5 freedoms you'd lose in health care reform

MattMan

Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
34
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah
Car(s)
'05 Cooper S '06 Nissan Titan
It's like you're saying people are dying in the streets left and right in US from people not getting treatment. ER's have to treat people period, with or without insurance. And don't tell me about the ER lines, that is date and location dependent. So, don't pretend that they're carting off thousands of poor bodies. It's exaggerated, you'll have similar cases in countries with socialized medicine as well. Go, on, read the bill, I think you'll be surprised. Plus, 2 week deadline for a bill that will take 4 years to fully implement? Please, read this thing, discuss and improve the bill.

Also, read the issues on the elderly, scary stuff. They're giving out pain meds instead of treatment, because they are no longer deemed worthy of any operation due to the Spartan like manner of letting the old die out and give it to the slightly younger.

Elderly Hardest Hit

Daschle says health-care reform ?will not be pain free.? Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle?s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.

In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.

Sorry guys, no thanks, too much knowledge and wisdom are with the Elderly. I won't let the government tell my Grandparents they get all the meds they want, but no care. You say we're scared of communism, well the government allowing older people to die because they won't utilize a pacemaker as well as a younger person.........my ass. This is where it crosses the line.

35 million uninsured (the 45 million they keep saying include 10 million illegal immigrants who would receive health care as well under this bill). Fine, make a plan for them, don't force it down a country's throat with 304 + million. Especially when the country is overburdened with a growing debt. Obama is doing nothing more than carrying on Bush's work of running up the bill with failed stimulus and a health care program that can be focused on the needy, instead of vast majority who are taken care of with GREAT medical technologies (yes we treat world leaders here when their life is on the line....sorry). You think Obama is that different from Bush on economics and health care?
 
Last edited:

ViperVX

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
1,404
35 million uninsured (the 45 million they keep saying include 10 million illegal immigrants who would receive health care as well under this bill). Fine, make a plan for them, don't force it down a country's throat with 304 + million.

Did you read the bill? That's exactly what they're doing, - mandatory coverage for everybody with a freedom to join a private plan. It's Mass Media speculation that kills ya. Please, don't think for a second that Congress is fighting to save you some money, the didn't care when they pushed $2.1 trln on bailouts. All of this is between insurers and medical suppliers not wanting to see profits halve and private health care providers not wanting to deal with the gov-t and have their 6-figure lose a nil.

Also, all of these NHS problems are nothing compared to what you have in US, where you are the world leader in cancer, obesity, flue and stillbirth (last is a direct result of gen/mod produce). Plus, you want the Gov-t to control it, as every US industry that went private is now bankrupt or screwed, except for the Military.
 
Last edited:

MattMan

Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
34
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah
Car(s)
'05 Cooper S '06 Nissan Titan
Did you read the bill? That's exactly what they're doing, - mandatory coverage for everybody with a freedom to join a private plan.

Read the bill? You betcha, why do you think I'm scared. MANDATORY coverage for everybody.....don't you see the problem with a capitalist based society? You help the needy by, get this......helping the needy!! Crazy thought I know. Don't waste resources on people that are happy with better quality care, period. Again, forcing everyone to pay for something that will bring the quality of care down to government level doesn't help the majority. By creating a huge safety net that covers 100% of people when only 8% need it is not a way to run things.

Obesity (most recent) by country

# 1 United States: 30.6%
# 2 Mexico: 24.2%
# 3 United Kingdom: 23%
# 4 Slovakia: 22.4%
# 5 Greece: 21.9%
# 6 Australia: 21.7%
# 7 New Zealand: 20.9%
# 8 Hungary: 18.8%
# 9 Luxembourg: 18.4%
# 10 Czech Republic: 14.8%
# 11 Canada: 14.3%
# 12 Spain: 13.1%
# 13 Ireland: 13%
# 14 Germany: 12.9%
= 15 Portugal: 12.8%
= 15 Finland: 12.8%

Yes we do lead obesity, but countries like the UK are not far behind. The launching of a ad campaign against cheese induced obesity is interesting. We have burgers, some have cheese. No country is perfect.


As for cancer treatment, we lead the world in advancements in this. Most countries are using US technologies to better their lives, all from PRIVATE investors and medical companies. Go ahead and scream greed and corporate corruption all you want, but other countries reap the benefits of these bad people. With US technology in the medical field also comes a higher report rate of cancer victims, because they actually report them while others don't even know they can treat it. Plus if you're past a certain age orsmoke, you won't be told no in the US.

US is currently 2nd in doctor consultations per person behind Japan. Denial of health care in this country is grossly exaggerated.

# 1 Japan: 14.4 per person per year
# 2 United States: 8.9 per person per year
# 3 Belgium: 7.9 per person per year
# 4 France: 6.9 per person per year
# 5 Austria: 6.7 per person per year
# 6 Germany: 6.5 per person per year
= 7 Australia: 6.3 per person per year
= 7 Canada: 6.3 per person per year
= 9 Denmark: 6.1 per person per year
= 9 Italy: 6.1 per person per year
# 11 Netherlands: 5.9 per person per year
# 12 United Kingdom: 4.9 per person per year
# 13 New Zealand: 4.4 per person per year
# 14 Finland: 4.3 per person per year
# 15 Sweden: 2.8 per person per year
 
Last edited:

ViperVX

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
1,404
Yeah, US is ranked 37th in HC in 2000, or more recently 6th out of 6 - Canada, NZ, UK, Germany and Australia (2005), then 19th out of 19 in 2007, so the number of consultations is not really something to shout about when you can't provide decent help. Clearly US lost to every single socialized medicine country, not only in HC ratings but also in every relevant category as LE and so on, so please, enough of blind patriotism. Plus, US spends twice as much per patient than any of the countries listed above, with new law it's bound to be 4 times as much, but, being 56 trln in the whole already no1 cares about an extra 4trl over next 6 years.

Off-topic aside, the new HC is a win-win. If it works, great, if not - It will be privatized once again and Republicans will have at least one joker to use in 2012 elections against Obama and Dems.
 
Last edited:

Plissken

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
1,404
I love the idea that "oh, we're fine with universal healthcare, it's just the Government are doing it wrong".

When the same people have been previously arguing that the Government are doing it at all. It reminds me very much of the Tory position on the Minimum Wage in the late 90s - full of scare stories about how thousands will lose their jobs as businesses are forced to pay people money that will keep them above the poverty line, the economy will crash, Government should stay out of business etc etc.

The law came in and shortly after, even the Tories committed to keeping it.
 

SirEdward

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2008
Messages
2,088
Location
Bologna, Italy
Car(s)
VW Polo mkVI
MattMan

MANDATORY coverage for everybody.....don't you see the problem with a capitalist based society? You help the needy by, get this......helping the needy!! Crazy thought I know. Don't waste resources on people that are happy with better quality care, period. Again, forcing everyone to pay for something that will bring the quality of care down to government level doesn't help the majority. By creating a huge safety net that covers 100% of people when only 8% need it is not a way to run things.

I think the problem is that if a healthcare system should be deployed, that only helps poor people, that would make the tax payers, the one actually paying for poor's healthcare, angry at paying for something they don't get the benefit of.

Plus, I know avoid paying taxes is not a ragingly spreading crime in US, but could become if only poor people could get free healthcare while the rest would have to pay for their own healthcare AND someone other's. You don't pay taxes and you also get free healthcare... nice...

Again: if the social healthcare for poor people was crap, everyone would complain that they are paying for something useless, but nobody will have any will to improve it, while if it was better than private insurances, paying people would complain about not having the best treatments BUT paying the whole burden.

I think there is no way to have a system like the one you are proposing without having disparities or spending a huge lot of money trying to unsuccessfully overcontrol everything.

I see the only way out in a free healthcare for everyone system, at least a basic but functional one, paid by taxes and with freedom to pay more for better treatment. I think there is also the chance that private medical insurances could cost less, if they should pay for only a part of the treatment instead that for all of them.
 
Last edited:

WillDAQ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
2,725
Location
Ukania
In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.

Sorry guys, no thanks, too much knowledge and wisdom are with the Elderly. I won't let the government tell my Grandparents they get all the meds they want, but no care. You say we're scared of communism, well the government allowing older people to die because they won't utilize a pacemaker as well as a younger person.........my ass. This is where it crosses the line.

Welcome to the reality of health care for all, the NHS has a huge budget and will pay for most important treatments. It will however not pay for everything, particularly when it's related to quality of life rather than life or death. It's that or raise taxes. The challenge for a state run health system is to correctly set that balance and while the NHS doesn't always get it right first time, it does an acceptable job of it.

You have to remember that many people in the UK also have private medical insurance to provide greater choice. So for simple operations you could choose to go entirely private. For more complex or serious operations you'd typically have the actual procedure paid for by the NHS then the private medical insurance would pay the hospital for to be located in nicer accommodation afterwards. It works quite well as the expensive but vital part is guaranteed while the comfort aspects are privately funded.

Richard Hammond is the classic example of this, after his accident he was taken to an NHS hospital for the serious medical work to be carried out. After that he moved to a private hospital for a more comfortable recovery.
 

AiR

Forum Addict
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
11,985
Location
Suecia
Car(s)
Bulgogi Knedliky 1.6 GDI (Hyundai i30)
In Norway I can have the doctor I want.
Same, I choose care facility myself too (don't know the equivalent in english, it's not a hospital but my local care facility across the road, deals with small cuts and allergies, ie the bulk of normal care).

Cue "durr communism" comments.
 

cvrefugee

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
4,114
Location
Corona, CA
Car(s)
2005 Scion xB
I think the problem is that if a healthcare system should be deployed, that only helps poor people, that would make the tax payers, the one actually paying for poor's healthcare, angry at paying for something they don't get the benefit of.

Plus, I know avoid paying taxes is not a ragingly spreading crime in US, but could become if only poor people could get free healthcare while the rest would have to pay for their own healthcare AND someone other's. You don't pay taxes and you also get free healthcare... nice...

Again: if the social healthcare for poor people was crap, everyone would complain that they are paying for something useless, but nobody will have any will to improve it, while if it was better than private insurances, paying people would complain about not having the best treatments BUT paying the whole burden.

I think there is no way to have a system like the one you are proposing without having disparities or spending a huge lot of money trying to unsuccessfully overcontrol everything.

I see the only way out in a free healthcare for everyone system, at least a basic but functional one, paid by taxes and with freedom to pay more for better treatment. I think there is also the chance that private medical insurances could cost less, if they should pay for only a part of the treatment instead that for all of them.

We already pay for poor people's health care, did no one read my post? I ACTUALLY WORK IN THE U.S. HEALTH CARE INDUSTRY! A majority of you people posting don't even live in the U.S., so how could you possibly know how things work here? Armchair politics FTL.
 

nomix

True Viking
Joined
May 26, 2005
Messages
7,293
Location
Norway
Car(s)
Tend do walk the 40 meters from my bed to lecture.
I am not trying to make myself out as an expert in American health, but what anyone can do, is to quite simply look into what policies are available to the public, and analyse the numbers, and take a stand from that POV.

Also, Nationality doesn't make you an expert either, most people have extremely large opinions about stuff they haven't got the faintest idea about. That goes for a lot of the people who attack socialised health care as well. They sit in THEIR armchair and rant about how bad it is in Europe.

That's politics. People without a clue talking about stuff they don't know squat about. Sad, but true. :)
 

ahpadt

Forum Addict
Joined
May 7, 2006
Messages
9,890
Location
London
Same, I choose care facility myself too (don't know the equivalent in english, it's not a hospital but my local care facility across the road, deals with small cuts and allergies, ie the bulk of normal care).

Cue "durr communism" comments.

My doc is just 5 mins away. A few weeks ago I had a very, very sore throat. Had it for a week. Got fed up eventually and called them at 1300. They were supposed to close at 1500 but they still told me that I could come by and then they could check if I had a bacteria infection. Costed me about 10 dollars. :p
 

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
13,265
That's politics. People without a clue talking about stuff they don't know squat about. Sad, but true. :)
+rep


My doc is just 5 mins away. A few weeks ago I had a very, very sore throat. Had it for a week. Got fed up eventually and called them at 1300. They were supposed to close at 1500 but they still told me that I could come by and then they could check if I had a bacteria infection. Costed me about 10 dollars. :p
I can do that as well. In fact, I have done just that before.
 

nomix

True Viking
Joined
May 26, 2005
Messages
7,293
Location
Norway
Car(s)
Tend do walk the 40 meters from my bed to lecture.
My doc is just 5 mins away. A few weeks ago I had a very, very sore throat. Had it for a week. Got fed up eventually and called them at 1300. They were supposed to close at 1500 but they still told me that I could come by and then they could check if I had a bacteria infection. Costed me about 10 dollars. :p

Last time I needed a doc was when I fell on my back. I called around 1500, had an appointment next day at 10 in the morning, I went to my doc, who is also my third cousin, and got it checked out. Payed 10 dollars and that was it.

It just works.
 

SirEdward

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2008
Messages
2,088
Location
Bologna, Italy
Car(s)
VW Polo mkVI
We already pay for poor people's health care

No, I think you don't. Otherwise, there wouldn't be millions and millions of americans facing the problem.

Sorry to put the thing this way, but while it may be true I might not have the best information in the world, it is also true that you can't simply attack me with simplistic rants and evidently false statements.

Also, I try to be polite, so even if something I say is not totally correct (which can surely be!), it should be clear it is said without any will to force my POV over others. Then again, if I didn't succed in making this clear, I beg the pardon of the readers, and yours.

As for the rest, does this wikipedia page contain enough correct information to be used as a source?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_the_United_States#Shared_costs_of_the_uninsured

Also, what do you think about this one?
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/573877_4

Because if they are both correct, they are showing more my POV then yours.
 
Last edited:

WillDAQ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
2,725
Location
Ukania
A majority of you people posting don't even live in the U.S., so how could you possibly know how things work here? Armchair politics FTL.

Never under estimate how much the rest of the world knows about the US (if only it were reciprocated). It's not the detailed implementation of the system that people are calling retarded, it's the whole concept that there is no state health system.

Such systems are entirely taken for granted in Europe* so the idea that implementing such a system is being labeled as a bad example of socialism is quite amusing.

*To give you an idea of how taken for granted it is, my free state covered health insurance covers the whole of Europe thanks to the EHIC
 

Dann

Active Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
265
Location
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Car(s)
VW Golf
We already pay for poor people's health care, did no one read my post?

Oh year right, medicaid/medicare is really the same as how people pay for poor people in countries with a centralized healthcare system...
Not only is medicare/medicaid extremely insufficient, the amount of healthcare you get for your buck is terrible. Where as in a country with a centralized healthcare system the price per person is as low as possible because the procurement is done for the entire country which means the lowest possible cost per unit.


A majority of you people posting don't even live in the U.S., so how could you possibly know how things work here? Armchair politics FTL.

Sorry bit what kind of bullsh*t is this? Because you perhaps don't know much about healthcare in the rest of the world doesn't mean we don't know nothing about the healthcare in the US.
 

Twerp128

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2006
Messages
3,662
Location
Indiana
Car(s)
'91 Miata, '09 Street Triple
Just this past week I talked to some Canadians who went to the hospital to get one of thier kids sprained ankles X-Rayed to make sure it wasn't fractured.

Since I'm American I'd wait at least three or four days to do that because of my $200 deductible. If I didn't have a full-time job I'd be fucked.
 
Top