailment can speed a cure).


As for the distance, Norway is more scarcely populated than the US:
List of countries and dependencies by population density

177 United States of America
211 Norway
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_densityIt's not as simple as scaling for size or for population density because most things don't scale, or scale very poorly. For example, a gallon of gas doesn't move a car in the United States x-times the distance that the same gallon of gas would move the same car in Norway just because the United States is x-times the size of Norway.

[Pars]

It's not as simple as scaling for size or for population density because most things don't scale, or scale very poorly. For example, 3.78541178 liters of gas doesn't move a car in the United States x-times the distance that the same 3.78541178 liters of gas would move the same car in Norway just because the United States is x-times the size of Norway.

Fixed p-)

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

[ting]

No doubt, the cost of maintaining the ability to perform obscure treatments is expensive--especially for a country that doesn't perform a lot of them--but not nearly as expensive as pioneering those treatments.

The United States churns out research, new drugs and new treatments like no other. And as much as we demonized them, much of that is made possible by the private capital generated by for-profit pharmaceutical and medical equipment companies. In the case of the pharmaceutical companies, the heavy lifting is done by the American medical consumer who pays for that research while the rest of the world benefits from it by circumventing compensation for that product through local laws that allow domestic producers to create generic copies of those drugs.

I'd love it if everyone, everywhere, could have access to all the medical care they could ever need, but there's no such thing as a win-win situation in a zero-sum game. The price of dramatically slashing the cost of medical care in the United States would be felt most at the vanguard of medical research. Would it be worth it? It would be a godsend for some (those with well understood disorders for which treatments are readily available), but a great loss for others (those for whom the prognosis hangs on the rate at which research into their ailment can speed a cure).

I don't agree with most of what you said.:lol: I don't know for a fact, however I think you are overstating the amount of medicine resarch some of the companies get out of the money they get for the drugs. It's a lot more complex than that. Think about how much money is spent on lawyers protecting the drugs. How much the companies generate in profit for their owners etc..

I'm not saying that resarch will not suffer, however I doubt it will be that much.

Also afaik the rules regulating drug prices and generic medicines have to comply with WTO rules and conventions. AFAIK, the US government is letting drug companies take extra profits through some US only rules. Congress must have agreed to this, no doubt due to some well placed campaign financing.

Finaly if it's true that the US consumer finances US drug resarch wich us Euros benefit from for nothing, I would accept a slower development cycle. I don't want americans to have it like they do now so I can get the latest brand of medicine 1 year earlier. In fact I find it strange that americans accept this, since they have a horrible time paying for "the bum next door".;-)



It's not as simple as scaling for size or for population density because most things don't scale, or scale very poorly. For example, a gallon of gas doesn't move a car in the United States x-times the distance that the same gallon of gas would move the same car in Norway just because the United States is x-times the size of Norway.

I'm sure you can find exceptions, however I think as a rule of thumb mass production has it's benefit.;)

[Derbedeu]

The United States churns out research, new drugs and new treatments like no other. And as much as we demonized them, much of that is made possible by the private capital generated by for-profit pharmaceutical and medical equipment companies. In the case of the pharmaceutical companies, the heavy lifting is done by the American medical consumer who pays for that research while the rest of the world benefits from it by circumventing compensation for that product through local laws that allow domestic producers to create generic copies of those drugs.



Just thought it might be worth mentioning that 6 out of the top ten drug companies in the world are European, including the top spot (Novartis), according to revenue. Also, on avg, they seem to spend about equal to the US companies on Helathcare R&D. The idea that a single-payer system will result in less medical innovation seems to be a myth.

[Garnex]

1. Of the 47 million people in the United States that do not have health insurance, 35 million are illegal aliens
2. The high cost of Drugs in the United States is a result of other nations healthcare systems demanded lower cost medicines. The increased expenses of these drug companies due to "givng away" drugs at a loss are then passed down to the US market.
3. If the US goes to a nationalized healthcare system where would the Canadians go in case they got really sick.

[TallGuy]

With all due respect to Norway (I love Norway), you're comparing a country with barely half the population of New York City to a country of over 300 million people spread over 3.79 million square miles?
Tedchnically, total population shouldn't matter. They have socialized healthcare in France(65.5m), Canada(33.5 m) Japan(127 m.) with good success.

[MrPilikia]

1. Of the 47 million people in the United States that do not have health insurance, 35 million are illegal aliens
2. The high cost of Drugs in the United States is a result of other nations healthcare systems demanded lower cost medicines. The increased expenses of these drug companies due to "givng away" drugs at a loss are then passed down to the US market.
3. If the US goes to a nationalized healthcare system where would the Canadians go in case they got really sick.

Point #1 above is false.

Reputable, scientific surveys show that somewhere between 15 and 22 percent of the uninsured are illegal immigrants. The U.S. Census Bureau (CPS 2006) reported that there were 10.2 million uninsured "foreign born" individuals who were "not citizens" (i.e., 21.7% of the total 47 million uninsured). It is unclear how many of these individuals are legally in the U.S. on visas versus illegal immigrants, so that number could be substantially lower.

In addition, the Center for Immigration Studies, a non-partisan, independent think tank, uses socio-demographic characteristics in the CPS data to estimate the size of the illegal immigrant population. The Center for Immigration Studies estimates that 15.4% of the 47 million uninsured (7.2 million) are illegal immigrants.

Where did you get your numbers?

[Mastermind]

^^ If the estimate of 11 million to 14 million (avg 12.4...which is about the usual number most articles on illegal immigrations cite...so, I have to say it passes the "smell test") residents in the USA are illegally here, then that would seem to indicate the following:

12.4 million minus the above cited 7.4 million uninsured aliens equals about 5 million illegal aliens that do have some sort of health insurance...now what illegal aline would get to have health insurance? Well, we know for example, last year, Tyson Foods and some Walmart suppliers in Arkansas were both raided by INS agents and found a substantial number (in the hundreds) of people who worked there were actually in the US illegally. However, they had used false SS cards to gain their employment under false pretenses (for the most part). Most of these people, working as legitiame US citizens, paying into the SS system (falsely) and living with the appropriate benefits probably had company sponsored health insurance.

So, we can thus assume from this example, a great many (about 40%) of illegal aliens have managed to elude the usual checks to slime their way into good paying, well benefited jobs that other "Honest Injun" US citizens might have held.

That revelation now brings up another concern. If these "Ghost" citizens, that is illegals posing and passing themselves as legitimate citizens constitute an alarming number of illegals that are not likely to be noticed as "Illegals"...how could any census or "fact finding" estimate be produced to learn exactly how many illegals are here?

If the official gross estimate are posted at about 12.5 million, then we find these hints of even more illegals already leeched into our jobs marets, it very well could be true that there really are between 20 million to 35 or possibly even 40 million illegals here we don't even know about.

This is very indicative that Garnexes posted item #1 could very well be nearly correct.

The most spooky bottom line is, we can clearly see, we have no idea really of just how many illegal aliens are in our nation right now.

[szr]

Also afaik the rules regulating drug prices and generic medicines have to comply with WTO rules and conventions. AFAIK, the US government is letting drug companies take extra profits through some US only rules. Congress must have agreed to this, no doubt due to some well placed campaign financing.There are indeed WTO rules regarding drugs which are regularly broken by other countries, and legal battles often end up in WTO dispute tribunals.


Finaly if it's true that the US consumer finances US drug resarch wich us Euros benefit from for nothing, I would accept a slower development cycle. I don't want americans to have it like they do now so I can get the latest brand of medicine 1 year earlier. In fact I find it strange that americans accept this, since they have a horrible time paying for "the bum next door".;-) Most Americans have no idea...

Just thought it might be worth mentioning that 6 out of the top ten drug companies in the world are European, including the top spot (Novartis), according to revenue. Also, on avg, they seem to spend about equal to the US companies on Helathcare R&D. Where they're headquarted is insignificant in that matter. Whether they're headquartered in Geneva or Nauru, they're multinational corporations whose largest market by far is the United States.
The idea that a single-payer system will result in less medical innovation seems to be a myth.Please continue.

Tedchnically, total population shouldn't matter. They have socialized healthcare in France(65.5m), Canada(33.5 m) Japan(127 m.) with good success.Don't see where you get that population shouldn't matter. The only country you listed that even comes close to us is Japan. And while I agree that Japan is an exceptional country from which we can learn a lot, our population is still over twice theirs, and spread over a continent compared thiers which is highly concentrated in one of the most densely populated parcels of land on earth. Which is why I believe if someone's feeling adventurous enough to institute government-managed and -finananced health care in the United States, it should occur at the state level, where populations and geographical areas most closely resemble those of countries with existing social healthcare systems.

[okiebugg]

Our beloved Congress is going to shove down out collective throats a bungled ill-conceived stealthy system to change the greatest health system (in the big picture) in theworld.

We currently have 47 million uninsured citizens.....I'll agree too many.
We currently have too many to count illegals without health insurance.
We currently have 33 million on Medicaid read unreimbursed insurance.
Medicaid is an offshoot of the welfare system which IMO is now a lifestyle to far too many people.
We currently have God knows how many enemployed or underemployed who under different circumstances would be insured and working

We have 1200 private companies in the US who are Health Care Carriers.

Essentially, our Congress/Pres under the cover of night want to covertly replace the 1200 private carriers.
The Congress/Pres want to insure the 47 million with "Government Health Care", and eventually every citizen with the same.
The Congress/Pres want to cover the illegals and their families with the same health care at no cost (they for the most part don't pay taxes)
The Congress/Pres are going to replace Medicare and or Medicaid with a system of diminishing benefit insurance.

All of this cost is going to be borne by the good ole tax-payer.....1.6 TRILLION per year not including interest on borrowing or printing the money.

What is it going to do????????? you ask???????????????

Dr's will be paid a fixed salary....no incentives. They will essentially be Government Employees. A Dr will make the same if he sees 15 patients per day or 50......What energy level do you have???
There will be little interest in R&D for new technology
There will be less money for Pharmaceutical R&D
The system will be corrupted beyond repair.
All under the cover of darkness

Welcome to the USA

Our Constitution will protect you......NOT

[Nano]

I already pay for medical, medicaid, and private insurance all of which only one I have ever used and it was only once. If given the freedom I would opt out of social security, medical and medicaid; ironically enough in the land of the free I have no such freedom. Responsible people are who are being feed to the grinder here and the irresponsible continue their chant for more freebies. It seems to me that government mandated health care for the uninsured is what drives the costs for everyone else.

Octotard is being allowed to raise children and I'm certain she is ill qualified to do so for having so many kids without the means to do so indicates she is ill equipped. I of course and the rest of the responsible bunch get stuck paying for some else's irresponsibility. Perhaps I should go out bang some whores have a couple of children I can ill afford get the tax benefit for the dependents and get all the other freebies.
This is nothing more than the government taking more for nothing from the people who are responsible for themselves at least as much as the government allows us to be and handing it over to their slave dependent voters. I don't expect much though given that this legislation comes from the original slave party and rather than removing the shackles from black Americans they seem to just put them on tighter and lengthening the chains/rope.

The above is just one legal and moral issue before that is even answered one must first question the constitutionality of government run health insurance in the first place. In my view of our constitution one can only argue that such power lies with the states if one would make the argument for social programs. Here is a commentary that shares my views on this whole matter. http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0720/p09s01-coop.html

I'm all for choice and my choice is not to pay for something I already pay for and don't use or be coerced into paying for it. The freedom to choose is one of the very few freedoms we truly have as human beings and even that people have managed to slowly, but surely take that away from us. The country is simply FUBAR when the majority believes that it is because government is not involved enough that costs and prices for health care are so high. Our country has become a mixture of both fascist and national socialism rolled into what was originally a republic and what is now touted as a democracy.

P.S. For those who think that I'm in this because I'm rich or even middle class think again. I'm a working blue collar who has the burn scars to prove it.

[okiebugg]

In todays political climate, you are an anamoly.....wanting to opt out. Unless you have a career choice which is guaranteed to pay you in your "Golden?" years, you cannot afford it. Fortunately, I was in the Military at the highest NCO level and I have a good retirement (for now). I have saved some money through the stock exchange, and worked all of my life.......I'm afraid that life as we know it is gonna get tough if something is not done about the relaxed use of the Constitution, and printing money.

Mark my words, two to three years from now we wont be able to piss or eat



I already pay for medical, medicaid, and private insurance all of which only one I have ever used and it was only once. If given the freedom I would opt out of social security, medical and medicaid; ironically enough in the land of the free I have no such freedom. Responsible people are who are being feed to the grinder here and the irresponsible continue their chant for more freebies. It seems to me that government mandated health care for the uninsured is what drives the costs for everyone else.

Octotard is being allowed to raise children and I'm certain she is ill qualified to do so for having so many kids without the means to do so indicates she is ill equipped. I of course and the rest of the responsible bunch get stuck paying for some else's irresponsibility. Perhaps I should go out bang some whores have a couple of children I can ill afford get the tax benefit for the dependents and get all the other freebies.
This is nothing more than the government taking more for nothing from the people who are responsible for themselves at least as much as the government allows us to be and handing it over to their slave dependent voters. I don't expect much though given that this legislation comes from the original slave party and rather than removing the shackles from black Americans they seem to just put them on tighter and lengthening the chains/rope.

The above is just one legal and moral issue before that is even answered one must first question the constitutionality of government run health insurance in the first place. In my view of our constitution one can only argue that such power lies with the states if one would make the argument for social programs. Here is a commentary that shares my views on this whole matter. http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0720/p09s01-coop.html

I'm all for choice and my choice is not to pay for something I already pay for and don't use or be coerced into paying for it. The freedom to choose is one of the very few freedoms we truly have as human beings and even that people have managed to slowly, but surely take that away from us. The country is simply FUBAR when the majority believes that it is because government is not involved enough that costs and prices for health care are so high. Our country has become a mixture of both fascist and national socialism rolled into what was originally a republic and what is now touted as a democracy.

P.S. For those who think that I'm in this because I'm rich or even middle class think again. I'm a working blue collar who has the burn scars to prove it.

[Garnex]

The IRS says that 12 million false social security numbers are being used in the United States. Many illegals, perhaps the same amount, are day laborers and don't need bogus social security numbers. Many of the millions have families and no insurance. Many of the SS# numbers are being used more than once. The US citizens is left to pay for this. The math of 35 million illegals is conservative. The 12 million number is only the tip of the iceberg and continuely gets miss reported as the total number of illegals

[California Joe]

I don't have any answers but what irritates the hell out of me is the opposition to this particular bill suddenly screaming "Hold on, we need to study this. The Pres is moving too fast on this important issue!!!" You've had how many decades to get it right? Every single asshole politician in both parties plays lip service to this issue every single f*cking election and only now, when it looks like the President might actually hold their feet to the fire (even if the bill is not remotely perfect) do they want to study it. They start freakling out and demand a slow pace to get it right. It's all self serving bullsh*t politics. We, the people, do not figure into their collective vision. It's all about how they position themselves for reelection.

And for the record, if you're in this country illegaly, you're a criminal and you deserve deportation and nothing else.

[Nano]

In todays political climate, you are an anamoly.....wanting to opt out. Unless you have a career choice which is guaranteed to pay you in your "Golden?" years, you cannot afford it. Fortunately, I was in the Military at the highest NCO level and I have a good retirement (for now). I have saved some money through the stock exchange, and worked all of my life.......I'm afraid that life as we know it is gonna get tough if something is not done about the relaxed use of the Constitution, and printing money.

Mark my words, two to three years from now we wont be able to piss or eat

I will simply continue to live the standard and quantity of life that I can afford and will afford to do so. The only chance I have at being able to "retire" is to save my pennies and start my own business. The reason I choose to opt out is simply because it is in essence stealing and taking away from some else's future. I can just as easily be on my way to financial security by going all in and stealing for a living. I choose to be a good and for the most part honest person, but perhaps you're right that maybe a luxury that I can ill afford. The fact is all our social programs are Ponzi schemes on such scales and dimensions that it will take a long time before they unravel.

[Nano]

The IRS says that 12 million false social security numbers are being used in the United States. Many illegals, perhaps the same amount, are day laborers and don't need bogus social security numbers. Many of the millions have families and no insurance. Many of the SS# numbers are being used more than once. The US citizens is left to pay for this. The math of 35 million illegals is conservative. The 12 million number is only the tip of the iceberg and continuely gets miss reported as the total number of illegals

The IRS more than anyone has better figures than most on how many illegals there are. My analysis is that if one takes relevant IRS data figures and double them you come close to the number of illegals. I would say that illegals comprise about 10%±2% of the total population.

[RamQan]

I love one argument that anti-free healthcare people use, it goes like this:

"You loose the benefit of staying healthy"

If the only reason you stay healthy is to save money, then the healthcare system isn't your biggest problem. I mean, do you have any plans on deliberately get sick just to get something back for your tax money? rofl

This is also tied to the argument that with free healthcare everyone will go to the doctor for every little problem. That's like saying you can't serve "all you can eat" at a restaurant because all guests would eat themselves to death.

Besides, isn't it better if a few people who doesn't need medical care go anyway, than the alternative? That you have to carefully think through what you can afford?

And the loss of choice argument. The idea is that free medical care will drive all alternatives out of existence. That's like saying air shouldn't be free, because if it costed money there could be alternatives. As far as I know, all human beings are treated the same way for the same illness. What alternative do they speak of? Quality? No one would even be a doctor if they where of "poor quality".

On the other hand, in free market, doctors, like any business, wants you to come back. So there's an incentive not to fully cure people. In socialised health care, they will want to treat you as good as possible, so you don't come back again.

[okiebugg]

[QUOTE=RamQan;4300322]I love one argument that anti-free healthcare people use, it goes like this:

"You loose the benefit of staying healthy"

If the only reason you stay healthy is to save money, then the healthcare system isn't your biggest problem. I mean, do you have any plans on deliberately get sick just to get something back for your tax money? rofl

This is also tied to the argument that with free healthcare everyone will go to the doctor for every little problem. That's like saying you can't serve "all you can eat" at a restaurant because all guests would eat themselves to death.

Besides, isn't it better if a few people who doesn't need medical care go anyway, than the alternative? That you have to carefully think through what you can afford?



I mean, do you have any plans on deliberately get sick just to get something back for your tax money?

WHAT?


What alternative do they speak of? Quality? "No one would even be a Doctor if they were of poor quality"

WHAT?

Your premise is poorly thought out and has no fact

[eskachig]

Even though I have an excellent health care plan through my work, and am lucky enough to be fairly healthy, I'd love for US to have a universal health care system.

Something that many people don't mention is that such a system is a boon to employers. My company pays over $400 a month for my benefits, and that's money they could put into investment or our salaries.

[okiebugg]

Even though I have an excellent health care plan through my work, and am lucky enough to be fairly healthy, I'd love for US to have a universal health care system.

Something that many people don't mention is that such a system is a boon to employers. My company pays over $400 a month for my benefits, and that's money they could put into investment or our salaries.

I envy you that you are young and healthy. I am middle age and healthy----but---lots of preemptive tests, and maladies of not taking as good of care of myself as I did. read young and stupid on my part.

As much as you take care of yourself, joints do wear out. One of my hips has been replaced because of wear and tear.

Take care of yourself my friend, but remember you are invincible today....Everything you do to your body today will affect you in about 25 to 30 years:roll:

[Chiptox]

This is also tied to the argument that with free healthcare everyone will go to the doctor for every little problem. That's like saying you can't serve "all you can eat" at a restaurant because all guests would eat themselves to death.
Wait wait wait. I thought the argument for universal healthcare was to open accessability to persons who cannot recieve the care they need now.

By definition universal healthcare will offer more care to more people. That's the idea. I'm sorry senor, but that dog won't hunt.



Efforts for preventitive care have so far been a mixed bag. My biggest worry is that, now that the govt is officially in the business, they will take steps to mandate health initiatives rather than letting us work for ourselves in our own self-interest. I see this as a first step to banning various substances from tobacco to cheeseburgers, activities like motorcycling and base jumping because now it is their job to keep the population healthy.



It's going to cost more, just brace yourself for it. I'll try not to be glib with my "I told you so" after it all comes down.

[11 Bravo]

such a system is a boon to employers. My company pays over $400 a month for my benefits, and that's money they could put into investment or our salaries.



A boon to employers?....... the money they spend would now be in your pockets ???.

My friend you are delerious... that $400 they spend now on you would likely in short order be alot more they would have to 'SUPPLY' .. er ah shhh be taxed....... to keep you in the new universal oh so great free lunch healthcare big government handout program.
It's like a game really as this money you so want to be yours you will certainly never see , and you'll likely have to pick up more of the tab and then some especially when all the broke****s and illgeals feed at the free lunch healthcare trough of utopia.

[RamQan]

okiebugg (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/member.php?u=71082): The benefit of staying healthy is being healthy.

As for the choice part; a doctor is a doctor, if he is a doctor he has passed the requirements. Sure, there are highly skilled surgeons and things of that nature, but there is really nothing stopping anyone from going to those. Or do you think a highly skilled surgeon would stop working just because he's employed by the state?

I mean you don't ask for private police. There are better and worse cops, why shouldn't people get to hire their own cops?

I really can't see why anyone would be against free health care.

[Hollis]

I really can't see why anyone would be against free health care.



No such thing as Free health care, someone pays for it.

[RamQan]

No such thing as Free health care, someone pays for it.

Free refers to being free for anyone. You are a free man/woman doesn't mean I could purchase you for nothing, it means you have freedom.

As for the cost:
The state have an incentive to keep costs down, thus giving people what they need. A state run health care will want to cure people permanently so they don't come back and cost more money.

In free market the incentive is to sell as much as possible. I've seen advertising from the United States, always telling everyone to buy more pills and that they are sick.

[Derbedeu]

Problem with reliance on the free market is that it fails to regulate itself, as Greenspan sheepishly found out. Yes we have regulation in place, but unfortunately it is toothless and never takes any action even when presented with evidence (e.g. Henry Markopolos writing to the SEC in 1999 to warn about Bernie Madoff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Markopolos). Not surprisingly, it always ends in the same way, with the government confronted with an exploding scandal (e.g. Savings & Loans Crises, Enron, WorldCom, Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, and the whole derivative scandals, housing bubble, Madoff, etc.), costing taxpayers Billions of dollars, and the government promising to get tough by instilling tough regulation, yet never doing so.

I blame this ingrained distrust of government and laissez-faire attitude towards business on our history. In the days of Manifest Destiny, if you didn't like your neighbors, just move out west. Looking to get away? Move out west. Expansion into the west alleviated the need for government regulation and helped instill an intrepid and independent streak in us, which was perfectly fine back in the old days, but it doesn't work like that anymore.

What does this have to do about healthcare? Well two things: first, as usual we as a population remain skeptical of the government having anything to do with running healthcare. Government is automatically equated with being bad and untrustworthy. The free market is thus believed to be the best system for healthcare, even though it has been shown time and time again that what drives everything in the free market system is profits and profits alone (and sadly it's usually short-term profits at the expense of long-term prosperity), not the well being of people. Secondly, even if we do pass some sort of government-regulated healthcare, I have no doubt that the idiots on Capitol Hill will find some way to muck it up. They've proven to be useless when it comes to regulating anything, and it won't be any different with healthcare.

Solution? I don't really know, but part of it will have to be changing our mentality that government is a bad thing. To me government is ultimately nothing but a tool, and like all tools its effectiveness depends on how one utilizes it. Unfortunately, too often our government is nothing more than a stepping stone to furthering one's own interests at the cost of the regular taxpayers. And this is a charge that can be levied at both sides of the aisle.

[Jobu]

Solution? I don't really know, but part of it will have to be changing our mentality that government is a bad thing.

Except of course government was intricately involved in many of these scandals you mentioned. The housing bubble was created by government mandate. Specifically HUD required Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to give over 50% of their loans to the very people who could not afford them, low and median income families. They had to give out risky loans, by law. Fannie and Freddie lead, the rest of the mortgage industry follows since they were the only 2 GSE's. Whatever they did was federally backed and thus, safe. It set the standard for the entire housing sector.

It's not a lack of regulation. It's bad regulation.

[Derbedeu]

Except of course government was intricately involved in many of these scandals you mentioned. The housing bubble was created by government mandate. Specifically HUD required Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to give over 50% of their loans to the very people who could not afford them, low and median income families. They had to give out risky loans, by law. Fannie and Freddie lead, the rest of the mortgage industry follows since they were the only 2 GSE's. Whatever they did was federally backed and thus, safe. It set the standard for the entire housing sector.

It's not a lack of regulation. It's bad regulation.

I'm not doubting that. Either it's regulation that isn't enforced, or it's regulation that isn't thought out well. But with scandals like Bernie Madoff, you have a government that failed to do anything, even when faced with evidence. I'm just saying that our government (and I'm including both parties in this) is simply inefficient and doing an all-around poor job.

[DS73]

I'm not doubting that. Either it's regulation that isn't enforced, or it's regulation that isn't thought out well. But with scandals like Bernie Madoff, you have a government that failed to do anything, even when faced with evidence. I'm just saying that our government (and I'm including both parties in this) is simply inefficient and doing an all-around poor job.
Dude, it's not inefficiency. The system is not designed to be efficient to begin with.

The scandals, frauds etc. are intrinsic for american political "antrepeneur" life.
You are not going to get anything else when Senate is producing solutions.

It's ridiculous when the politicians decide how many planes Air force can have. It's ridiculous when the politicians decide the details of medical system.
They're simply incapable to do that. They don't have nor knowledge neither time to produce appropriate thoughtful decisions. And it's not their duty.
Such decisions can be only conclusions drawn by specialists in respective fields based on facts and studies.

Politician capability can go only as far "Yes/No" go. After all they are nothing but "vox populi", who in theory express population' desires.

For example if population wants total medical care system the politicians can express this desire and produce budget for some commission, that obviously is built from different desirably antagonistic specialist groups. There is no other way to produce working solutions. All success stories (like European GSM, USA industrial programs from WW2) followed this simple recipe.

[Holycrusader]

And for the record, if you're in this country illegaly, you're a criminal and you deserve deportation and nothing else.

Good point... Thats why I do not understant whats all that talk that illegals will gain from US
healthcare.
USa already spend enough money to on healthcare to have it "free" for its citizen. Its stupid that Americans paid for simple injection more than I would pay for operation in private clinic...

[Chiptox]

Good point... Thats why I do not understant whats all that talk that illegals will gain from US
healthcare.
USa already spend enough money to on healthcare to have it "free" for its citizen. Its stupid that Americans paid for simple injection more than I would pay for operation in private clinic...
Unless you pay no taxes you paid significantly more than your co-payment for your operation.


When your average American pays for a shot they pay roughly what it actually costs (or their insurance company does). Just because you pay less out-of-pocket for medical care doesn't mean that the larger, actual, expense isn't passed on via taxes. In the end I would think you end up paying roughly the same as we Americans do.


There is some truth to it though. Persons with insurance in the US pay retail for their medical care. Every expense is tripled and passed on to the insurance company. A lot of this is because there are so many un-insured in the system unable to pay for their care so the extra costs are passed on to those who have the ability to pay. Legally, hospitals have to take people in regardless if they have insurance or not. This has led to a system swamped with people who don't even bother paying for their healthcare and instead mooch off the legally mandated generosity of hospitals.

I'd like to see a slight overhaul of the system where the government perhaps taps an individuals Social Security to pay outstanding medical debt and/or gives favorable loans to those who have high medical expenses. This way hospitals who provide care to those with no money to pay at least get some compensation. This reduction of deadbeats clogging the system should lower costs for those who actually play by the rules and buy insurance to pay for their healthcare.

[Holycrusader]

Good post Chiptox... I agree to some level.
But you didnt see that I talk about private clinic. Current US healthcare is simply very expensive, because of it is hidden costsharing as you said.

[okiebugg]

rofl
okiebugg (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/member.php?u=71082): The benefit of staying healthy is being healthy.

As for the choice part; a doctor is a doctor, if he is a doctor he has passed the requirements. Sure, there are highly skilled surgeons and things of that nature, but there is really nothing stopping anyone from going to those. Or do you think a highly skilled surgeon would stop working just because he's employed by the state?

I mean you don't ask for private police. There are better and worse cops, why shouldn't people get to hire their own cops?

I really can't see why anyone would be against free health care.roflroflrofl


To begin, a Doctor like any other profession is not necessarily a Doctor. Many are Doctor by name only. Most are good, many are not. I've seen it every day of my adult life working as a Force Medical Corpsman, A Physicians Assistant (By education) and an RN (by education)

"Or do you think a highly skilled surgeon would stop working just because he's employed by the state?"

I've seen it both ways....Military and Civilian.

Military Dr's tend not to see as many patients per day because they don't have to. They get paid the same seeing 10 patients per day as 30. Make sense?
Civilian Dr's tend to see as many patients as possible so as to make more money to pay expenses, overhead etc. Make sense?

To answer your question, a Skilled Surgeon would not stop working because he is a Federal Employee, He can simply slow down. I f employed by the Govt, his overhead and expenses are paid by the Fed and he makes the same approximately as any other Surgeon.

I don't understand your COP analogy.

""I really can't see why anyone would be against free health care"".

There is no free lunch, and there will be no free Health Care.

As an aside, there is an old saying that being a Military Doctor is not necessarily a choice.......Many are there because they can't cut it in private practice.....It's only a saying, but there appears to be a modicum of truth to it.

[okiebugg]

Good point... Thats why I do not understant whats all that talk that illegals will gain from US
healthcare.
USa already spend enough money to on healthcare to have it "free" for its citizen. Its stupid that Americans paid for simple injection more than I would pay for operation in private clinic...

I agree that illegals are shadow people. They had better be glad that I'm not in Law Enforcement.......But I'm not

So you don't understand what all of the talk about illegals is about???? I'll tell you what. Seems to me that with our Political climate, and as afraid as our politicians are of the Hispanic voting bloc, the illegal that are in this country are as entitled to the same rights and inclusion as a true American Citizen. Estimates of 12 million are not correct IMO, more like 18 to 24 million are the numbers I have seen. These folks are entitled to the same protection as those of us who are naturalized or born on American soil

Tell me how many dollars it takes to care for 20 million illegals in the healthcare system?????

[Fat Lazy American]

roflroflroflrofl


To begin, a Doctor like any other profession is not necessarily a Doctor. Many are Doctor by name only. Most are good, many are not. I've seen it every day of my adult life working as a Force Medical Corpsman, A Physicians Assistant (By education) and an RN (by education)

"Or do you think a highly skilled surgeon would stop working just because he's employed by the state?"

I've seen it both ways....Military and Civilian.

Military Dr's tend not to see as many patients per day because they don't have to. They get paid the same seeing 10 patients per day as 30. Make sense?
Civilian Dr's tend to see as many patients as possible so as to make more money to pay expenses, overhead etc. Make sense?

To answer your question, a Skilled Surgeon would not stop working because he is a Federal Employee, He can simply slow down. I f emploryed by the Govt, his overhead and expenses are paid by the Fed and he makes the same approximately as any other Surgeon.

I don't understand your COP analogy.

""I really can't see why anyone would be against free health care"".

There is no free lunch, and there will be no free Health Care.

As an aside, there is an old saying that being a Military Doctor is not necessarily a choice.......Many are there because they can't cut it in private practice.....It's only a saying, but there appears to be a modicum of truth to it.

I think you imagine yourself arguing against government care, but it sounds to me you're actually arguing in favor of government care.

Less patients per day means lower costs, more time with patients, and a higher likelihood that a given medical problem is solved by a single visit.

A doctor or surgeon that's just trying to do as many visits and/or procedures as possible in a given allotted time is inflating the cost of medical care and probably not doing a very good job.

And WRAMC and Bethesda (and military hospitals in general) are more well-administered than any civilian hospital or clinic I've been to -- by far. The patient care, of course, varies from doctor to doctor and nurse to nurse -- some of the best doctors and nurses I've been to have been military, but I've seen some good doctors in the civilian world, too. (Of course, all of the worst doctors I've seen have been civilians.) And Navy Corpsmen in particular are so much better than the techs running around civilian hospitals it's not even funny. (Of course, this probably wouldn't be replicated in a civilian government run health care, but it's worth noting nonetheless.)

And you're just dead wrong about military doctors not being able to hack it in "private practice".

[okiebugg]

I think you imagine yourself arguing against government care, but it sounds to me you're actually arguing in favor of government care.

Less patients per day means lower costs, more time with patients, and a higher likelihood that a given medical problem is solved by a single visit.

A doctor or surgeon that's just trying to do as many visits and/or procedures as possible in a given allotted time is inflating the cost of medical care and probably not doing a very good job.

And WRAMC and Bethesda (and military hospitals in general) are more well-administered than any civilian hospital or clinic I've been to -- by far. The patient care, of course, varies from doctor to doctor and nurse to nurse -- some of the best doctors and nurses I've been to have been military, but I've seen some good doctors in the civilian world, too. (Of course, all of the worst doctors I've seen have been civilians.) And Navy Corpsmen in particular are so much better than the techs running around civilian hospitals it's not even funny. (Of course, this probably wouldn't be replicated in a civilian government run health care, but it's worth noting nonetheless.)

And you're just dead wrong about military doctors not being able to hack it in "private practice".

I'll change my diatribe from "Military" Doctors to "VA Administration" Doctors It's what I should have said in the first place.

[/QUOTE]""A doctor or surgeon that's just trying to do as many visits and/or procedures as possible in a given allotted time is inflating the cost of medical care and probably not doing a very good job.""[/QUOTE]

The nail has just been hit on the head. American Health Care is the most expensive system in the world.

[/QUOTE]Less patients per day means lower costs, more time with patients, and a higher likelihood that a given medical problem is solved by a single visit.[/QUOTE] This is exactly correct.....except..... there is a shortage of Doctors and most if needing to see the Dr "today" have to go to the Emergency Room at the local hospital and wait 6-8 hours

I absolutely do not want Government health care.

I have absolutely no problem with 'Military Hospitals" such as Bethesda (Been there done that)

[RamQan]

okiebugg: Again, free health care means free for anyone, not costless. Free as in freedom, not free as in 0 dollars. You say USA is a free country, does that mean the country can be obtained for 0 dollars?

Also, of course you've seen doctors who are doctors by name only, you're living in USA, where people simply can get a medical license and start a private practise. In a country with real free health care they require a lot from their doctors. Not requiring anything special from their doctors is like having people in the military that isn't doing their jobs.

As for the cop example, it's quite simple, cops are for everyone. They are supposed to protect everyone and get paid by taxes. Would you want a system of free market cops? The principal is the same, you pay a private organization for protection (protection against medical problems) and they can charge what you're willing to pay.

[okiebugg]

okiebugg: Again, free health care means free for anyone, not costless. Free as in freedom, not free as in 0 dollars. You say USA is a free country, does that mean the country can be obtained for 0 dollars?

Also, of course you've seen doctors who are doctors by name only, you're living in USA, where people simply can get a medical license and start a private practise. In a country with real free health care they require a lot from their doctors. Not requiring anything special from their doctors is like having people in the military that isn't doing their jobs.

As for the cop example, it's quite simple, cops are for everyone. They are supposed to protect everyone and get paid by taxes. Would you want a system of free market cops? The principal is the same, you pay a private organization for protection (protection against medical problems) and they can charge what you're willing to pay.

I don't know where you are from that free means free.

I live in the USA where freedom consists of responsibilities including paying taxes. What the Congress wants us to do is pay more taxes to pay for free health care

Cops also live from these taxes paid. So does Welfare. So does the illegal alien problem and on and on and on

[toki]

I don't know where you are from that free means free.

I live in the USA where freedom consists of responsibilities including paying taxes. What the Congress wants us to do is pay more taxes to pay for free health care

Cops also live from these taxes paid. So does Welfare. So does the illegal alien problem and on and on and on

There are health care systems that are not tax funded. The mandatory insurance i split with my employer (law here), does not flow into anything else than health care. No welfare, no cops, etc. Healthcare does not equal 'another tax'. It's strictly sepparated, at least here. They are still insurance companies - private and public, but there's no free money flow directed by the government.

[okiebugg]

There are health care systems that are not tax funded. The mandatory insurance i split with my employer (law here), does not flow into anything else than health care. No welfare, no cops, etc. Healthcare does not equal 'another tax'. It's strictly sepparated, at least here. They are still insurance companies - private and public, but there's no free money flow directed by the government.

Congratulations....you hit the lottery

[toki]

Congratulations....you hit the lottery

ehmm? Not sure how you mean it.

Still it's a mandatory/socialized healthcare system, everybody has healthcare here. BUT of course you pay for it. Maybe your congress should go back to the drawing board.

[okiebugg]

ehmm? Not sure how you mean it.

Still it's a mandatory/socialized healthcare system, everybody has healthcare here. BUT of course you pay for it. Maybe your congress should go back to the drawing board.

I mean it in a good way. In USA, I pay taxes as do all Americans. In addition, if I want health care, I pay a fairly stiff monthly payment in addition to my taxes.

I would be willing to bet $$$ that your Health Care is administrated by Medical Professionals unlike mine which will be administered by our Congress.

As far as going back to the drawing board, Our God given rights are administered philosophically by our Constitution. Seems to me that this administration is allowing us to have rights granted to us by them?

[toki]

I mean it in a good way. In USA, I pay taxes as do all Americans. In addition, if I want health care, I pay a fairly stiff monthly payment in addition to my taxes.

I would be willing to bet $$$ that your Health Care is administrated by Medical Professionals unlike mine which will be administered by our Congress.

As far as going back to the drawing board, Our God given rights are administered philosophically by our Constitution. Seems to me that this administration is allowing us to have rights granted to us by them?

No system is perfect. You think twice about hiring workers if you pay so much healthcare for them. It's tough on employers!

But it makes people work for a healthcare program if they want or not. You can't safe money by skipping insurance, it comes with the job.

My uncle is in the basic healthcare (from a certain salary on you move to private) and he got heart surgery in our university clinic by a doctor with a good rep and he won't lose sleep over his bills. He worked all his life, never fell into welfare/benefits. Still he would not able to foot the bills in a direct manner. Who can lash out 50-100.000€ just like that?

Whatever: Social healthcare isn't social healhtcare. Different systems have different strenghts. The UK system seems very different to ours. A friend who moved thee came back because of health problems, faster and better treatment here. Though i'm sure our system has other weak points.


would be willing to bet $$$ that your Health Care is administrated by Medical Professionals unlike mine which will be administered by our Congress.


It's the "Bundesministerium für Gesundheit". Federal ministry for health.
I'm pretty sure there are more than a few medical professionals. I better hope.

[Mastermind]

Derbedeu post above is right on the mark. It is not that we fear a socialized health care system. What we fear is that politicians will screw it up to the point it will be practically unworkable in the extreme. As we have seen in the models being proposed by the worst bunch of politicians in our entire national history...the Present batch of Democrats. This one can not be blamed on the Republicans...since they have been almost totally locked out of the discussion and planning.

We see an unfair, inefficeint, clumbsy, bureaucratic bumbling clod monster being created that iwll have control of every aspect of our health care from cradle to grave. It will be fully subject to every liberal scam and whim that come down the pike, from smoking to breakfast cereal to saving the planet and prevention of animal cruelty (there goes chicken, beef and pork...all would be declared health hazards under this bunch of greenie weenies)

We're not afraid of nationalized health care...were just afraid of nut job liberal democrat politicians who would run it.

[sinophile]

THERE IS NOT ENOUGH WEALTH IN AMERICA TO PAY FUTURE HEALTHCARE COSTS.


Period. I like that this thread has legs, but its time to face the looming demographic reality in most developed nations. Grandma will not get her hip replacement (unless she can pay for it out-of-pocket) and the government will pay most of the cost of the pain-killers she'll become addicted to instead.

If the US is going to openly and honestly decide its a public priority to bailout medicare and give insurance to 49m uninsured... okay, fine. But let us be honest about the real cost... people with existing healthcare will see coverage decline as costs cannot demographically be reconciled with supply.

Still don't understand? Try this:

http://i31.tinypic.com/nv4cpe.jpg

[TheSteve]

THERE IS NOT ENOUGH WEALTH IN AMERICA TO PAY FUTURE HEALTHCARE COSTS.


Period. I like that this thread has legs, but its time to face the looming demographic reality in most developed nations. Grandma will not get her hip replacement (unless she can pay for it out-of-pocket) and the government will pay most of the cost of the pain-killers she'll become addicted to instead.

If the US is going to openly and honestly decide its a public priority to bailout medicare and give insurance to 49m uninsured... okay, fine. But let us be honest about the real cost... people with existing healthcare will see coverage decline as costs cannot demographically be reconciled with supply.

Still don't understand? Try this:




Wait, could you please make another idiotic, dumbass, photoshop graph please? We need more of those on these forums.

Yes our native population is declining, but because of immigration our population is actually increasing here in US. There is, and will be, enough wealth to pay for healthcare costs. Even if our population was decreasing by a lot, we could still pay for it.

I like how you think its "ok, . . . fine" to discuss healthcare reform, how dreadful! great attitude, cocksucker.

[Flagg]

THERE IS NOT ENOUGH WEALTH IN AMERICA TO PAY FUTURE HEALTHCARE COSTS.


Period. I like that this thread has legs, but its time to face the looming demographic reality in most developed nations. Grandma will not get her hip replacement (unless she can pay for it out-of-pocket) and the government will pay most of the cost of the pain-killers she'll become addicted to instead.

If the US is going to openly and honestly decide its a public priority to bailout medicare and give insurance to 49m uninsured... okay, fine. But let us be honest about the real cost... people with existing healthcare will see coverage decline as costs cannot demographically be reconciled with supply.

Still don't understand? Try this:

http://i31.tinypic.com/nv4cpe.jpg



Yup........

Taxes UP

Standard of living and quality of life DOWN

[TheSteve]

Yup........

Taxes UP

Standard of living and quality of life DOWN
Well yeah, I mean so many people wouldn't be able to get an expansion on their house if they are taxed more, you are right. Or maybe they wouldn't be able to get a second car, that would suck, right?

What a **** move, providing basic health care to tens of millions of your fellow citizens. Defiantly, standard of living would go way down.

[Flagg]

Well yeah, I mean so many people wouldn't be able to get an expansion on their house if they are taxed more, you are right. Or maybe they wouldn't be able to get a second car, that would suck, right?

What a **** move, providing basic health care to tens of millions of your fellow citizens. Defiantly, standard of living would go way down.

You might want to consider pointing your keyboard in another direction, take a deep breath, and calm yourself down sunshine.

The majority of folks seem to take the following statement:

"The United States is the wealthiest country in the world";

at face value.

Doing so would be oversimplistic.

The US is asset rich and balance sheet broke.

Just like a lot of circa 2006 McMansion cul-de-sacs in California, Nevada, and Florida right now......everyone LOOKS wealthy, but if you scratch beneath the surface you will find negative equity and negative cash-flow

The US is unsuccessfully trying to "borrow it's way out of debt" while at the same time looking at spending a staggering sum on "free" healthcare.

When your collective net worth has plunged off a cliff and when your collective cash-flow begins with a minus sign, it's probably not the best time to spend MORE money.

I grew up in the US and have seen the good and bad bits of the US healthcare system.....it needs fixing.

I live in a place where we have a pretty good universal healthcare system paid with my taxes.

Actually "pretty good" would be an understatement.

I pay a staggering amount of tax and I understand society has decided that the more financially successful have to pay far more than just "their share".

I accept that...if I didn't, I wouldn't live here.

Your smart-ass post fails to look beyond the immediate short-term.

As mentioned by sinophile, have you ever looked at US demographics?

What USED to be a healthy and solid pyramid where many working adults supported very few on government financial and medical life support is in the process of turning upside down rather quickly("quickly" meaning 1-2 decades).

Before you throw out additional sarcastic remarks, consider looking at the history of income tax rates in the US and around the western world.

If you actually do it, you will probably be quite shocked, if you are too lazy to do the basic homework, then keep living in your oversimplistic world.

The last 25 years have been an anomoly.

An anomoly most assumed would continue in perpetuity.

That is incorrect.

We are in the process of returning to "the mean" and quite likely to overshoot to the low side.

Which means more bad news going forward for possibly a decade.

I'd love to see the US adopt an amazingly efficient, cost-neutral, accessible, and affordable health system where everyone can be healthy and live to 100.

But it's not going to happen.

Taxes ARE going to go up

Social Security retirement age IS going to go up

Entitlements WILL drop in real terms via inflation and fake COA adjustments

You DON'T call "happy hour" at 6am to keep the party going, you DO face the hangover headon.

[MaverickCowboy]

Under the CURRENT house bill. if i have private insurance and am happy with it. will i get taxed more even tho i don't use it or QUALIFY for the public option???

[sinophile]

...There is, and will be, enough wealth to pay for healthcare costs. Even if our population was decreasing by a lot, we could still pay for it...

I keep laughing every time I read your reply.

Per capita GDP is $45,800. That's the sum total of good and services produced in the US and 80% of it is consumed by the national debt. Soon 90%. Remember we're talking per capita GDP here, so we can address your immigration fantasy.

This leaves only 10%, or $4,580 to pay for everything else. Guns, butter, healthcare, remedial education for the dumb.

Sorry, not even annexing Canada would solve this problem.

The only solution to healthcare is to accept that either many will go without, or everyone will get poor quality. Welcome to demographic reality and the tragedy of the commons.

You can wish it away, but the truth lingers.

[Eye]

And for the record, if you're in this country illegaly, you're a criminal and you deserve deportation and nothing else.

I don't think migration can be considered as a crime in any free country.

[Laconian]

okiebugg (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/member.php?u=71082):
I mean you don't ask for private police. There are better and worse cops, why shouldn't people get to hire their own cops?

I really can't see why anyone would be against free health care.

You've made the incredible assumption that enforcing the law and health care are STATE functions. Law enforcement certainly is; health care is not.


Well yeah, I mean so many people wouldn't be able to get an expansion on their house if they are taxed more, you are right. Or maybe they wouldn't be able to get a second car, that would suck, right?

What a **** move, providing basic health care to tens of millions of your fellow citizens. Defiantly, standard of living would go way down.

So I shouldn't work hard and save my money to do the things I want to do with it? Whether it's put an expansion on my house or buy a second or third car, I earned that money, it's mine to do with as I please, whether I want to donate it to missions or take my family to Disney World. According to you I'm SUPPOSED to just want to give anything other than what I really need to the government to do with as they see fit? It's selfish of me to want to keep as much of my earned income as possible? Well, I happen to think it's selfish of anyone to assume the they are entitled to government health care.

These politicians trying to ram this down our throats for our own good are so full of crap most 'em have brown eyes. You know why? The jokers writing this law are exempting themselves and their medical coverage from it. Oh yeah, they fail to mention that part in the press conferences. So excuse the f*ck out of me if I don't just jump up and down for joy at the thought of some gov't bureaucrat deciding how I get my medical care.

People on this forum (and elsewhere) complain day in and day out about the know-nothings in ATF (agents that don't know anything about guns and intrusive federal regulations on their Constitutional protected rights to bear arms) and a completely failed drug/narcotic policy and it's incredible waste of money, and every other thing that is bungled by big government from Army uniforms to posted speed limits. Just what do you think is going to happen when THOUSANDS of bureaucrats that know nothing about health care, medicine and insurance start dealing with the largest government intrusion in private life in the history of this country? Some people are going to do okay, but most folks are about to get their legs pissed on and told it's raining.


I don't think migration can be considered as a crime in any free country.

Yes, it can. Crossing a country's border illegally is a crime. Really not that hard a concept to grasp. If I enter your house without your permission are you going to let me squat there and start eating your chow, wearing your clothes, partaking of those things that are yours or are you going to call the cops and have me arrested for criminal trespass or burglary?

[Zoomie]

http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/gdx_2cuPgQQ

[Thugut]

So I shouldn't work hard and save my money to do the things I want to do with it? Whether it's put an expansion on my house or buy a second or third car, I earned that money, it's mine to do with as I please, whether I want to donate it to missions or take my family to Disney World. According to you I'm SUPPOSED to just want to give anything other than what I really need to the government to do with as they see fit? It's selfish of me to want to keep as much of my earned income as possible? Well, I happen to think it's selfish of anyone to assume the they are entitled to government health care.

This bitching and moaning about taxes is ludicrous. You are a part of society, like it or not. You aren't living in a cave, or in the jungles of the amazon. Your whole way of life depends on the services and goods provided by every worker in the US, past and present. Everyone has to contribute for the common good, especially those that are better off.

Also I'm sorry, but I don't have much respect for the argument claiming you EARNED your money. This is a capitalist economy after all, somehow being successful doesn't automatically mean your work has any positive effect or contribution to the world at all. :roll:

[Zoomie]

This bitching and moaning about taxes is ludicrous. You are a part of society, like it or not. You aren't living in a cave, or in the jungles of the amazon. Your whole way of life depends on the services and goods provided by every worker in the US. Everyone has to contribute for the common good, especially those that are better off.
The problem with your delusions of grandeur is that there's a HUGE disconnect from reality, in the fact that we can just drop a tax on people, and we'll be able to pay for healthcare. Look at America's ever growing deficit. Something tells me that healthcare is something we can't foot the bill for.


Also I'm sorry, but I don't have much respect for the argument claiming you EARNED your money. This is a capitalist economy after all, somehow being successful doesn't automatically mean your work has any positive effect or contribution to the world at all. :roll:
WTF are you smoking? So, putting in a long day of work doesn't mean that we earned our money. Then why else are we getting paid? You might want to rethink your argument, because you jump from one rant to another, and then try to tie them together.

[Pete031]

That video is like a Bizarro Micheal Moore film for the Republican party.

Pure and utter Bull****.
I have never waited longer then 1 hour to see a Doctor. You will get Canadian doctors in the States saying anything you want them to say because down there they get paid the big bucks.
Sure, Triage is done in the Emergency rooms, so if you go in with a common cold you will wait longer then someone who is a guns hot victim.
But everyone gets it. You don't die because you don't have medical coverage.

The Vet joke at the end was gold...:roll:

[Thugut]

WTF are you smoking? So, putting in a long day of work doesn't mean that we earned our money.

Sure it does, if for example you work on a factory assembly line. But I don't hear many of those factory workers bitch about taxes.

[Zoomie]

That video is like a Bizarro Micheal Moore film for the Republican party.

Pure and utter Bull****.
I have never waited longer then 1 hour to see a Doctor. You will get Canadian doctors in the States saying anything you want them to say because down there they get paid the big bucks.
So, is that your only explanation for it?


Sure, Triage is done in the Emergency rooms, so if you go in with a common cold you will wait longer then someone who is a guns hot victim.
But everyone gets it. You don't die because you don't have medical coverage. No one said that is was because they weren't covered, but it was because they had to wait for said coverage.

[Zoomie]

Sure it does, if for example you work on a factory assembly line. But I don't hear many of those factory workers bitch about taxes.
So, only when a majority of factory workers complain about taxes, then we should question the government?? When was the last time you spoke with a factory worker? I'm sure you'll hear plenty of complaining from them when half their check disappears due to taxes.

[Pete031]

So, is that your only explanation for it?
No one said that is was because they weren't covered, but it was because they had to wait for said coverage.


My explanantion for it is, you can find something wrong with anything if you look for it long enough.

They found what, 4 examples in a Country that gives health care to
over 33 million people.
Now, the US has a lot more people in it. But the root of the problem is, not that you can't do it, but that some people in the US do not want to do it. Which is something that most of the world cannot understand.

You know, you can have whatever you want, it won't affect any other country, however I take offense when used car salesmans masquerading as journalists try to justify their points at the expense of My Nation.

[Laconian]

This bitching and moaning about taxes is ludicrous. You are a part of society, like it or not. You aren't living in a cave, or in the jungles of the amazon. Your whole way of life depends on the services and goods provided by every worker in the US, past and present. Everyone has to contribute for the common good, especially those that are better off.

Of course I'm part of society and I believe I should pay my fair share, most folks do believe that. What I have a huge problem with is providing for an ever increasing number of non-contributory parasites that feel entitled to the same things I have had to work for and a government that thinks it is to provide all things to all people, especially when it threatens to keep decreasing the amount of money I get to keep for me and my family. And the people that keep telling me I need to give more and more are exempting themselves from the rules they are setting forth for everyone else.


Also I'm sorry, but I don't have much respect for the argument claiming you EARNED your money. This is a capitalist economy after all, somehow being successful doesn't automatically mean your work has any positive effect or contribution to the world at all. :roll:

If I have to get up in the morning and go to work to get paid, I earned my money. I have entered into an agreement with my employer to provide a service to him for a sum of money. He has decided how much that service is worth to him and I have agreed that I will work for that much. I willingly contribute my share to the pot for the government to maintain roads, provide for the common defense, etc. I do what I do for a couple of reasons and none of them is to insure that the family down the street is as well off as my family is.

[Laconian]

I'll add this: If everyone seems to believe we need to reform health care, then let's form some committees: led by Congress and involving all the relevant partners and decide what to do and how to do it. I'm okay with that. But this "the sky is falling if we don't fix health care now" is quite frankly a bunch of crap. This doesn't need to get fixed in the next week with a bill containing regulations and legislation that the frigging committee members don't know is in there and can't even explain.

I'd like to see someone go to their boss and say, "Boss, I've fixed the biggest problem you didn't even know you really had. I need more money than we have to fix it." And when he asks, "Well, what's the plan?" you respond with, "Well, it's pretty complicated, you won't understand it, I can't explain it but trust me, it's just what we need." Let me know how that works out.

[Eye]

Yes, it can. Crossing a country's border illegally is a crime. Really not that hard a concept to grasp. If I enter your house without your permission are you going to let me squat there and start eating your chow, wearing your clothes, partaking of those things that are yours or are you going to call the cops and have me arrested for criminal trespass or burglary?

As far as some "illegal" immigrant rents flat for himself and work honestly to earn money I don't see any parallel with your comparison about violating of private property.

I fully agree with you about socialized healthcare - it's not good :)

[Zoomie]

As far as some "illegal" immigrant rents flat for himself and work honestly to earn money I don't see any parallel with your comparison about violating of private property.

I fully agree with you about socialized healthcare - it's not good :)
Laconian, feel like taking a trip to Poland some time?

[sinophile]

http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/gdx_2cuPgQQ

That says it all. That video is the gold standard for why the US Govt. should leave healthcare alone.

Contact your US congressperson now at http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/

Tell them to leave healthcare alone.

[MaverickCowboy]

all of you guys creep me out, this guy says we dont "earn our money" even tho we work for it and get out pay check. Taxing us for healthcare reform is still TAKING money out of my check. i dont want the public option i want to KEEP my insurance.

[Flagg]

Also I'm sorry, but I don't have much respect for the argument claiming you EARNED your money. :roll:

You sir are an idiot.

Maybe it's because I've got the flu, or maybe it's because my tolerance for simpleminded village idiots has passed the breaking point.

You are not adding value to this discussion.

Quite frankly, you are sucking the life and soul out of any worthwhile discussion on the topic, and if you represent your generation's ability to discuss and debate with logic, reason, and intelligence I weap for the future.

Pull your fcukin head in.

[Mastermind]

WTF is going on here? Has this site suddenly collected the attention of Obamacare Enthusiasts? How much proof do you need? How much logic is required? Have you socialists ever heard of "Classical Thinking"...of practical discussion?

First and foremost,socialized medicine is socialism...and socialism is not at all what the US is about. Working class citizens despise the idea that they will be called upon to support health care costs for the alarmingly increasing numbers of "hangers on" who refuse or are incapable of paying their share or have partied away their savings and retirement plans. The US became great because people worked hard, paid their own way and the government stayed the f out of our lives for the most part.

The slow "sinking" of the nation that has happened since the invention of social security has eroded our spirit, our personal determinations and our will to resist the government that is constantly reaching ever deeper into our personal pockets, eroding the riches we have earned...EARNED!

As working class Americans, tax paying Americans we are disgusted by the actions of our government to force this socialistic style of government upon us.

Do not, under any disguise, try to make working class people believe that others, as has been stated, “Factory Workers” don’t mind being over taxed…they despise it as much as any other man or woman who is in the daily struggle to keep food in their families mouths and a roof over their head.

Don’t you, dear socialist lover, ever try to tell me I can not earn as much as I am capable or desire by any means legal in this republic. How dare you try to tell me, in such a flippant, off hand manner, that it is right that I should limit my family to just one car or reduce my home to a shack. This is not Europe…this is not Asia…this is the God Blessed United States of America. There is a reason and a damned good one, that people from Europe and Asia and the Southern climes struggle to the extent of sacrificing their very lives to get to this place and to get their families here.

Socialists, like Obama and the current spate of Democrats, will not win their argument to force socialized medicine or anything else socialist upon us. They have screwed the pooch on this. After the July defeat, and the more sane members of congress get to have their ears pounced in their Town Hall Meetings, there is going to be a completely new kind of thought process upon those heights of political skull drudgery in Washington. Obama over reached and it has exposed him and his supporters for what they are.

So, you people who so recklessly shoot your stupid socialist mouths off in here had better get your minds re-washed. Americans are not having any of it…you show yourselves for what you are…dreamers of the utopian dynasties that exists only in your childish minds. We’ll thank you to leave us out of your filthy nighmares.

[MaverickCowboy]

what mastermind said.

http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj216/Cowboy_Wolf/ocare.jpg

[FullMetalJackass]

WTF is going on here? Has this site suddenly collected the attention of Obamacare Enthusiasts?


Like most things internet, the eurofags:bash: dominate because in their socialist utopion ****holes they have nothing better to do than troll internet message boardswootrofl. The same goes for underemployed or unemployed liberal homos in the US. They take their talking points from the same game plan because they are so weak minded the only thing that makes sense is to "equalize the playing field". p-)

[Laconian]

MM, you need to stop being so wishy-washy. Get off the fence; pick a side ;-)

[Pete031]

SO what happens in this recesion, with all sorts of people losing their jobs? What if they aren't covered? Just asking....

I know you are all fired up and spitting blood because you think that this discussion is an attempt at a communist coup.

But really, what happens to your neighbours if they loose their jobs and whanot what is available to them?

Oh and Fullmetaljackass, your post has the weakest arguement in it so far.

[MaverickCowboy]

SO what happens in this recesion, with all sorts of people losing their jobs? What if they aren't covered? Just asking....

I know you are all fired up and spitting blood because you think that this discussion is an attempt at a communist coup.

But really, what happens to your neighbours if they loose their jobs and whanot what is available to them?

Oh and Fullmetaljackass, your post has the weakest arguement in it so far.

to quote 'History of the eart part 1'

'FVCK THE POOR!'
'FVCK THE POOR!'
'FVCK THE POOR!'
'FVCK THE POOR!'

[Pete031]

No dude, I'm being serious, what do people who oppose health care, think should be a contingency plan for those who cannot pay. Churches coming together and raising money? Community fundraisers?

[Blue387]

We Americans should be allowed to go bankrupt because we broke our leg. People without coverage enjoy going to hospitals and waiting for hours in emergency rooms. Fun was had by all when we pass those costs onto insured people, leading to higher premiums. We don't like socialist latte-drinking Volvo-driving government bureaucrats but if it involves a BMW-driving profit-driven HMO bureaucrat with tasseled shoes, where do we sign up?! You won't get that in Canada. It's the American way.

(sarcasm)

[Laconian]

Pete,
I don't have a real answer for you. I know folks that have had to sell off things to make payments on medical bills. I've helped relatives make payments.

My real problem with these plans is that we are spending money we don't have, making future generations little more than indentured servants. The G is throwing numbers like TRILLIONS around like I drop a ten-spot and claiming,"Emergency! Emergency!" The Pres is saying things that he can't back up because nobody can definitively say what is even in the bill, but we're just supposed to trust them.

[Pete031]

Laconian-
SO you are not opposed to the idea as a whole, you just don't see it as being the smartest idea at the moment due to the financial situation?

[Soldat_Américain]

This is what I do know. Health care on its current path will bankrupt our nation. At one point my parents won't be able to afford health care. There needs to be reform, and if the only way for that is to have a nationalized system then under god I want it.

[Zoomie]

Laconian-
SO you are not opposed to the idea as a whole, you just don't see it as being the smartest idea at the moment due to the financial situation?
It's the smartest idea because it's a crackpipe dream. It just won't work.

This is what I do know. Health care on its current path will bankrupt our nation. At one point my parents won't be able to afford health care. There needs to be reform, and if the only way for that is to have a nationalized system then under god I want it.
A nationalized system will bankrupt our country faster than anyone will ever imagine.

[Pete031]

Well, what about the auto companies bail outs... Your country afforded them.
Again, a common theme I am seeing is people not wanting to do this for the sole reason of national debt. Not because you are opposed to the idea itself.

[Zoomie]

Well, what about the auto companies bail outs... Your country afforded them.
Again, a common theme I am seeing is people not wanting to do this for the sole reason of national debt. Not because you are opposed to the idea itself.
Umm. . .we afforded them as much as we afforded all the other bailouts - just dumping them on the deficit. And I'm against for more reasons other than the national debt. Government run healthcare just will never work - just take a look at any government run program or agency, and let me know how well the government should be able to run your healthcare.

[MaverickCowboy]

Well, what about the auto companies bail outs... Your country afforded them.
Again, a common theme I am seeing is people not wanting to do this for the sole reason of national debt. Not because you are opposed to the idea itself.

I oppose the idea, i don't want to pay for other peoples healthcare.

i am not a socialist.

[Policía Loco]

Too many Americans milk the welfare system as it is. It would only get worse.

[Pete031]

Umm. . .we afforded them as much as we afforded all the other bailouts - just dumping them on the deficit. And I'm against for more reasons other than the national debt. Government run healthcare just will never work - just take a look at any government run program or agency, and let me know how well the government should be able to run your healthcare.


My Government runs them fine, I have never had a problem and neither has my family.

So Maverick, you would rather watch someone die then help them financially?

[sinophile]

SO what happens in this recesion, with all sorts of people losing their jobs? What if they aren't covered? Just asking...

{:) <--- Meet Bill

Bill owns a small business with 10 employees. He doesn't provide health insurance.

{:(

Bill must now pay 8% of his payroll to the USGOV or provide health coverage to his employees under the new healthcare bill. The 8%, or $48,000, is less expensive than the $63,000 coverage for his employees will cost, so Bill pays the 8%. But, its a $48,000 expense he didn't have before, and it comes in the middle of a near-depression. Bill terminates one employee and replaces another with a part-time worker.

{:(

Bill has some health issues, mostly related to stress from tough business conditions. He's trying to keep his company together, take care of his family and not give up his volunteer work at his neighborhood church. But the new government health insurance won't pay for the advanced testing required to try to nail the cause of his irregular heartbeat.

{:(

Bill goes out-of-pocket, or purchases expensive after-tax supplemental coverage to pay for his healthcare needs. Because of the new Obama tax increases on companies and individuals this costs him a lot in absolute (pre-tax) dollars. Also, there's been big state tax increases. Bill terminates another two employees and out-sources a company task to India, lowering his payroll.

So - the answer to Pete031's question... under the proposed healthcare bill Pete031's uninsured person gets some coverage, but three and half people lost their jobs.

Call this hypothetical, pessimistic, alarmist or rhetoric if you wish... but its how the real world works. Long waits or little coverage to repair all those bleeding hearts. Enjoy!

[Zoomie]

My Government runs them fine, I have never had a problem and neither has my family.
Well good for you, but a little reality check - your government is not my government.

[Laconian]

Pete, that is certainly part of it. I want some body to be able to REALLY show me what the REAL need is. The Pres and his folks tout the 47 million w/o insurance number and claim emergency; opponents claim that of that number 11-12 million are illegal immigrants who shouldn't be covered, another 10 million are folks qualified for current Medicaid/Medicare but aren't registered, another 5 million or so make over $300K/yr and aren't on a plan, another 5 million are in that group of folks that just don't want to pay for insurance because. Leaving really 10 million folks w/o insurance. Either way, somebody or everybody is lying about numbers. I have a problem with that.

The US government does not have a reputation for success in ventures: The Postal Service does an incredible job moving mail, but the USPS gets serious competition in parcel post from UPS/FedEx/DHL, etc. They have a protected market delivering the daily mail. AMTRAK is in the same boat with passenger trins. These are government run services. Although they from a large part of these certain markets, they obviously don't it the best and without government protectionism would not the leaders in their fields.

I fear the same thing would occur with a complete government run health care system; especially since none of the proponents of the plan can tell me with any certainty what the plan is. Certainly those folks that are genuinely poor and can not afford health care and/or insurance should have some venue so they can get quality care. But people are also supposed to plan to for the rainy day, whether that be unemployment or some injury/medical condition and most folks aren't.

[Pete031]

Sure guys. I'm only asking because I don't understand. Thats all.

For the record sinophile, Thats how only a portion of the world works.

[Pete031]

Well good for you, but a little reality check - your government is not my government.

Ummm yeah. Little reality check zoomie, thats why I was asking.

[Mastermind]

SO what happens in this recesion, with all sorts of people losing their jobs? What if they aren't covered? Just asking....

I know you are all fired up and spitting blood because you think that this discussion is an attempt at a communist coup.

But really, what happens to your neighbours if they loose their jobs and whanot what is available to them?

Oh and Fullmetaljackass, your post has the weakest arguement in it so far.
Recessions and down turns in the economy are highly fertile fields for socialist thinkers and people who try to "level" the filed so everyone has company in their misery. It is when people are down they are the most vulnerable and the socialists always take advantage of people when they are at their weakest.

Notice, it was at the very height of the Great Depression that Socials Security was leveraged upon us...completely against the constitution...as the history of the Supreme Court US reveals. Roosevelt, a self avowed socialist, won office on the promise of a chicken in every pot...well, folks eating rats at the time, and feeling damn lucky to get them, thought chicken sounded like a step up and voted for the commie. His ponzi scheme of SS was dreamed up by his commie college cronies as a way to gain Democrat control of the population..."Do as we say or you might lose your pittance, Dearie".

The chief Justice of the Supreme court (Hughs) was appalled that any American could even think of such a plan since the Consitution specifically prohibited it...and the majority of the court agreed.But, Roosevelt threatened the court with his "court Pakcing Scheme as early as 1935 to get them to refuse to hear the arguments against his SS program As Roosevelt began thrusting his numerous other socialistic "New Deal" legislations in his second term, the ran straight into this reinforced wall of "Disgusting Constitutionalists"...

So, along with other socialists, a plan was devised, loosly based on the Opinions of a previous Justice, the renowed "Living Constitution" Oliver Wendle Holmes. Roosevlet and his cronies decided they could "pack the court" through some sly legislations called, "The Judiciary Reorganization Bill of 1937 (look it up). Basically, to stop the court from resisting his even more outrageous plans, he actually "pulled the gun" he had threatened them with over the 1935 SS Act.

This bill threatened to let the President appoint (essentially) as many other justices as he wanted..he could have ended up with a SCOTUS of 301 justices!...or even more. The bill would have been glaringly constitutional and the Justices caved....the immediate consequence was, the Court got to stay with 9 justices and the US was enslaved for all foreseeable generations with social welfare programs, the top most of which is Social Security....later programs, all coming under following Democrat Presidents; Welfare, MidicCare, MedicAid, Affirmative Action, Abortion paid by the Gvt, and "protected Classes" of citizens....now we have the Abomination of Obama-Nation...and this one is proving to be a dilly.

[Zoomie]

Ummm yeah. Little reality check zoomie, thats why I was asking.
Yeah - but then you should realize that what works for you, most likely won't work in the US.

[sinophile]

Sure guys. I'm only asking because I don't understand. Thats all.

For the record sinophile, Thats how only a portion of the world works.

Really? How does the rest of the world work? Be careful... before you brag about other countries healthcare read this entire thread and pay attention to my posts on demographic reality. I don't want you to come across as stupid.

[Pete031]

Pete, that is certainly part of it. I want some body to be able to REALLY show me what the REAL need is. The Pres and his folks tout the 47 million w/o insurance number and claim emergency; opponents claim that of that number 11-12 million are illegal immigrants who shouldn't be covered, another 10 million are folks qualified for current Medicaid/Medicare but aren't registered, another 5 million or so make over $300K/yr and aren't on a plan, another 5 million are in that group of folks that just don't want to pay for insurance because. Leaving really 10 million folks w/o insurance. Either way, somebody or everybody is lying about numbers. I have a problem with that.

The US government does not have a reputation for success in ventures: The Postal Service does an incredible job moving mail, but the USPS gets serious competition in parcel post from UPS/FedEx/DHL, etc. They have a protected market delivering the daily mail. AMTRAK is in the same boat with passenger trins. These are government run services. Although they from a large part of these certain markets, they obviously don't it the best and without government protectionism would not the leaders in their fields.

I fear the same thing would occur with a complete government run health care system; especially since none of the proponents of the plan can tell me with any certainty what the plan is. Certainly those folks that are genuinely poor and can not afford health care and/or insurance should have some venue so they can get quality care. But people are also supposed to plan to for the rainy day, whether that be unemployment or some injury/medical condition and most folks aren't.


I get ya. Its difficult for people to understand feelings like the ones you have if not in that situation. Growing up and health care never being an issue here has kind of made me ignorant to some of the points you brought up.
There is a definate need for clarity.

[Mastermind]

Run your poll asking people if they want the gummnt to run their health care system who are coming out of the post office or after they have had a dealing with the IRS...or who had to deal with getting their service records straightened out.

There is only one thing the Gvt really does right...they make hellacious killing machines.

They sometimes make nice highways….but not always.

[Soldat_Américain]

I just want a better health care system for my family as I am not really affected by this.

[Power_serj]

But really, what happens to your neighbours if they loose their jobs and whanot what is available to them?



Have you ever heard of Medicaid, unemployment checks, and welfare?

[Zoomie]

I just want a better health care system for my family as I am not really affected by this.
You'll be footing the bill for a pointless program.

[Pete031]

Really? How does the rest of the world work? Be careful... before you brag about other countries healthcare read this entire thread and pay attention to my posts on demographic reality. I don't want you to come across as stupid.


Well I wouldn't want to sound stupid now would I.... I am not bragging about anything, so get your panties out of a knot.
I am saying that a portion of this world lives under national health coverage. And it works well. Other countries have a healthcare system that doesn't work well.
And then there are some that have none at all. Some that still have great care available, and some that don't.
Seeing as your so touchy about people bragging and whanot about healthcare, read that I have stated only that I want to learn why US citizens don't want it. I'm not judging.
But thanks for coming out an being a ****.

[Soldat_Américain]

You'll be footing the bill for a pointless program.
I honestly don't care what you think. Because it doesn't have to be a program, what needs to start is better regulation of the health care industry as well as tort reform.

[digrar]

Really? How does the rest of the world work? Be careful... before you brag about other countries healthcare read this entire thread and pay attention to my posts on demographic reality. I don't want you to come across as stupid.

Choose your words more carefully. There is a civil conversation going on here and you are using words that would get you sat on your arse if spoken face to face.

If we stick with the other English speaking countries, they all have a nationally funded health service and they all work, some better than others, they could probably all be better, but we're not dying of the plague out here. So to say that it would never work in the US is obviously not quite right.

You all pay taxes, the people who come the higher socio economic areas contribute more taxes and therefore contribute more to the running of other parts of the country, so why should health care be any different?

[sinophile]

Well I wouldn't want to sound stupid now would I.... I am not bragging about anything, so get your panties out of a knot.
I am saying that a portion of this world lives under national health coverage. And it works well. Other countries have a healthcare system that doesn't work well.
And then there are some that have none at all. Some that still have great care available, and some that don't.
Seeing as your so touchy about people bragging and whanot about healthcare, read that I have stated only that I want to learn why US citizens don't want it. I'm not judging.
But thanks for coming out an being a ****.

Pretty much what I expected from you. You didn't read this thread, you didn't address demographics, and you have no idea what you're writing about. So, yup, you look pretty stupid.

[Zoomie]

You all pay taxes, the people who come the higher socio economic areas contribute more taxes and therefore contribute more to the running of other parts of the country, so why should health care be any different?
Because you can only milk a cow so much before it runs out.

[Laconian]

Sino, did you not understand the "I want to learn why US citizens don't want it. I'm not judging." part of Pete's comment?

The man is remaining civil and trying to have a discussion. As far as I can tell he is asking for info and not making an argument for or against. He doesn't look stupid, but you look like a tool.

[digrar]

So you draw the line at health, not at education, or the military, or roads, big infrastructure projects, social welfare or the thousands of other things that Government provides?

[Mastermind]

What Pete and others are missing is, the US is not Europe! The US has a system that works to our way of life. yes...it could and should be improved. But, what Obamamighty wants to do is use the present health care woes to further increase Federal control over peoples lives...to use it to enhance the socialist system on our way of life.

We do not see that path as necessary or even acceptable.

If they wanted to really fix the system, the first thing they would do is pass tort reform legislations...that is not gonna happen with all the friggin lawyers in congress.

[Power_serj]

Too many Americans milk the welfare system as it is. It would only get worse.

This is so true. The only true health care reform would really not really be a health care reform, it would be a government reform.

Here's ways to pay for health care using the status quo:

*Create a plan that stops bill dodgers:

-Problem: Many people misuse hospitals because they don't have insurance and know they really won't have to pay any money back.

Solution: Hospitals should create a financial office/bureau that creates realistic and legally binding plans that require that person to pay for his/her medical bill (regardless of insurance) over a certain period of time based on dependents, and income as well as current debt. Even if the person cannot pay the whole bill, it will give hospitals more money, while not making a citizen pay medical bills their whole life.

*Illegal Immigrants

-Problem: Illegal immigrants dodge hospital bills, and hospitals have no way of tracking them for payment.

-Solution: Create a guest worker program where workers can work and enter the United States legally. They would pay taxes, and be required to be under the same program that would put them under a plan to pay (the plan I stated above)

*New (few more, don't go overboard here) Regulations on Insurance Companies

-Problem: It's obvious that insurance companies take advantage of customers, then try to drop them or not pay out when they are injured.

-Solution: Enact laws against insurance companies that stop them from using current tactics of dropping customers, and not paying out.

*Mandatory insurance for infants and the elderly

-Problem: Infants and the elderly are more vunerable and required more care than everyone else.

-Solution: Require they get insurance.

*Other problems with government which could help in aiding health care reform: There's many more things the government can do to weed off government leeches such as further limiting unemployment, welfare reform: change welfare to more of a government job search program, require people who take unemployment to take low wage jobs (including burger flipping, and hard labor, if they want to continue receiving benefits) etc...

Ah yes, and *Tort Reform so hospitals don't waste billions of dollars on insurance (as well as all the other side effects of ridiculous lawsuits)

[11 Bravo]

I honestly don't care what you think. Because it doesn't have to be a program, what needs to start is better regulation of the health care industry as well as tort reform.

TORT reform... oh man ,,, oh what a gas... the demoslobs control the gub'mt now and they are bought with trial lawyers money bigtime. Don't expect ANY tort reform until the trial lawyers get their arse's in a bind.... not likely gonna happen.
Better reulation of health care... jeez that would be great but the whole lawyer thing and then the politics of the money behind the whole scheme will just torpedo anything meaningful or financially solvent.That is just self evident.

[Pete031]

Pretty much what I expected from you. You didn't read this thread, you didn't address demographics, and you have no idea what you're writing about. So, yup, you look pretty stupid.


Sorry Pal, but you just being a douche.

[Mastermind]

TORT reform... oh man ,,, oh what a gas... the demoslobs control the gub'mt now and they are bought with trial lawyers money bigtime. Don't expect ANY tort reform until the trial lawyers get their arse's in a bind.... not likely gonna happen.
Better reulation of health care... jeez that would be great but the whole lawyer thing and then the politics of the money behind the whole scheme will just torpedo anything meaningful or financially solvent.That is just self evident.
True! All True!

[MaverickCowboy]

simple. divide the country into two nations. one with free healthcare, the other without. then people would migrate to both countries depending on their ideology.

[AZZenny]

I just got my annual Notice of Health Insurance Premium Highway Robbery. It's going up by over a thousand dollars for next year, to almost $6500 a year. As a self-employed person, I have a hybrid individual-quasi-group policy through a professional organization. It's decent, but certainly not a cadillac policy, and I've had to cut back on some benefits in a pointless effort to keep the rates within reason. It's doubled in cost over the past 5 years, and I would be ecstatic if the feds found a way to reduce the bite even a little.

[Mastermind]

$6,500 a year! man, what a bargain. My son's (also he is self employed) went to 8 g's a year...he is now without a policy...he decided to just take his chances waiting to see what the gvt does next. He's taking a chance...but, he thinks it is worth it in the short run.

[Power_serj]

simple. divide the country into two nations. one with free healthcare, the other without. then people would migrate to both countries depending on their ideology.

amidoinitrite? If you can't read it, the states with red outline are United States of America, and the states with grey outline are Socialist States of America.

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/6057/ussplit.jpg

***Not pictured in this map: United States of America annexes Alberta and Socialist States of America annexes Quebec... sorry Canada.

[JKD]

With the large array of things that are already provided by the government and paid for with taxes I'm truly not sure how it is that health care became the dividing line in a lot of people's minds for what they consider to be socialism.

[Elbs]

I don't think that Americans are necessarily scared of health reform, and I'm sure most of us would accept a system which provided low-cost health care for all Americans that could keep a balanced budget and be well run.

What many Americans fear is that government will screw it up like ends up happening with some government-run services (the famous DMV example), that we can't afford it, etc.

I don't personally see it as an "OMG socialism" issue, but rather something to be contemplated in terms of: can we afford it, can there be accountability, can it provide what it says it will, will it be somewhat smooth running, etc.

Just my 2 pennies

[MaverickCowboy]

amidoinitrite? If you can't read it, the states with red outline are United States of America, and the states with grey outline are Socialist States of America.

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/6057/ussplit.jpg

***Not pictured in this map: United States of America annexes Alberta and Socialist States of America annexes Quebec... sorry Canada.

you need to Cut missouri in half and florida in half as well, Vermont is part of America.

[digrar]

What many Americans fear is that government will screw it up like ends up happening with some government-run services (the famous DMV example), that we can't afford it, etc.


People are already paying 6, 7, 8 thousand a year for private cover, how could it get any worse?

[Policía Loco]

People are already paying 6, 7, 8 thousand a year for private cover, how could it get any worse?

The government is extremely inefficient. Lack of personal control is also an issue.

[MaverickCowboy]

amidoinitrite? If you can't read it, the states with red outline are United States of America, and the states with grey outline are Socialist States of America.

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/6057/ussplit.jpg

***Not pictured in this map: United States of America annexes Alberta and Socialist States of America annexes Quebec... sorry Canada.

http://i28.tinypic.com/35mkv47.jpg

jefferson, parts of Missouri and Pennsyvania, new mex and arizona givin to enemy territory aswell as florida.

[Thugut]

all of you guys creep me out, this guy says we dont "earn our money" even tho we work for it and get out pay check. Taxing us for healthcare reform is still TAKING money out of my check. i dont want the public option i want to KEEP my insurance.

You should re-read my post, you obviously did not understand it. The American economy is a capitalist one. The amount of money one makes in it is not strictly proportionate to the physical labour, or the benefit they offer society as a whole. For all I know this guy complaining could be the inventor and copyright holder of shamwow. One can make a lot of money while basically doing nothing of real value. I wouldn't consider that such a person has earned much at all.


You sir are an idiot.

Maybe it's because I've got the flu, or maybe it's because my tolerance for simpleminded village idiots has passed the breaking point.

You are not adding value to this discussion.

Quite frankly, you are sucking the life and soul out of any worthwhile discussion on the topic, and if you represent your generation's ability to discuss and debate with logic, reason, and intelligence I weap for the future.

Pull your fcukin head in.

Your entire post is just a personal attack. You are the one with no arguments, the one offering nothing to this discusion.

[Elbs]

One can make a lot of money while basically doing nothing of real value. I wouldn't consider that such a person has earned much at all.


What line of work are you in again?

[Thugut]

My field is the natural sciences. I will most likely find work in academia in general. I will probably get a pretty good salary, nothing to brag about, but i don't care for having more. I won't benefit from any grand socialist move sweeping across the US.

There are lazy bums that do nothing and expect a hand out, yes. There are also hard-working people that simply aren't getting what they deserve from the economy and society.

[Flagg]

You should re-read my post, you obviously did not understand it. The American economy is a capitalist one. The amount of money one makes in it is not strictly proportionate to the physical labour, or the benefit they offer society as a whole. For all I know this guy complaining could be the inventor and copyright holder of shamwow. One can make a lot of money while basically doing nothing of real value. I wouldn't consider that such a person has earned much at all.

First off, consider reading, and rereading your posts, before posting them.......either you are retard strong or you are completely failing to achieve your objective.

"One can make a lot of money while basically doing nothing of real value".

OK sunshine, why don't you show everyone how that is done and lead us all by example.

I know a lot of folks making serious money.

Some seem to earn it easily, others seem to dedicate their lives to the dollar.

I also know lots of folks eeking by on very little....some because they have little initiative, some who are simply lazy, some just not that talented, others because society doesn't value their contribution to society as highly as many of us would like.

Some of this is fact, some of it is my opinion.

One thing that IS also opinion is your quote:

"I wouldn't consider that such a person has earned much at all."

That's your opinion........based on your post history thus far, I'd say you are far more often wrong than right.





Your entire post is just a personal attack. You are the one with no arguments, the one offering nothing to this discusion.

It IS a personal attack...a rather accurate one so far....many of us are sick of halfwits speaking twice as much as they listen.

In effect you are pissing in the debate punchbowl and based on your content so far, will not be missed if I ban your ass.

Some of your comments thus far are borderline infraction worthy.......but black and white when it comes to diluting the debate.

As I said, pull your head in, or your time hear will be short.

Last chance sunshine :)

[Thugut]

It IS a personal attack...a rather accurate one so far....many of us are sick of halfwits speaking twice as much as they listen.

In effect you are pissing in the debate punchbowl and based on your content so far, will not be missed if I ban your ass.

So having an opinion that doesn't fit with a moderator's beliefs and having the temerity of posting it is a banable offense? :)

I have said already whatever I had to say on this matter. I didn't expect such hostility, though when people resort to personal attacks and threats of banning, it usually means they ran out of worthwhile arguments.

[Flagg]

Also I'm sorry, but I don't have much respect for the argument claiming you EARNED your money.

I think this is where you completely lost what little plot you had.

I don't care if your opinion differs from mine, other moderators, or other forum members.

To be honest if everyone on this forum shared the same opinion on everything I wouldn't be here.

What drives me bat****, is someone like yourself with little experience on this forum, and what would clearly include little experience in the real world, throwing around quotes like the one you puked up a few pages back.

It's simply unacceptable.

If you want to play the martyr, fantastic.......you can enjoy a pity party in a table set for one.

You've actually said fcuk all of substance on the matter and if you have attended university I strongly encourage you to ask for a full refund.

[Elbs]

Thugut, I'm curious. Which professions do you consider "worthy" of earning their keep?
If I work in an office, am I not earning my pay? Should I be out cutting logs, digging ditches to earn my paycheck?

[Thugut]

I think this is where you completely lost what little plot you had.


No, without knowing what one's job is, I personally won't assume beforehand that he "earned" it, in the full meaning of the word.

Also thanks for the infraction. You should though try to come up with a better excuse than this:

"Reason: Didn't use search engine before requesting something popular"

[Elbs]

No, without knowing what one's job is, I personally won't assume beforehand that he "earned" it, in the full meaning of the word.

So using this reasoning we can assume that you, as a natural sciences student, wont be earning that "pretty good salary" you hope to get when you find a job. Because after all, without knowing you personally, it's okay to assume your efforts are not worthy of the money you'll be making.

[Flagg]

No, without knowing what one's job is, I personally won't assume beforehand that he "earned" it, in the full meaning of the word.

Also thanks for the infraction. You should though try to come up with a better excuse than this:

"Reason: Didn't use search engine before requesting something popular"

Actually I selected "Post didn't meet minimum content quality".

For the second time.....

[Thugut]

If i don't do my job well enough I'll get fired. Now as to whether the salary is just, i can't say; though it certainly is much smaller compared to what one gets in other sectors, and requires more years of studying.

[Flagg]

If i don't do my job well enough I'll get fired. Now as to whether the salary is just, i can't say; though it certainly is much smaller compared to what one gets in other sectors, and requires more years of studying.

Enjoy your two week holiday........consider doing some reading here.....it may improve your posting behavior upon your return.

[Policía Loco]

pbs.org section on healthcare
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/

2 interesting sections.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/countries/models.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/countries/

[Derbedeu]

pbs.org section on healthcare
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/

2 interesting sections.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/countries/models.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/countries/

It was interesting how they showed that the current US system is an amalgamation of all those other systems. This part makes a lot of sense as well:


The United States is unlike every other country because it maintains so many separate systems for separate classes of people. All the other countries have settled on one model for everybody. This is much simpler than the U.S. system; it's fairer and cheaper, too.

[Eye]

I have a solution :)
The healthcare market in US just should be open. You should liquidate monopoly of AMA and let medical stuff from Europe, Mexico, Australia and other countries work in US without limitations. It makes medical service much cheaper than it is now.
And all those advantages without socialized healthcare - just free market :)

[Olybrius]

Your entire post is just a personal attack. You are the one with no arguments, the one offering nothing to this discusion.

yes its very funny to read .. and now YOUR account is suspended..rofl

[Herr Oberst]

(Real)Americans don't like the idea of a nationalized health care system for two reasons.

Americans dislike anything that is socialist. Americans are resisting this Frankenstein Legislation for Socialized Medicine in America.

I am starting a new small business, some think I'm crazy in this Cap and Con economy. Obama's New Steal is doomed to failure as is socialism,see my relatives from Sweden, France and England(as expert witnesses to the failure of Socialism). So what does my new business produce.....Torches and Pitchforks.....Mary Shelley smiles.p-)