Do you support universal healthcare?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics not related to music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=60863
Printed Date: November 21 2024 at 22:40
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Do you support universal healthcare?
Posted By: Courtesy Flush
Subject: Do you support universal healthcare?
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 07:55
| Tis a poll |
Replies:
Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 08:12
| no, only the upper-middle class and upper class deserve treatment because anyone who can't afford it doesn't deserve to live. |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 08:38
If Courtesy Flush (gotta love that handle) means physical health then YES If he means mental health then NO as some of the the sufferers clearly choose not to help themselves. ------------- 
|
King By-Tor wrote:Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 09:00
|
I'm starting to find a middle ground. I think catastrophic care should be provided, so that no one faces financial ruin over an illness. But I think regular visits and tests under a certain yearly cap need to be paid for by the consumer, with more competition involved. Some people do abuse health care by running to the Doc for every little sniffle, and these folks should either buy a private plan or pay. But I do support families not losing their home and life savings because mom or dad get some deadly disease. |
Posted By: The Doctor
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 10:04
 Although I would modify it a bit and say that maybe there should be an IQ test prior to getting healthcare. Time to chlorinate the gene pool. 
Seriously, I voted yes. I think healthcare is a basic human right that everyone is entitled to. While I agree that there are some who abuse the system by running to a doctor for every sniffle, perhaps there could be an "idiot" surcharge for those people. If you go to the doctor for something serious, you're covered. If you go to the doctor for a cold you're charged, whether you have private health insurance or not.
Further, I believe that mental health should be covered as well. For the person who says many people with mental health problems do nothing to help themselves and therefore should be denied coverage, let me ask, should we deny coverage to those who have heart attacks because they are overweight? How about denying coverage to those with lung cancer or skin cancer because they brought it on themselves? Or the person who breaks his leg during a skiing accident? ------------- I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you? |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 11:04
|
|
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 15:33
| Sort of . . . People who can't afford it should get it for free and the rich should pay for it if they need it. I think it's horribly wrong that I as a student have to pay an annual fee for my healthcare even though I never go to the doctor. |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 16:06
|
So if you were to break a limb or say, heaven forbid, get run over by a steamroller you'd be able to pay for that out of pocket? What's the student medical fee that you pay if you don't mind? |
Posted By: akamaisondufromage
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 16:19
|
I think there should be a health service lucky dip. So when you enter the hospital you get a raffle ticket and if the doctor draws your number out of a hat then you get a free operation- otherwise tough.  ------------- Help me I'm falling! |
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 16:21
Not much (30 €?), but I'd much rather pay a 50 for going to the doctor whenever I need to than pay 30 a year for a service I don't use. (And I don't think the student healthcare would do much good if I got run over by a steamroller.  ) |
Posted By: SentimentalMercenary
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 16:24
|
"I want everybody to have maximum care at the best price. And that's why I want the government out of it completely."
- Dr. Ron Paul
------------- Those who promise us paradise on earth never produced anything but a hell. - Karl Popper |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 18:42
I think I'm too subtle for my own health sometimes...The remark in bold was directed at the diseased organ inside King By Tor's head which makes him susceptible to posting such facile garbage in the first place. It's called irony so yeah, the IQ test sounds like a winner. That aside, I can only endorse the remainder of your post (That's NOT irony) -------------
|
Posted By: Matthew T
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 19:19
|
We Have a Healthcare system in Australia and if any government tried to remove it and replace it with a fully private Health System they would be thrown out. We pay at the last time I remembered is 0.75 percent Tax on your gross income. Now I will admit the public hospitals are not perfect but compared to most places in the world they are fabulous.
Whatever treatment you receive in a public hospital in Australia it is free from a Heart Transplant to an in grown toe-nail. If you are involved in an accident or are seriously unwell you will be taken to a major Public Hospital for treatment as they have the equipment ,Intensive care units etc.
You still have the choice of Private Health insurance and I will admit it is advisable because if you require an operation that is not considered life threatening you could wind up on a waitintg list for 6 months. The goverment pays a 30% rebate back to you with private health insurance. You are up for $500.00 dollars if you require an overnigtht stay or more in a private hospital and they only charge you the $500 excess once per financial year no matter how many times you are in and out. I pay over $5,000 per annum and the government pays another approx $1,500 (30% rebate) on top bringing the actual cost to $6.500. This is Family cover that I am using,single is a roughly half that. It is not a common practice here for an employer to offer Health Insurance with a job.
At the moment my wife is not well and requires surgery and the treatment that she has received through the public system has been pretty good and quick and cost me nothing except for the drutgs she requires which I will add are all under the P>B>S scheme so if the drug costs more than $34.00 the goverment pays the balance.
$1 Aust is roughly 80 US cents
I work with a friend who is a U.S citizen ( Texas,Nevada and California was where he lived) and he was telling me with private insurance you are still up for massive amounts and it is not uncommon if any serious issue arises to wind up broke.
He likes our system here by a long shot.
Anyway here is another perspective and really think hard about what you want ------------- Matt |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 19:30
|
This is a no-brainer. Yes. But there are fools wiggling on the private insurers hooks and swallowing it whole. Makes you ashamed to be an American sometimes. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 19:37
Wait, you haven't seen A Fish Called Wanda have you? If you had your feet stuck in wet cement you just might. |
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 19:48
Not sure what healthacre cover I require when cruising around the Belt of Orion ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: rpe9p
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 20:20
Of course, everyone on the other side must be fooled by some trickery, no logical person could possibly hold another viewpoint from you. It does bother me a lot though that in the current health care debate in the US the republicans and opponents of the health care bill are just trying to spread lies and scare people instead of raising what I believe are legitimate problems with it. |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 20:50
|
Because it's a no brainer. Extremely logical, smart, and heartless people with different viewpoints from mine are using extremely emotional, not-so-smart folks to do their dirty work for them. If they could win in a real debate they might try. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: himtroy
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 21:00
| It sounds like a good idea, but for a country (US) that already has horrible debt problems it seems like a poor time. |
Posted By: Man With Hat
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 21:13
|
Yes. ------------- Dig me...But don't...Bury me I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect. |
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 21:39
| I support the universe. |
Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 22:05
|
Was just reading the Madoff trial sentencing transcript (incredibly funny and hysterical at times)... but anyway, a point that came up a few times was that people who'd lost their incomes, pensions, etc. with Madoff found themselves worrying about health insurance, their partners' health insurance and so on... now, at the same time you've got the stress of a financial crisis on you, you don't want that. Now, that's a problem that I think exists with pretending that leaving people to forage for their own healthcare plans is fine. |
Posted By: clarke2001
Date Posted: August 29 2009 at 23:45
| Absolutely, it's ridiculous to think otherwise. Non-supporting it is against Universal Declaration of Human Rights. |
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 00:34
+1 ------------- 
|
Posted By: A Person
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 01:00
Wow, Atlas ain't got nothin' on you. |
Posted By: rpe9p
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 02:46
| Obviously the question is not specific enough, but you guys are oversimplifying the discussion with your arguments. Pretty much everyone believes that all people have the right to some degree of health care, but the argument is how much is everyone entitled to. I kind of took the poll question of "universal healthcare" to mean the best possible care for everyone, though that may not have been how it was intended. |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 08:05
|
Universal healthcare is a no brainer in a civilised society, I would have thought...
Having grown up with the NHS, and having had short spells in hospitals over the years for trivial things, I have no complants about the service. The treatment my father recieved while dying with Cancer was `second to none. The same goes for my mother after she had a stroke. I've no complaints. That f***ing Tory d!ckhead who recently went to the States and scared the sh!t out of the American people by running down the NHS, making reference to all the horror stories of people giving birth or dying on trolleys in the UK, should be strung up by his nuts and shot to ribbons! Take my word for it, please dont believe a single word that comes out of the mouth of any UK politican, especially a puffed little Tory sh!thead. Bear this in mind; you will only ever hear the horror stories. Good news is no news as far as the media is concerned, and busy city hospitals in the US will have their own horror stories, under the current system. The NHS serves a huge population and is the one last institution that the British can be truly proud of. |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 08:31
|
I've written novels from time to time, and this subject always made me wonder... Doctors in the US are essentially private businessmen. They go to school and have to foot the bill themselves (grants aside) like most anyone else. They have to invest money in beginning a practice. Etc. What if, for whatever reason, people no longer decided to become physicians and nurses anymore? Folks just decided the field isn't profitable enough to get into (or wasn't interesting- again, whatever reason). What would our government's course of action be in such a scenario (especially with a national health care system)? Institute a mandatory draft in which certain people are forced into medical school? Just one of those weird "what if" ideas that came to me. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 08:54
Well, enjoy your next career as a Wal-Mart greeter or a fast food employee. Seriously it must be nice to have the luxury to be able invest all that time and money in a career and just quit. v v v  |
Posted By: The Doctor
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 09:00
|
I lived in Poland for a year and a half, where the doctors are not well-paid. In fact, many of them make very little money. Of course, there's a free education system for Polish citizens (free education...what a concept), so there are no pesky student loans to pay off. But there are quite a few doctors in Poland. That's not to say that there aren't problems with the Polish health service, but not everyone thinks that money is the be all and end all of their existence. There would still be doctors in the US. Policemen are paid next to nothing for putting their lives on the line on a daily basis, yet many still do it. And, a question that comes to mind is do I really want to see a doctor who only went into medicine because he thought he could make a killing? ------------- I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you? |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 09:12
This is certainly a very intriguing (and possibly chilling) idea. I can't speak for the US but in the UK the practice of medicine is still seen as a 'calling' and not purely a 'career choice' by most of its General Practitioners (and similarly with the nursing profession to a certain extent). But yes, as you remark, this happy state of affairs rests upon the continuing altruism of those entering the profession (and let's face it here in Australia where I now live there is a shortage of Doctors which is currently addressed by attracting GPs from overseas) These people work obscenely long hours due to staff shortages and no amount of remuneration will ever recompense an individual for the loss of precious free time with their own loved ones. Although the healthcare system in the UK is far from perfect it does have two constituent parts which seem to be mutually beneficial i.e the Private Sector attracts the wealthier patients who wish to avoid what can be long waiting times in the Public Sector (NHS) for non-life threatening operations and this takes some of the strain off the limited resources of the latter. I think this compromise solution works reasonably well and for some of the reasons you have outlined above, is infinitely preferable to an exclusively private or public route. It is sadly inevitable that some people will always abuse whatever liberties and rights you grant them, but this fact alone does not sanction the creation of a control system designed to quantify the moral worthiness of recipients. Epignosis, you are already a recording artist and a novelist, do you paint as well ?  -------------
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 12:12
Paint the town red! ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 12:27
With beer, I'd have to guess. 
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 13:09
|
I'm not for paying someone who stubbed their toe to get a couple days in a hospital/similar lol-worthy services. Big health issues, sure; deal with your own minor crap. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 13:25
|
We have universal health care here in Scandinavia. Here in Norway we need to cover some minor fees as well, but not to the extent that many are blocked out of using the system. And anything serious will be treated no matter if you have the money or not. Here as in many other countries some doctors are grossly overpaid - that's a system fault it's hard to do something about - but apart from that it's a pretty good system. And I find it increasingly strange to know that there are western countries against this kind of system in this day and age. ------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 13:26
Uh, I think Rob meant people deciding not to enter the medical profession in the first place, i.e. not going to medical school. |
Posted By: KoS
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 13:44
yeah, 10+ years of schooling, thousands of dollars in debt, incredible stress, seems to me that they deserve to be highly paid. |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 13:59
|
No. Not at all. Why should I have to pay for other people's problems? Next thing that's coming is communism. I'm watching Obama destroy America one bill at a time. ------------- 
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 14:00
Yeah, you're right, I misread that. What more profitable enough fields are they going to go into instead? What if most jobs meant a paycheck that most people can't live off of? What if the standard of living for most folks were under attack from those with the most power and money? What if the regulations that were put into place to keep the economy from going whack were dismantled so that those at the top were able to accumulate vast amounts of wealth at the expense of the people that really do work hard for a living? Sorry about that, I should have moved it over to the economical discussion thread, though the two do intertwine. ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: LinusW
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 14:07
Ah, the good ol' socialism fear What if in an extremely market-liberal society we drop all the securities for the working doctor and he's forced to work for slave wages in the murdering competition, if he's to have a job at all? Just one of those weird "what if" ideas that came to me. I mean, these sorts of predictions feel a bit silly, coming from both sides  I can only talk for Sweden, but being a doctor is a prestigious job with career opportunities and good salary. |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 14:22
------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 14:27
Yeah, that's not the issue. I don't have problems with docs earning, say, 100.000 dollars a year. It's the select few closing in on 200.000 or above I think earn just a tad too much ;-) ------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
Posted By: rpe9p
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 14:31
Everyone makes the amount they make because of supply and demand, if youre going to complain about that at least complain about professional athletes or something, not doctors |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 15:14
Not a prediction, but just a creative scenario (I think up weird crap all the time). And yes, Pat, that's what I meant, thank you. I have been exposed to just about all sides (I, of course, am I not a doctor, but I used to work for a network of them). I've been a self-payer, had health-insurance, I've paid a fortune in medical expenses, been denied a procedure (in another state) due to the place's belief that I could not pay (the woman literally told me I should be on welfare), and a host of other small experiences. Well, this right-wing nut believes there's probably a viable, moderate solution. Health care is partially so expensive because doctors have to have malpractice insurance, which is insanely expensive. And people like to sue. I think http://www.atra.org/ - tort reform is probably where we should start as a country. We already do have a "light" form of universal health care (for the poor), in the form of Medicaid, but I think that needs a huge overhaul (I know people personally who either cannot get it and need it, and people who do not need and get plenty of government help, including that fine cheese). I think we can facilitate some manner of health care incentive for folks on a sliding scale. It happens to a large extent on the local level (here we have clinics that operate on that sliding scale, so people who make X amount of dollars a year pay in full, and those who make squat are seen for free). This is especially true for children. In Florida, by the way, the law states that hospitals must treat you regardless of your ability to pay. I don't think there's any reason a person should, say, lose a home in favor of cancer treatment. At the same time, I don't think it's wise for the government to run health care. I see firsthand what it has done to our schools and I tremble, I quake.  ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: Leningrad
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 17:12
You are the reason that so many people are shot in revolutions
|
Posted By: KoS
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 17:42
|
Posted By: russellk
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 18:52
| I support 'as needed' healthcare, but not quite universal, for the reasons mentioned above: some health spoending is discretionary and should be privately funded (dentistry, for example). And I'd appreciate it if some of our contributors thought outside their own country's boundaries when contributing. |
Posted By: SentimentalMercenary
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 19:45
------------- Those who promise us paradise on earth never produced anything but a hell. - Karl Popper |
Posted By: KoS
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 19:57
I would just like to say that my political views are more libertarian than anything else. |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 20:17
|
Obama? Nothing to do with socialism? Where the hell did you get that? Everyone knows this story: When you see a starving man with no food, don't give him a fish. His supply will run out eventually, and he'll end up where he started, therefore you did not help him at all. If you teach him HOW to fish, he will be able to get by for the rest of his life comfortably. If the upper-class are paying for people living on the streets, how is that fair to the upper class, how is that not socialism, and how is that getting anything accomplished? My family wouldn't even be affected by these taxes on the wealthy! I shouldn't care at all what happens to them! But if you realize that people who are very intelligent and spend their whole life helping accomplish something important, they deserve their money! They should NOT have to give it to people who don't have jobs. -------------
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 20:21
|
Oh, and by the way; are you forgetting about what's happening in Canada? People there are getting denied what they need and coming here. What's going to happen to us when WE are denied a surgery or a doctor's visit because the government can't afford it? And believe me. Healthcare doesn't seem like communism at all. It's happened with other countries. The government takes control of one business, and then slowly it will take away all of our freedom, and what makes America what it is. -------------
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: KoS
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 20:24
|
^ Dude, using the slippery slope is the worst way to argue. The best way to argue against universal healthcare is to take into consideration that Medicare and Social security are failing institutions. The government is cutting the budgets of schools, prisons, police etc. in order to pay for medicare/SS, so to have an even more expensive govt. program the govt. would have to cut even more programs. Another important argument is that poor people do get free or discounted healthcare. My brother actually got approved for a program covered by the govt.. He has a condition where his bones aren't strong enough so it broke, he couldn't afford the full cost so the gov.t stepped in.Obama should concentrate on how to de-regulate healthcare providers and make existing programs more efficient rather than a complete overhaul that is going to cost more harm than good, especially with the economy the way that it is. I posted this in the Healthcare thread in the General Topic section, just posting it here in case anyone wants to read it.: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200909/health-care - http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200909/health-care Really good article on the American health care system. |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 20:45
|
Damn, I never should have posted in this thread. After I post in these threads everyone hates me
-------------
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 21:15
On the contrary, my ambivalence towards you is unwavering. |
Posted By: russellk
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 22:00
| Perhaps we could rename the thread 'Do you support universal healthcare in America?' |
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 22:01
Probably what the OP was going for, yeah. |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 22:05
|
Yes No Maybe So? |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 22:54
|
I don't even support Medicaid and Medicare. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 23:06
Individualism, lack of knowledge, exaggeration... a sign of the times...
I'd love if any of the people who call Obama communist would have the slightest idea of what communism really means, either Marxist communism or what existed until the end of the 80's in the Soviet Union....
Anyway, I really don't understand how someone could be against universal healthcare... one could be in favor or against specific ways of paying for this universal healthcare, one could be against the public option, but against universal healthcare???
But then again, you have to have lived a few years (and I'm not even that old, I'm just 30) to understand some things, or to have experienced them.... ------------- 
|
Posted By: Windhawk
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 23:06
Well, if the athletes were also paid by taxpayers money I would have issues with those too, if they rose above a certain level ;-) ------------- Websites I work with: http://www.progressor.net http://www.houseofprog.com My profile on Mixcloud: https://www.mixcloud.com/haukevind/ |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 23:08
You basically support death.... (not the band...)
Let the old rot, let the poor die....
Now THAT's the sign of an advanced civilization.....
-------------
|
Posted By: Figglesnout
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 23:24
A couple of problems with this post. For one thing, Canada, comprehensively, has a better health care system than the US, though neither country is particularly good. For another thing, the proposed health care reform is the not the same as health care in Canada, so please look up what a bill does before making comparisons. Thirdly, if you look at the best health care systems in the world (France, Japan, Germany, etc), they are ALL "socialized" systems (though in reality many of them are simply regulated private systems that guarantee everyone coverage). Let's look at just Japan. Japan imposed cost controls on procedures. The result? An MRI in the US costs $1,500. In Japan, it costs the equivalent of $98, and the labs still make a profit. Japan also has government provided health care. The result? In the US, 20% of medical costs go to paperwork and bureaucracy. In Japan... wait for it... 1.5% (those wasteful French and Canadian systems are at 4% and 6% respectively). Oh, and wait times? They're pretty damn short. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/21/AR2009082101778_pf.html - source ------------- I'm a reasonable man, get off my case |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 23:26
------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: LinusW
Date Posted: August 30 2009 at 23:31
Heh. Hah. Hih. Blargh. |
Posted By: rpe9p
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 00:02
I read something like 50% of the money spent on medical care in a persons entire life is spent in the last year of their life (on average of course). Personally when I'm old and dying I sure hope the government isnt paying that much to keep me alive that extra year, that would be a waste of taxpayer money. If I've saved enough and that extra time is worth enough to me, then I'll pay for the care, but if the government ever tries to do it for me I'd probably just refuse. |
Posted By: KoS
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 00:13
Re: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/ - http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/ |
Posted By: Figglesnout
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 00:53
|
I had to search around the website a bit to find what you were referring to with them being unable to afford it, but what I found (that most of their hospitals are operating in the red) seems to be avoidable simply by not taking price control to such an extreme.
Or, if need be, with government provided money to hospitals that obey the rules and end up in the red. Same idea of taxing the people who can afford it to help those who can't. If you were referring to something else, you will need to point me in the right direction. edit: I was not saying that we should necessarily adopt the Japanese system. I am simply saying that there are fairer, better systems out there than ours, and we should adopt some sort of system akin to one of them (whichever one will work best for a country like the US). As it stands, we have a really terrible health care system for how powerful and wealthy we are, and it needs to be fixed. I do not presume to have the knowledge to know how exactly it ought to be fixed. I simply find it impossible to believe that something which works for so many other countries (to varying degrees) would magically not work here. ------------- I'm a reasonable man, get off my case |
Posted By: Figglesnout
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 01:00
People could, but they don't (or, at least, they don't enough). Hence the 47 million uninsured in the US (even if you take out those who can afford health care but choose not to buy it, it's still an egregiously high number). As for the latter half (doomed to fail), numerous systems exist that provide coverage to everyone that are not failing despite "government bureaucracy." Frankly, I value the lives and welfare of poor people more than the additional wealth of rich people, especially since the distribution of wealth in this country is based on arbitrary factors such as natural assets (intelligence, looks, strength, athleticism, etc) and the social class into which you were born just as much as if not more than non-arbitrary factors like how dedicated a worker you are. ------------- I'm a reasonable man, get off my case |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 01:26
|
I value the rights of people to not have money stolen from them regardless of the reason no matter how noble it is perceived to be. You making this a rich vs poor is silly I think. Also I don't really know how the distribution of wealth is based the way you say it is. Especially since you are apparently ignoring that intelligence, looks, strength, and athleticism are able to be improved by hard work. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: Figglesnout
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 02:07
|
So do you oppose taxes altogether? The only reason people have a right not to have money stolen from them is because we collectively agree that we have this right. I am making the argument that this right ends where it impedes our ability to provide basic services to people who cannot provide it for themselves.
I am not making this rich vs. poor. It is simply the case that, if more money is needed and the only way to get it is through taxes, the fairest way to obtain it is to tax most those with the most money, since it causes them the least harm. People work jobs based in part on their opportunities (going to college will get you a better job in general, but people born into poor families are much less likely to get this opportunity than people born into rich families). As for natural abilities (in which I should not have included strength since it is very much dependent on the effort you put into it, way moreso than the others), yes, they can be improved, but no amount of hard work is going to turn me into an NBA star or a person with an IQ of 90 into a particle physicist. In addition, there are simply not enough well-paying jobs for everyone to make a reasonable living, and moreover there are low-paying jobs that need to be done (some of which are almost exclusively done by people born into poor families or born with low intelligence, such as janitors, at least in my personal experience). For these reasons, the distribution of wealth in a capitalist system will inevitably be arbitrary and unfair to a very great degree, and thus it is not immoral to take money from those this system benefits in order to help those it shafts. ------------- I'm a reasonable man, get off my case |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 03:26
Probably the most intelligently reasoned post in the entire thread. The portable version might read as: It is scarcity alone that confers a value on anything.  -------------
|
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 08:00
Sorry. Maybe communist doesn't fit your liking. Socialist is the word. When the wealthy pay for the poor through taxes, what else is that called if not socialism? -------------
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 08:05
He does not support death, and neither do I! There's a point where we must draw the line! The rich are rich for a reason. I'm not rich and I'm not poor, so why should I care about this plan at all? It just IS NOT RIGHT to take money that people worked hard for and give it to people collecting money in a soup can on the street. I actually donate to charities and fundraisers. I don't believe anyone should starve or not have enough money to live in this world. But when the government is FORCING you to pay for anything of theirs, then we have a problem. -------------
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 08:17
|
Relax J...we conservatives are just cold-hearted b*****ds who don't care about the little folks...even if we are the little folks (I know I am...I'm twelfth generation poor). As I mentioned, I think a moderate approach for health care could work... ...but I do find it kind of weird that people who probably would oppose slavery in America don't mind people working hard to have their money taken from them for the benefit of those who didn't lift a finger for it. Just sayin. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 08:18
|
The T pointed out that most people have no idea what communism actually is, and this is quite right. 'Communism' is a bogeyman word, used to scare Americans into supporting right wing legislation. To most people the 'c' word, doesn't have any actual definition. It's as meaningless a term to most people as 'codpiece' or 'sixpence' and yet when the word is uttered, people start flapping around like frightened ducks running for the water, when they see a dog off a leash.
People need to get a grip. A government trying to introduce some supportative policies for their populations less well off, is not an act of communism. If you think it is, go and live in North Korea for while. If you survive the experince without being beaten to death or shot, then return to the US, and start counting your lucky stars...and stripes! You're in a good place. Communism, my arse! |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 08:29
And if the Russians ever come, they'll all be beating bongo drums. Joe Jackson ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: SentimentalMercenary
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 08:31
Well I'm a libertarian myself and I believe that both Bush and Obama are failures. And both of them believe in a form of authoritarianism or another, which leads to collectivism, and then to socialism. They're just working their way on different issues. And they're succeeding because the people refuses to admit the inevitable consequence of their collectivist actions/programs...
------------- Those who promise us paradise on earth never produced anything but a hell. - Karl Popper |
Posted By: SentimentalMercenary
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 08:35
The word communism is used as a shortcut. Policies such as socialized healthcare are collectivist by nature. And it is from collectivism that societies ended up with authoritarian regimes such as socialism, communism or fascism. Quite simple, whereas you raised a good question. ------------- Those who promise us paradise on earth never produced anything but a hell. - Karl Popper |
Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 08:38
|
About taxes: You can earn as much money as you can because you live in a society with laws and government. Naturally, that needs to be paid for. Taxation is the only way to do that. As a citizen, you have responsibilities as well as rights. Universal healthcare offers accountability beyond how much you're paying and the threat of mild bad publicity, it offers you more freedom (freedom is not the same as independence) if your current healthcare plan is tied to your work, chances are it'll increase life expectancy, it removes the chance you'll have to negotiate with your insurance when you're already very sick and it offers competition with which existing insurance providers will have to keep up. As far as I can see, it's a case of social cooperation which will provide benefits most obviously to the poor, but which will make a positive difference to the lives and opportunities of virtually anyone in the country. (The Madoff case is revealing: formerly well-off people find themselves seriously concerned about their healthcare at age 65) |
Posted By: akamaisondufromage
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 08:41
|
I guess you 'conservatives' could try getting rid of taxes all together if you don't feel any responsibility for your fellow man. Try living without rubbish collection, street lighting, police service, fire service - in the good old days they would only put out the fires in houses that had paid just leave it to the free market which works sooooo well (Look at the banks everyone and see how well they have done for us) .
J the rich are mainly rich cos daddy or grandaddy was rich - Paris Hilton anyone.
Communism has never existed - nor will it so stop worrying. Facism is another matter altogether.
------------- Help me I'm falling! |
Posted By: RedScare
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 08:46
|
You know, US citizenship (or that of any other country for that matter) is not mandatory. If you don't like what the government asks of you, you can always renounce it, and found your own society where everyone is free, and no one will impose anything on you. Dream on, kids, dream on... Poor kids, who have no idea of what life is really like, and believe in the big, bad, red bogeyman... Poor, spoiled kids with their inhuman, heartless, cruel Libertarian beliefs, who think they are God and nothing will ever happen to them just because they're gifted and work hard... Poor, fanatical, misguided idiots, who would turn the world into an even worse place that it already is. If you could only realise that everything you have could be taken away from you by a mere twist of fate, without any fault of your own, and you might find yourself in the same shoes of those people whom you are so quick to judge, without knowing anything of their circumstances. The best I can wish you and your ilk is to find yourselves on the receiving end one day, and to find the same level of 'compassion' that you are showing. And please, stop mouthing off inanities about Communism... You have no idea of what you are talking about. If you want to continue making fools of yourselves, then don't complain if all the rest of the world laughs at you, ignorant Americans. The world does not revolve around you, as much as it may pain you to realize it. |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 08:47
------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 09:02
Robert, I agree something needs to be done with health care. What's going on right now does not work. I just do not believe that Obama's approach will solve anything. -------------
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 09:18
|
Part of being part of a society means that the group contributes to the good of the whole. You cannot get out of that. And it means that the powerful have provide a bigger portion in order for things to function.
The idea that anything truly belongs to you is an illusion. Have someone accuse you of a sex crime and you'll find out how quickly your property rights are meaningless. Money is always a shell game. We sit and argue about how the shells get shuffled, because those in power don't want us to get savvy to how things really work. Sometimes as a worker or a customer, you have to say "I don't give a mailto:$#$@#$ - $#$@#$ how your accounting sheets look, this is want I want as my compensation for I'm giving you."
We are already paying for the insured at very high rates to get poor treatment in our ERs which are not designed to give them the care they need. The shells are arranged in perhaps the stupidest way possible right now, unless you are certain doctors, insurers, pharmaceutical companies, owners of surgery centers and imaging centers, or plaintiff's attorney's. Even if your insurance works well for you, it would cost less if we had a system that made sense.
This is not about giving the lazy something you don't think they deserve (though I would argue they deserve health care before cash to use at their discretion which we already give) They already go to the ER and cost us the money. Unfortunately, at least 1/2 the uninsured are not lazy but are people in a gap where either they work for a small business or themselves which cannot afford commercial insurance.
The original question is a no-brainer. The question of "Is the current plan on the table worth passing?" is a different one. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 09:25
|
I love the phrase "no-brainer" in this discussion, as though this is some completely straightforward issue and those who oppose a universal health care system are without brains. Most of the comments I have seen are lazy generalizations anyway. I'm more in favor of seeing health care costs go down (again, major tort reform is one starting point), not taxpayers footing exorbitant bills, so those who need to see a doctor for the most part can afford it. My wife was once was charged $600 for a late night hospital visit in which all they did was check her urine and give her a prescription. I wrote them a letter and said that they should have made her a sandwich and massaged her feet for that price. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 09:32
Oh no, hospital food is terrible. |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 09:35
------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 09:38
|
That $600 paid for uninsured patients, liability insurance, and somewhat to the legitimate overhead of running an ER or Urgent Care.
Most of us who work more than full time giving health care for the poor and uninsured think that opponents of universal health care are a) heartless (a small but powerful proportion) b) scared of losing what little they have (probably the majority) or c) don't understand the issue (a surprisingly high number) or d) transferring their general political alliances to an issue that should not be Democrat or Republican. There are a few idiots but that's on all sides. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 09:59
|
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-cn-canada-medicare-for-all,0,3246185.story - Canadians bristle at American criticisms of their system 8/31 ... "The flaw in the American system," Ontario Health Minister David Caplan said recently, "is that first they check the size of your wallet, not the size of your need." Obama has stepped in to defend his neighbors' system. "I don't find Canadians particularly scary, but I guess some of the opponents of reform think they make a good bogeyman. I think that's a mistake," he said. In seeking to spread affordable coverage, including to the nearly 50 million uninsured Americans, Obama has said he isn't looking to copy the Canadian model, but wants to build on the existing U.S. system with a mix of private and government-funded insurance. For all the rhetoric, both Canadians and Americans appear in opinion polls to be broadly content with the care they have. A Harris-Decima poll published last month found that 82 percent of Canadians believe their system outdoes America's, and 70 percent felt it was working very well or well. The telephone poll of 1,000 Canadians was conducted from June 4 to 8 with a margin of error of 3.1 percentage points. A survey released this month by the nonpartisan http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/politics/robert-wood-PEPLT007207.topic - Robert Wood Johnson Foundation said more than 86 percent of Americans rated their care as good to excellent. But 52 percent were very or somewhat worried they wouldn't be able to afford future care, and nearly 30 percent said they were very or somewhat worried it would bankrupt them. The telephone poll of 500 Americans had a margin of error of 4.4 percentage points. Canada's system provides its citizens with coverage at a much lower per capita cost than the U.S. largely because its single-payer system, in which the government picks up the tab, greatly reduces administrative costs. ... http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-tc-nw-underinsured-0829-0830aug30,0,3233169.story - Millions of Americans with Health Insurance Find They are Underinsured When in Medical Need 8/31 Health care: Millions pay for coverage, but it's not what it seems
By Bobby Caina Calvan
McClatchy/Tribune news
August 30, 2009 SACRAMENTO, Calif. -
-- Laura Burwell was weeding her backyard vineyard last summer when she was bit by a rattlesnake. ...   |
Posted By: SentimentalMercenary
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 10:32
|
I got a question for those who support universal health care :
What makes healthcare so much more important than access to food that makes you support the provision of the former by the government, but not of the later? ------------- Those who promise us paradise on earth never produced anything but a hell. - Karl Popper |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 10:34
------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 10:41
First of all, we do support food for everyone. There are some (also incomplete) systems for providing this....food stamps are much easier to obtain than an actual welfare check which is as it should be. Unfortunately the restrictions on the use of these vouchers are not as strict as they should be.
Second of all, health care is a resource that is too expensive in many cases for any individual to purchase for themselves. Even with simple savings from an average income, it is not reasonable to be able to pay for an average hospitalization (e.g. getting your gallbladder out) in the current system. Therefore, some way of pooling resources is necessary. The one we use now is run by for profit, rarely honest, accountants that do not have to take all comers. One option is making them take everyone and imposing cost limits, or by simply creating a government program. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 10:46
All right. Let's go with that model. I guarantee you health insurance companies will no longer exist. They are a business run for profit (sorry, but profit is not an ignoble thing). Force them to take everyone AND limit what they charge, and the "evil" businessmen who run the insurance companies will close shop and invest in something more productive, like...I don't know...taco stands. Then everyone can pay their own way. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 10:47
|
Anyone who believes that the hard work is what makes you rich in a capitalist system is a complete fool.
It is but one of several factors, and not the most important. By far the most important is the cultural environment in which you were born into. You may find extraordinary exceptions to this, but this is the rule. If your parents never worked a steady job, the chance you will are much much less than if yours did. It's not just laziness. It's a culture.
Now, how do we change our culture to make it harder to take without giving back??? Without finding away to only allow contributing members of society to reproduce, I don't know how to fix that. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: SentimentalMercenary
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 10:56
I would agree and disagree. In a capitalist system, there are three factors that can make you rich, and none of them is more important than the others : your hard work, your starting position, and sheer luck. That's still a better system than arbitrary appointments and misery for all the others.
------------- Those who promise us paradise on earth never produced anything but a hell. - Karl Popper |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 10:58
You're right. That's why having a for-profit manage a public service is doomed to fail.
For rich people like me (who went from my lower-middle class background to lower-upper class based mainly on the set of talents God gave me, in spite of my natural laziness), the answer is to buy catastrophic insurance (which actually functions as insurance) and pay for our routine health care out of our pocket. That is not an option for most Americans.
The Bible, among many sources of ancient wisdom, frown on the type of debt-based business upon which the U.S. is now run. For many of the ancient masters profit, is, in fact, evil.
------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 11:28
-------------
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 11:54
 ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 12:43
|
I voted yes. It's a complex discussion, but I think that some form of basic health care should be free for everyone. The difficult part is where to draw the line ...
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: August 31 2009 at 12:48
Not a bad way of putting it. Tax dollars pay for police, who will come to one's home in case of a break-in, which could cause a citizen to lose his or her life (for example). Meningitis (for example) could be seen as an internal "intruder" that could also be combated by tax dollars. Interesting... ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |