Democrats eye universal health-care

Democrats eye universal health-care (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Level -> Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 3:10:42 AM)
In a conference call in January, the health-care debate within the Democratic Party played out before former senator John Edwards of North Carolina, who was in search of policy advice for his presidential campaign, and his wife, Elizabeth. On one side was Ezekiel Emanuel, a doctor and bioethics expert and the brother of Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), arguing that the American health-care system is so riddled with inefficiencies that it needs to be blown up and replaced by a plan in which people can buy coverage themselves with a voucher. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19686903

OO8OO88O8 -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 6:14:33 AM)
They need to be wary of national healthcare though. Just like any other, it has ups and downs. They ups are now everyone has some degree of healthcare. The downs are that quality of service goes down. We will still have the best doctors, but they will see patients with private healthcare rather than deal national healthcare and worry about being paid.

pahunkboy -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 6:17:12 AM)
this bird wont fly. how about we preserve the middle class!

Alumbrado -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 6:25:52 AM)
quote: ...arguing that the American health-care system is so riddled with inefficiencies that it needs to be blown up and replaced by a plan in which people can buy coverage themselves... And of course the people who brought us Amtrak, the postal service, TennCare, and FEMA are just the one's for the job of fixing the entire health care system. [8\|]

OO8OO88O8 -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 6:26:58 AM)
RIP the middle class indeed. I always get a kick of the twisted statistic known as "total job growth." It never takes into account the earning wages of all those "new" jobs the administration has created. The one's lost are the one's that hurt.

MistressDaisy73 -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 6:33:32 AM)
Nationalized anything is just another way of saying "socialism". Without a certain amount of competition and natural selection, nothing progresses and grows nearly as quickly. It is time for a "do-nothing" government. When will folks start realizing they have been bred to be stupid and passive and look to big brother to solve everything, when they should do it themselves, or at least stop looking to the government to solve all ills. One shoe does not fit all feet. Hell, one size rarely even really fits the same person on both of their own. Peace.

Real0ne -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 8:02:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MistressDaisy73 Nationalized anything is just another way of saying "socialism". Without a certain amount of competition and natural selection, nothing progresses and grows nearly as quickly. It is time for a "do-nothing" government. When will folks start realizing they have been bred to be stupid and passive and look to big brother to solve everything, when they should do it themselves, or at least stop looking to the government to solve all ills. One shoe does not fit all feet. Hell, one size rarely even really fits the same person on both of their own. Peace. Oh come on! its FREE! (isnt it?) LOL

Real0ne -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 8:11:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado quote: ...arguing that the American health-care system is so riddled with inefficiencies that it needs to be blown up and replaced by a plan in which people can buy coverage themselves... And of course the people who brought us Amtrak, the postal service, TennCare, and FEMA are just the one's for the job of fixing the entire health care system. [8\|] Oh yeh FEMA! CIA, NSA, HLS.

meatcleaver -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 8:17:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MistressDaisy73 Nationalized anything is just another way of saying "socialism". Without a certain amount of competition and natural selection, nothing progresses and grows nearly as quickly. It is time for a "do-nothing" government. When will folks start realizing they have been bred to be stupid and passive and look to big brother to solve everything, when they should do it themselves, or at least stop looking to the government to solve all ills. One shoe does not fit all feet. Hell, one size rarely even really fits the same person on both of their own. Peace. This is why western European healthcare systems are better and twice as cheap as the US healthcare system....oops! sorry, the US doesn't have a healthcare system, it has corporate healthcare which is why it is so expensive and so many people have no health cover, the health corporations needs to fleece people for their profits and you can't fleece the poor so the poor can go and fuck themselves.

Real0ne -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 8:20:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: MistressDaisy73 Nationalized anything is just another way of saying "socialism". Without a certain amount of competition and natural selection, nothing progresses and grows nearly as quickly. It is time for a "do-nothing" government. When will folks start realizing they have been bred to be stupid and passive and look to big brother to solve everything, when they should do it themselves, or at least stop looking to the government to solve all ills. One shoe does not fit all feet. Hell, one size rarely even really fits the same person on both of their own. Peace. This is why western European healthcare systems are better and twice as cheap as the US healthcare system....oops! sorry, the US doesn't have a healthcare system, it has corporate healthcare which is why it is so expensive and so many people have no health cover, the health corporations needs to fleece people for their profits and you can't fleece the poor so the poor can go and fuck themselves. not entirely true GAMP That and it is so expensive because of all the shitty doctors who the system refuses to deny the ability to practice thus law suits have driven the proices sky high. The federal gov has the legitimate autority to regulate the corporations how ever this is no longer a republic but a fascio-x-y-z country

MistressNoName -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 8:21:05 AM)
I'm truly trying to understand the argument against this. I don't care what you want to call it, whether "universal," "national," or {gasp}, the dreaded "socialized" healthcare...what is wrong with trying to create a system of healthcare that is based upon inclusivity and accounts for real differences in ability to pay for services? I think it's pretty safe to say that most Americans argue against socialized systems of medicine without even really understanding what it is and how it works in areas that have adopted these plans. And no disrespect intended MistressDaisey, but if your argument is the best there is against socialized healthcare, I find it quite lacking. Your analogy to one-size doesn't fit all doesn't work here, as this is exactly the type of situation most people are struggling with here and now. Most ppl get their healthcare policies through some employment system. There is usually very little choice in the matter...Sure we have a million and one companies and lots of good, ole healthy competition, but when a person starts a job, most folks get very little choice on the plans they can opt for...and much of any choice they are given usually boils down to what expenses their pocket can bear. And that's not a good way to dole out choice, as far as I'm concerned. Example: Option A is a great healthplan with lots of variety...hey great...my docs on on it, my pediatrician is there, awesome!! ...oh, problem...I'll break the family budget with this plan...so looks like Option B is for me...an HMO...and nope the kid's pediatrician is not there and neither is my ob-gyn...crap! Ah well, but at least I can afford the plan and the free enterprise system is well intact. Good healthy economic competition...I can sacrifice my family's health for that...no problem! Anyway, I really do hope someone can help me understand the rational reasons behind why we tend to think socialized medicine is so evil... MNN

cyberdude611 -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 8:21:29 AM)
Great....thats all we need... more government.

Real0ne -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 8:26:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cyberdude611 Great....thats all we need... more government. LOL exactly!!!

farglebargle -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 8:32:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OO8OO88O8 They need to be wary of national healthcare though. Just like any other, it has ups and downs. They ups are now everyone has some degree of healthcare. The downs are that quality of service goes down. We will still have the best doctors, but they will see patients with private healthcare rather than deal national healthcare and worry about being paid. I dunno. Medicare works pretty well. Just extend that, and shutdown the HMOs....

MistressDaisy73 -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 8:35:28 AM)
It is because of government interference that healthcare is so expensive to begin with. And, the US has plenty of free healthcare for the less fortunate. The poor often have many more options than the middle class or people who, by the sweat of their brow are making ends meet, just barely. Govt involvment only increases the cost, due to regualtion, and FORCING people and companies to NEED insurance. An example of this can be seen by the many doctors offices and hospitals that, if you pay them in "cash" they give you a very significant "price break". My opinions about nationalized anything being socialism still stand, and I respect other peoples opinions. However, America became what it was (not necessarily is) through the same fires that all other countries have gone through. We have just done it in 300 years as opposed to a much more lengthy history. There have been, what I consider, mistakes made in our history and there are mistakes made every day. The one thing I do hope for is educating people about the errors of the powers that be. They are not perfect and unfortunately their errors affect us all. One must at least try to be informed and question what one is taught instead of just accepting the status quo or what their folks did, or what their race does, etc. Socialism takes away from everyone, not gives to everyone. Sure, other countries have systems that SEEM to work..... NOW, after a few centuries of progressive socialism. Plenty of folks from those countries might disagree about how well it works. And remember, NOTHING is free. You pay for it one way or the other, whether it is in your income tax, property tax, sales tax, etc. I am not saying it is all bad. If that is what the majority of folks want, then that is awesome and I am happy for them. Social Darwinism still exists in those countries too. It just is different.

Real0ne -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 8:35:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MistressNoName I'm truly trying to understand the argument against this. I don't care what you want to call it, whether "universal," "national," or {gasp}, the dreaded "socialized" healthcare...what is wrong with trying to create a system of healthcare that is based upon inclusivity and accounts for real differences in ability to pay for services? I think it's pretty safe to say that most Americans argue against socialized systems of medicine without even really understanding what it is and how it works in areas that have adopted these plans. And no disrespect intended MistressDaisey, but if your argument is the best there is against socialized healthcare, I find it quite lacking. Your analogy to one-size doesn't fit all doesn't work here, as this is exactly the type of situation most people are struggling with here and now. Most ppl get their healthcare policies through some employment system. There is usually very little choice in the matter...Sure we have a million and one companies and lots of good, ole healthy competition, but when a person starts a job, most folks get very little choice on the plans they can opt for...and much of any choice they are given usually boils down to what expenses their pocket can bear. And that's not a good way to dole out choice, as far as I'm concerned. Example: Option A is a great healthplan with lots of variety...hey great...my docs on on it, my pediatrician is there, awesome!! ...oh, problem...I'll break the family budget with this plan...so looks like Option B is for me...an HMO...and nope the kid's pediatrician is not there and neither is my ob-gyn...crap! Ah well, but at least I can afford the plan and the free enterprise system is well intact. Good healthy economic competition...I can sacrifice my family's health for that...no problem! Anyway, I really do hope someone can help me understand the rational reasons behind why we tend to think socialized medicine is so evil... MNN Yes but the larger problem here is that the feds, GW BUSH has decided rather to act within their legitimate constitutional authority and regulate the corporations and keep pricing reasonable, they have chosen to regulate and cap malpractice law suitsby regulating we the people by capping our law suits to 250,000 (the value of someones life now days), which is not in their constitutional charter and as a result there is no way for us to prevent the growth of this greedy fungus by cleaning out the garbage That gone our system is broken. What socilaized health system would be better in a fascist country and not subject to even greater fraud than it is now?

NoirUMC -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 8:42:14 AM)
I'm too close to our "health care system" to be unbiased on this. Frankly, these professionals put up with a lot of bullsh** at their jobs and I'm definitely not in favor of any government meddling that makes it easier for people to get away with the nonsense they love to engage in on a regular basis. (Example: Medicare-sponsored emergency room visits at 4:00AM for a run of the mill cough and cold. Surely someone with an M.D. next to their name can vouch for the fact that this happens too often?) More to the point, I'm not in favor of any government program that takes money from me to pay for things I'd just as soon pay for myself. And I'm saying that with a straight face and a job that barely pays minimum wage.

farglebargle -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 8:42:35 AM)
quote: It is because of government interference that healthcare is so expensive to begin with. If by that you mean, "The US Government Permits Health Insurers to routinely deny properly filed, valid claims, simply to slow payment to Doctors, causing, by some estimates, THREE TRILLION DOLLARS of waste. So, by simply bringing the Health Insurers to heel, and make them act in Good Faith, we could EASILY pay for any Medical Delivery infrastructure we wished to have. To repeat: TODAY the Health Insurance Company is ripping YOU and YOUR DOCTOR off for THREE TRILLION DOLLARS

MistressNoName -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 8:43:36 AM)
Well, though it may take 18 pages I believe there is someone out there with a rational, reasonable and well-supported opinion of why socialized medicine would not work in this country...I haven't seen it yet, but I can wait for it. Carry on. MNN

farglebargle -> RE: Democrats eye universal health-care (7/10/2007 8:47:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MistressNoName Well, though it may take 18 pages I believe there is someone out there with a rational, reasonable and well-supported opinion of why socialized medicine would not work in this country...I haven't seen it yet, but I can wait for it. Carry on. MNN Answer: The Health Insurance Companies who own the legislators will not permit it.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.201294E-02