Healthcare Reforn

In Favor of a Public Option?

  • Yes

    Votes: 14 51.9%
  • No

    Votes: 13 48.1%

  • Total voters
    27
I'm one of the 50 or so estimated Americans that doesn’t have health insurance. I don't mean just poor health insurance. I mean I have nothing. I haven't had health insurance in about 10 years, and it's not by choice. If anything medically serious were to happen to me I would most likely be in bankruptcy my entire life if not worse. I would also cost society a lot more at that point. I stay in great shape but someday if do to nothing more than age, or an unforeseen accident or medical condition I will need healthcare. I even had a scare a few months ago that luckily turned out to be nothing, but I couldn't go get it checked out like I wanted to. My family has a history of cancer among other things on top of it. None of that is even accounting for the fact that I have been able to get my eyes or teeth checked in that time either other than to just have some teeth pulled completely out because I couldn't afford anything else.

The people that don't want government run health insurance have never come up with a reasonable solution for people like me other than some of them that will admit that people like me should just be thrown to the wolves because it would inconvenience them. Considering I think having the government give you as reasonable healthcare as it can is a human right, what were doing right now isn't working. Treating healthcare as a business or a function of the market is stupid. It can never be treated as a normal business. The free market system has failed. It's failure is blatantly obvious at this point.

What also needs to be remembered is that as expensive as health care is getting more and more people will be left without it either literally or in a practical sense. Then you have to add in all the people that technically have health care but it's so poor or inadequate it might as well not exist for them. The way it's currently going is unsustainable. That's what has happened for letting market forces dictate healthcare. It also drags down other business that have to help flip the bill for it because at some time we got the stupid idea in our heads that it was a good thing to get health care though our employers. All the technological advances or great care we can give don't mean shit if more and more people continually can't receive it. It's better to have adequate care for everybody than great care for a few and the rest get screwed.

If anything, all proposals that have been suggested are inadequate. It's just a bunch of play baby half-assed measures that probably won't work that good and will prolong the inadequacies of the system while the people that might loose a profit from it fight it as much as possible. The government just needs to socialize everything about medicine. If that means taking over hospitals, drug manufactures, laboratories, research facilities, medical branches of places of higher learning, making all medical doctors employees of the government, and strictly regulating cost and regulating everything about it short of things like unneeded elective plastic surgery then so be it. Whatever it takes to get reasonable health care to as many people as possible and constrain the cost of it as much as reasonably possible. Maybe if anything they can let insurance companies continue to exist only provide people with insurance for very very exceptional or unneeded treatment if they so choose to pay them for it.

While I don't trust the government to run things efficiently or to always do what's in the best interest of society, I trust businesses, especially businesses in the medical industry a lot less.

Admittedly, I'm not well versed in the intricacies of the Canadian health care system, nor do I really have a firm opinion one way or the other on this issue, I do have one anecdote that I think may be relevant, one way or another.

Three years ago, my brother in laws 78 year old father (who lives in Alberta), slipped on some ice and landed on his knee, and for a few weeks afterwards, had trouble walking properly (without a severe limp). Being the tough guy he is, he decided he didn't need to go to the doctor and decided to try to tough it out. His wife however, was none too happy about that, and eventually drove him to the doctor to see what they could do. There was no swelling, no visible injury outside of bruising, but a lack of mobility that was most concerning for everyone. Long story made short, they wait-listed him to get X-Rays and that list took 6 months, by which point his injury had healed enough to make treatment useless. Now, I'm not sure this is a widespread issue or anything, but it's always made me wonder about public healthcare.
 
The most interesting aspect of the political debate over health care reform is inherent Achilles the GOP has on the issue today.

15 or 16 years ago they told us the verbatim phrase they are telling us today, it "puts a bureaucrat between you and your doctor". Not only have things gotten worse in terms of costs, they (the GOP) had about 12 years to offer a solution or reform the system themselves. They did neither.

Which suggests to me they simply stand for obstructionism on the issue and have no solution other than trying to win the political fight.

If Obama wanted to be politically ruthless on the issue, he would hammer them mercilessly on those points.
 
While the Canadian system isn't great if you have cancer or something like that, I've heard though that the Canadian system is better than the US when it comes to ER visits and stuff like that. I'm in favor of universal health care, and we can't just look to Canada as an example, there are many other countries out there like France, Italy, Japan, Germany, basically any developed nation has it except the US. Unless if you're an extreme laissez-faire free-marketeer, why do we Americans have the right to public education, police, and fire departments, but yet we do not seem to have the right to health care?
 
Throughout your life things change a lot-you might be in and out of work,be healthy at times and sick at others, you might have an accident or contract some chronic ailment.
An insurance based system would charge low premiums in the good times and high when things go wrong (probably at a time when your earning capacity is low)
Many countries have a government based "average" premium which takes into account these fluctuations .The UK calls it "national insurance" and is deducted from pay like income tax .Unlike many countries the government actually runs the health service and on the whole it works well (we seem to get more for our money than most) though it's too beaurocratic and wasteful.There are waiting lists but for life threatening problems these are shortened.It's great to have it available and for all its faults it's a national treasure.We can of course take out further insurance;there is a thriving private healthcare system too.
Other countries operate a State insurance system but use the revenue to pay for treatment.
What you won't find is many people who think it's a bad thing , largely because it clearly isn't.
 

MILF Man

milf n' cookies
Government health care is a very BIG MISTAKE!
 
I'm not even making that argument ...

Government health care is a very BIG MISTAKE!
I'm not even making that argument.

What I'm totally against is a single, federally-run program. If the states want to come up with their own, mandatory private or absolute or supplementary public system, then so be it.

What still dumbfounds me today is how many Democrats want to send all the money to a single federal -- one location to lobby and the same entity responsible for defense spending.

There's a reason why education is also state funded and run, not federal, among other things.
 
Doctor's got greedy when the lawyers got greedy and raised the costs of everything to be able to commit medical malpractice and still turn a profit. Tort reform in many states limited doctor's medical malpractice liability and made it harder and harder to sue doctors for fucking up, but medical costs continue to skyrocket. Because so many people's health care "insurance" has been provided completely or partially by their employer, there was no incentive to shop around for a good deal. If a so-called public option is instituted, companies (if they are smart) will quit providing health insurance because health care can be provided by Uncle Sam. Thats when the whore's come in.
 
Re: I'm not even making that argument ...

I'm not even making that argument.

What I'm totally against is a single, federally-run program. If the states want to come up with their own, mandatory private or absolute or supplementary public system, then so be it.

What still dumbfounds me today is how many Democrats want to send all the money to a single federal -- one location to lobby and the same entity responsible for defense spending.

There's a reason why education is also state funded and run, not federal, among other things.

It would likely be the case that DHHS would administer the program similar to how ED administers and funds the public school system IMO.
 

Facetious

Moderated
If the government will guarantee in writing (not a form letter either ! ) that I will get the same lifetime healthcare options as, say, a Nancy Pelosi, hey, I'm IN ! :rofl::laugh:




"[ . . And she said we are all just prisoners here, of our own device
And in the masters chambers,
They gathered for the feast
The stab it with their steely knives,
But they just cant kill the beast

Last thing I remember, I was
Running for the door
I had to find the passage back
To the place I was before
relax, said the night man,
We are programmed to receive.
You can checkout any time you like,
But you can never leave!
"

Eagles • Hotel California
 
I am not in favor of it, the government all ready has way too much control of our lives. Think about it; the government owns a few banks, it owns a major car company, and now it's making a grab to own the healthcare industry. It's time for the American people to stand up and say no to the government. We are already in a massive deficit and this 1 trillion+ dollar plan will only add to it.
 

Facetious

Moderated
Re: Healthcare Reforn

Why would anyone allow 2 crooked Chicago Politicians (the hildabeast & Obama) to annex the private sector health care system ? Does that really make sense ? That would be like appointing Blagovich as "Health CZAR" or . . . Is Rostenkowski out of prison yet ? :D
 
Re: Healthcare Reforn

Why would anyone allow 2 crooked Chicago Politicians (the hildabeast & Obama) to annex the private sector health care system ? Does that really make sense ?
It makes perfect sense. Our present system sucks. It's way too expensive. We subsidize the world's meds...etc.

:sing:When it's time for change, then it's time for change...:sing:

I read a very positive article in the Wall St Journal today about some companies mandating that employees take physicals, breast exams, etc., in order to maintain their health benefits. What they're discovering is that some employees are changing shitty, poor health habits, like eating garbage and smoking, and these mandates are positively affecting the health of their employees, which, in turn, lowers costs.

Once we get Universal Health...let's figure out a way to kickstart FAT OBESE AMERICA into shape!

How about if the Gov't asks Corporate America to allocate 1 hr a day for employees to do some sort of physical activity during the workday?
 
Argue the issue at hand, not the rhetoric ...

Why would anyone allow 2 crooked Chicago Politicians (the hildabeast & Obama) to annex the private sector health care system ?
Sigh, let's argue the issue at hand, not the non-sense and rhetoric. As much as I got tired of people doing that to W. & co., I'm honestly getting tired of people doing it to Obama & co. as well.

My problem is with Americans who want to send it to a single, all-powerful federal. The same entity that can misappropriate trillions of dollars, let alone declare war with the same money.

The more local it stays, the better. That's my attitude in general.
 

Facetious

Moderated
Just 5 or 6 months ago this government maintained that they needed some 700 billion dollars in stimulus or else !!

We are economically worse off today than the government said we would be had they not received the 700 Billion. Is it any wonder why these intellectual exchanges of ideas go no where when the answers are elementary.

Stop feeding this government.


Sorry for my cynicism


BTW, quality healthcare is a commodity, not a right.
IMNSHO

:D / :(
 
^
You're living under the pressure of a 24/7 news cycle. Things take time. It's not fair to expect that "life" or "the economy" operate faster because Obama is making decisions now. We should not bail on decisions quicker just because fiscal conservatives say we should. They have no credibility on financial matters anymore.

Without the Stim and TARP---what do you think the unemployment rate would be right now? Are you satisfied with a many years long recession that slides into a many years long depression?

I don't believe we need a second Stimulus, as some Dems are talking about now. I think we need to all relax, take a breath, and let things play out now.

BTW, quality healthcare is a commodity, not a right.
IMNSHO

Quality healthcare appears to be elusive today. It is certainly more important than a commodity. It is an essential human right.
 
Top