Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/13/2008 3:22:27 PM   
subfever


Posts: 2895
Joined: 5/22/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomAviator

I dont know where the hell this silly idea people are "entitled" to anything comes from.


Probably from a similarly moronic idea that government should be entitled to tax our labor.

(in reply to DomAviator)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/13/2008 3:25:27 PM   
faerytattoodgirl


Posts: 5824
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

There are such things as progress in technology (a very much improved artificial heart) and biotechnology (adding or growing a secondary supporting heart). You are likely too die early - but you might outlive most of us. A lot can happen in say twelve years time.


well i wasnt expected to live past age 20.  they've done no surgery since...and since i turned...say...age 24 (roughly) i have had major troubles doing things of physical nature with my energy deteriorating year by year and now basically completely gone.

i have a artificial pig valve thats 23 yrs old (age 14 the day they said i'd die by age 20)..only supposed to last an average of 10 years.  it has to be changed...but i figure ill have a heart attack before that happens..this is what it is looking like with my health.

they are waiting for a technology to be perfected so they dont actually have to operate on me.  they can just push it through my veins the new valve without opening me up.  because opening me up = serious life threatening.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetralogy_of_Fallot




< Message edited by faerytattoodgirl -- 5/13/2008 3:28:02 PM >

_____________________________

I did not reply to your cmail.
I am flawed.
Imperfect.
MUST SPANK!!!
SPAAAAAAAANK!!!

(in reply to Rule)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/13/2008 3:37:52 PM   
LadyEllen


Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline 		Free at point of delivery healthcare is something the US has to decide for itself, if it wants it.

What is surprising though, is the vehement resistance to the idea from many here. Often it must be said, based on what appears to be wild extrapolation of what are the adversities of the British (note, not European) system. The system you need to look at is the French system; our system fell behind from 1979 when Thatcher stepped into power until 1997, and it has a lot of catching up to do even now.

Yes, it costs more in the tax bill you pay - though not necessarily if your health insurance is high at the moment. But it means that everyone gets healthcare. "not my problem to provide healthcare for others" some will say, and yet that is an easy thing to be able to say, when one is of the lucky part of the population that gets health insurance cover. Anyone, absolutely anyone, can be destitute by this time next year. What then? Being destitute and ill, one should die and decrease the surplus population?

The only argument I see against it, not that its my business particularly, is the potential swamping of a free at delivery health service by way of what is by all accounts a very porous border.

E

_____________________________

In a test against the leading brand, 9 out of 10 participants couldnt tell the difference. Dumbasses.

(in reply to ownedgirlie)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/13/2008 5:15:44 PM   
kiwisub12


Posts: 4742
Joined: 1/11/2006
Status: offline 		My mum had a leaking cerebral aneursym - she went into hospital, CT scan, bedrest for a week, flown to the hospital that does neurological surgery, brain surgery - couldn't get to the aneurysm from the approach taken, bedrest for two weeks, another surgery, bedrest for another couple of weeks, flown back to original hospital, my dad also was along for the trip, discharged home after a while. Total of nine weeks in hospital, two ct scans , two brain surgeries, two flights - all paid for by the government, out of pocket expenses - $50.00.

My Sir has two bad knees, and needs prostate surgery. He works, doesn't have health insurance, doesn't get operated on,  was in heart failure, had a 4 vessel bypass, is being sued by the hospital for the bill. This is a man that works hard, and has done all his life. Would he be willing to pay more in taxes to be able to access health care and go on a waiting list. Hell yeh!
People who don't have health insurance aren't dead beats. They are people who don't work for big businesses and get health insurance, or can't afford health insurance offered. I for one would be fine with paying more in taxes for universal health care. As it is , we pay for it by hospitals writing off bad debt and raising health care costs to cover it.
And it isn't an open hospital system. For nonemergent surgerys, patients go on waiting lists , and have the surgery when their number is up. My sister needed a hip replacement, went on a list and after a year, got her new hip. The system works for every one. In New Zealand, you can also carry private health insurance, and get care in a private hospital.

So if you have money you can get your elective care faster, but if you don't have it you still can get care - it just takes longer. If it is an emergent situation, care is given immediately.
I really don't see a down side to universal health care.

(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/13/2008 5:25:01 PM   
kittinSol


Posts: 16926
Status: offline 		Many 'conservatives' don't want universal healthcare in America because it's an ideological issue. They're terrified of anything remotely 'socialistic', and universal healthcare is just one of these things that brings benefits to the most suspicious elements of the population: the less well off. So they reject the idea purely on principle.

Also, they have a vested interest in the insurance and pharmaceutical industries, two lines of business that profit enthusiastically from an insanely expensive and private system.

< Message edited by kittinSol -- 5/13/2008 5:26:04 PM >

_____________________________



(in reply to kiwisub12)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/13/2008 7:41:27 PM   
Zensee


Posts: 1564
Joined: 9/4/2004
Status: offline 		It's called triage and it has been acceptable and necessary part of medical practice from time immemorial. When resources are limited you apply them to the people with the greatest chance of benefiting from them. Single payer systems do it and bloated private (you-are-poor-so-fuck-off) systems do it (even more and with less compassion). So enough with the "social medicine evil killer of old ladies" crap already.


Z.


_____________________________

"Before enlightenment, chop wood and carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood and carry water." (proverb)

(in reply to kittinSol)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/13/2008 8:11:30 PM   
kittinSol


Posts: 16926
Status: offline 		Exactement.

_____________________________



(in reply to Zensee)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/13/2008 8:48:09 PM   
SugarMyChurro


Posts: 1912
Joined: 4/26/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol
They're terrified of anything remotely 'socialistic', and universal healthcare is just one of these things that brings benefits to the most suspicious elements of the population: the less well off.


What's amazing is that people buy into this bullshit.

The U.S. is imbecilic in that it is already substantially socialistic in many things that it does. It just isn't doing some more of the right things that would make sense like universal healthcare.

The military is socialistic isn't it? I mean, Blackwater is showing us that we could altogether privatize that need and hire piece of shit mercenaries.

FWIW, fresh strawberries are at $1.50 a pound locally. I am becoming tempted...I like strawberry goo on my oatmeal. Oh wait, wrong thread...!

< Message edited by SugarMyChurro -- 5/13/2008 8:55:01 PM >

(in reply to kittinSol)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/13/2008 9:25:08 PM   
DomMeinCT


Posts: 2355
Joined: 5/5/2005
Status: offline 		No one plan is perfect. 

As many as 12.5% of the UK population has private medical insurance.  Tons of articles about how UK doctors and dentists are leaving the NHS.  http://www.healthinsurance.co.uk/healthinsurance-information/Health-Insurance-and-National-Health-Service-FAQs.html (private health insurance industry website)

Some 65% of Canadians have some form of supplementary private health insurance (which pays for things the national plan won't) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_insurance 

Similar to what you see in the U.S., even in countries with extensive national medical programs, people who can afford insurance seem to be buying it.  Why?  Because the national plans aren't as comprehensive (or don't provide the best medical care) that people want.

_____________________________

The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances:
if there is any reaction, both are transformed.
~ Carl Jung

(in reply to SugarMyChurro)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/13/2008 9:38:06 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline 		Yeah,duhh.

Private HC won`t pay for everything either.

And you can still be booted off of a HC plan at any time, for any reason. Poof ,gone!

No system is perfect,but one(the European model) cost half of what the other system (ours) costs.

Can you square that for us ?


(in reply to ownedgirlie)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/14/2008 1:16:13 AM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomMeinCT

No one plan is perfect. 

As many as 12.5% of the UK population has private medical insurance.  Tons of articles about how UK doctors and dentists are leaving the NHS.  http://www.healthinsurance.co.uk/healthinsurance-information/Health-Insurance-and-National-Health-Service-FAQs.html (private health insurance industry website)


Some people send their children to private schools even though they might be worse than state schools and in all but the top private schools, they are. Its an ideological decision based on their loathing and suspicion of anything considered left wing. (probably jealous that the right didn't thik of it first).

You might pay insurance to get your gall stones removed in a private hospital but if you have cancer, you will throw yourself on the experts in the nationa health service, after all, you I assume you would want to live and not go bankrupt. Actually the chances are, if you have something serious and you want to remain private, the private insurance will buy you a place in the French national health service or the German one. Yep, it sounds daft but on the whole, private health insurance is daft.

As for private dentists in Britain, it is cheaper to go to holiday in Hungry and pay next to nothing for first class treatment.

The real problem with the British HC system is that it was run by Margaret Thatcher (and she was a rightwing bitch, remember)  and her corrupt cronies (two actually ended up in prison) for the best part of 20 years. They caused real damage with their right wing ideology.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomMeinCT
Similar to what you see in the U.S., even in countries with extensive national medical programs, people who can afford insurance seem to be buying it.  Why?  Because the national plans aren't as comprehensive (or don't provide the best medical care) that people want.


As I have previously mentioned, private health cover comes unstuck when you have a serious illness which requires expensive ongoing treatment. If you are rich enough, fine but most people don't want to leave their families with debts long after they are dead.

< Message edited by meatcleaver -- 5/14/2008 1:19:18 AM >

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to DomMeinCT)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/14/2008 6:51:26 AM   
ownedgirlie


Posts: 9184
Joined: 2/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

Yeah,duhh.

Private HC won`t pay for everything either.

True, but it will pay for care for the elderly and for the sick.

quote:


And you can still be booted off of a HC plan at any time, for any reason. Poof ,gone!

What's the percentage of insured people who are booted for frivolous reasons?

quote:


No system is perfect,but one(the European model) cost half of what the other system (ours) costs.

Can you square that for us ?




Nothing costs less.  Taxes are higher, goods are higher, waiting lists are longer, and care is rationed.

I'll take my own private care, thank you.  One of the things I negotiate with employers is what they pay for healthcare.  In my past three jobs, my premiums have been covered 100%. 

Edited to ask:  What part of my post were you Duh'ing?

< Message edited by ownedgirlie -- 5/14/2008 6:53:01 AM >

_____________________________

Good is the enemy of great.

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/14/2008 7:21:12 AM   
QuietlySeeking


Posts: 297
Joined: 5/5/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: missturbation

Everyone pays for their health care in some shape or form (immigrants discluded but thats another argument.) USA has private medical insurance, UK has taxes to cover it or private medical insurance.



And as far as the "free" healthcare is concerned, we all pay for it. 

The largest hospital operator in the US gave away about 10% of its annual revenues in free/reduced care.....guess who got to pay for that 10%....everyone else who used care at facilities across the US.

(in reply to missturbation)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/14/2008 7:23:57 AM   
kittinSol


Posts: 16926
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie

Nothing costs less.  Taxes are higher, goods are higher, waiting lists are longer, and care is rationed.



Which country are you referring you here? And what do you mean by 'rationing'?

_____________________________



(in reply to ownedgirlie)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/14/2008 7:33:49 AM   
LadyEllen


Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking

quote:

ORIGINAL: missturbation

Everyone pays for their health care in some shape or form (immigrants discluded but thats another argument.) USA has private medical insurance, UK has taxes to cover it or private medical insurance.



And as far as the "free" healthcare is concerned, we all pay for it. 

The largest hospital operator in the US gave away about 10% of its annual revenues in free/reduced care.....guess who got to pay for that 10%....everyone else who used care at facilities across the US.


Youre erring here in the idea of free healthcare, but right in the notion that all pay for national health services. Its "free at point of delivery", not free gratis.

What is your objection, as I read it, to contributing towards the 10% of revenues used to treat people who likely cannot afford treatment though please?

E

_____________________________

In a test against the leading brand, 9 out of 10 participants couldnt tell the difference. Dumbasses.

(in reply to QuietlySeeking)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/14/2008 7:40:31 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline 		That`s good.You`re taken care of ,healthy and comfortable.Just ducky.

"waiting lists are longer"

How long is the waiting list for those without private health care/insurance?

They count too, in comparison,b/c all people are counted and included in the Europian models. 


"and care is rationed"

Look honey,healthcare is rationed here too.lol

Are you one who believes the weather is great everywhere b/c it`s nice where you are?It`s a big country,ya know.

Not everyone`s so lucky as you are.

And what`s the "ration",.... for folks without healthcare/insurance?

They count too,just because Americans count,period.

They count b/c they`re people and people count.If that makes me a liberal,so be it.


What would Jesus do?


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


And health care is cheaper overseas and with better outcomes.Because they do it right.


I hope American arrogance and silly political terms like "socialized medicine" isn`t going to stop us from learning from other nations.


Us having the best health care in the world,is a myth.


http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/18/business/18leonhardt.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1210775095-EYCt5iQmKikUp68AeGzLFw

There`s plenty of proof that the Europeans do a better job for less.It`s now up to the defenders of the status quot to explain why that is and why we shouldn`t adopt some of there ways.


Why we`re paying more for the same drugs and why are Europeans paying about half per head(per capita) with better outcomes, with everyone included?


Pulling out some horror stories isn`t going to serve the debate either.There are plenty of horror stories with private health care/insurance,ie. the guy who`s broke,70 and powerless,getting tossed when his kidneys fail.

< Message edited by Owner59 -- 5/14/2008 7:53:57 AM >

(in reply to ownedgirlie)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/14/2008 8:05:59 AM   
QuietlySeeking


Posts: 297
Joined: 5/5/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

Youre erring here in the idea of free healthcare, but right in the notion that all pay for national health services. Its "free at point of delivery", not free gratis.

What is your objection, as I read it, to contributing towards the 10% of revenues used to treat people who likely cannot afford treatment though please?

E


I'm not arguing that the people who cannot afford treatment should not be treated, simply that there are fail-safes in place for many of these uninsured people.  For every sensational piece that gets blasted across every media channel, there are hundreds of others that don't get told about charity-care, doctors reducing/eliminating fees, doctors/nurses helping out people who can't afford care.

Many have suggested that the US government providing "Universal Coverage" is the only way to "solve this healthcare crisis".  We already complain about how taxes are diverted into programs that the right/left/mugwumps don't support. When <insert someone you love here> is turned down for a liver transplant because they were an alcholic 20 years ago, do you think you will still support the "universal coverage" system or will you be the next person demanding "justice" because he/she is "entitled" to his/her transplant?

Do we really believe that the government run primarily by corrupt elected individuals (at least on the surface) is really going to provide us a workable, marginally uncorrupted healthcare system for the uninsured? 

If you follow SugarMyChurro's line, then do you really believe that a government run primarily by agri-business, pharmaceutical companies, and fictitious legal entities will really provide us a workable, marginally uncorrupted healthcare system for the uninsured?

Do we really believe that the government-run system that is designed to be the final safety net won't be completely riddled with fraud, corruption, and outright theft?

I watched my father go through a simple Social Security disability case where the SSA doctor agreed with my father's physician's statement that my father was disabled; yet, somehow, some bureau-cretin (without a medical degree) was given the final say-so over my father's case (which was denied).  My father finally went to federal court where the judge simply signed the case against SSA without hearing any arguments;  Through legal fees, my father lost about 25% of his back-pay award.

As evidenced by the statements above,  I don't trust the government to run an effective healthcare program.  I don't trust the government bureaucrats having access to all of my personal medical information, nor having any decision regarding my healthcare.

(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/14/2008 8:33:43 AM   
faerytattoodgirl


Posts: 5824
Status: offline
quote:

Everyone pays for their health care in some shape or form


unless your disabled and on disbility. then you pay nothing.  we(the disabled) dont pay taxes either. we have no assets as we dont own houses, cars, or anything of value therefore we dont pay taxes on those either sine we dont have them.

in fact i get a $300 refund every year.  only because i pay rent.  that is all i can place on the tax form plus my money from disability.  with that i also get what is called GST at $80 4 times a year. 

no sign of health care payment any place.  its always been this way as my condition ive had since i was born and isn't curable but is getting worse with more surgery needed.  (already 4 open heart so far + pacemaker)

we only pay tax on certain items like pop, chips, junk food, and certain services.   but anyone who lives in canada pays that..hence why i get it back in the GST at $80 per year.  so really..im not paying that either!  though if your over a certain income amount you dont get GST..its like if you make more than $35K


_____________________________

I did not reply to your cmail.
I am flawed.
Imperfect.
MUST SPANK!!!
SPAAAAAAAANK!!!

(in reply to QuietlySeeking)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/14/2008 8:54:40 AM   
Renee7852


Posts: 88
Joined: 11/12/2007
Status: offline

I can't complain about the system we have here in the US.  I started a job and 2 weeks away from having full benefits I had a heart attack and went into kidney failure.  Needless to say that meant NO benefits.

        That was October '04.  Numerous hospitalizations later and having been a dialysis patient for 3.5 years here I sit with a new kidney and feeling better than ever.  Cost to me out of pocket?  less than $1,000.00.  Yes I am on disability now and being out of work sucks. I have worked since I was 14 yrs old.  Im ...........lets say MUCH older now lol............ but I hope to be back to work soon and be productive once again.  I will have to pay for my anti rejection meds myself in another 2 years but should be able to take care of that by then.  I feel lucky to have been taken care of the way I have been.

                      Renee' 



(in reply to ownedgirlie)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/14/2008 9:13:33 AM   
faerytattoodgirl


Posts: 5824
Status: offline
quote:

Yes I am on disability now and being out of work sucks.


of course it does...i would rather have something to do than twiddle my thumbs all day and feel worthless because i cant do something for someone (damn that submissiveness of mine) or provide for a family (if i had one).  confidence also gets low and depression sets in.....and luxuries are all but gone. 




_____________________________

I did not reply to your cmail.
I am flawed.
Imperfect.
MUST SPANK!!!
SPAAAAAAAANK!!!

(in reply to Renee7852)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.516