Society Universal Healthcare

[redcometfm]

Very nice misdirection. Where in hell do you get your slant that Im influenced by the far right? Or that Capitalism is worse off than what you have? Do you feel justified in how your life is run or conditioned when you make a bogeyman out of american systems?

So in Britain you can actually, personally elect your own leaders? Hmm, always thought the Parliament handled that, along with all your health policies without public-consultation.

What America should be doing is CAPPING MALPRACTICE. It would solve a hell of a lot of problems! (But of course, watch, no bureaucrat will want to do something that constructive, it wouldnt benefit them long-term)

 

[blai]

and btw pat, visit Sweden or the UK, and you'll notice that the difference in the expertise or that the quality of the care is equal, or even higher in hospitals owned by the municipality than what it currently is in the U.S.

We have also expounded and developed (as a socialist country) better than most of the capitalistic ones. We have a very high living standard and bnp per capita. The difference between the higher classes and the lower classes are small enough to have a system that works fairly and equally for everyone.

Everyone's equal.. but the rich ones are worth a bit more... or how's the capitalist saying?

---

btw red, yes you do that. You vote for the party, and then for the person you would like to be in the parliament for that party. Then the party itself elects the ones they would like in each and every commitee iirc

 

[Kaiten]

Malpractice isn't the only problem here. Medical records aren't digitized and have to be sent from doctor to hospital by pony express, or what amounts to it anyway. Doctors aren't paid salary here, they are paid for every procedure and test preformed. This often leads to over treatment at the expense of the hospital, which is passed on to the consumer and insurance companies. Medicine cost to much. Preventive care costs to much. There isn't a single issue or magic bullet, the industry needs to be regulated. That's the long and short of it. God help me, I don't want to be put on a waiting list for care. Hopefully America can avoid that, it's a legitimate fear raised by opponents. Unlike Canada and Britain there is no proposal to nationalize medicine; hospitals will remain private, as will doctors. If a public option is passed it will be for insurance and coverage only. Only 1/6 of U.S. hospitals are owned by the government, none at the federal level. Formerly 2/3 of all hospitals were run by non - profit organizations. The strain of our current medical crisis has forced most into bankruptcy. Due to the size and scope of the American higher education system there will never be a shortage of doctors nor the need for federal funding for education.

 

[redcometfm]

You know what would really solve the problem? haha
Getting rid of the special interest groups, lobbyists, and companies unjustifiably keeping the price of goods high. By force if necessary.
That and the easily bought bureaucrats.

 

[thsv]

You know what would really solve the problem? haha
Getting rid of the special interest groups, lobbyists, and companies unjustifiably keeping the price of goods high. By force if necessary.
That and the easily bought bureaucrats.

What you seem to fail to understand is that access to healthcare should not be denied by the inability to pay top dollar. Hence why everybody is entitled to healthcare via national insurance. No one ever got denied care on the NHS because they had a pre-existing condition.


And by the way, Stephen Hawking is alive today because of treatment he received from our 'socialised' healthcare system. America shouldn't be taking credit for our NHS's work.

 

[redcometfm]

Yes but one of the main points of the debate is that there are those who can currently afford insurance (in the majority of the US pop) and those who cant (the minority percent of US pop). Now if we enact this new bill in the US, everyone will get health insurance but here are the main questions/problems:

How will the minority percent be covered for their insurance? Will taxes be raised? (If so, why should one part of the population be forced to pay for the other?) Or will it covered by further adding to the deficit/national debt? (Which will not be sustainable and will damn well bankrupt the US) What if the current healthcare-possessing US pop still wants its private insurance? Will they be able to keep it? (Because supposedly through careful planning, the Obama Administration will subtly shift everyone over to national govt healthcare from private because of the pressure he'll put on businesses financially through policies and other bills, etc no matter how much he pretties up his plan with his words; Also could do this through making financial difficulties for the various private insurance companies, make them charge too high to cover their problems which would force their clients onto the nat'l govt healthcare)

And its horrifying that the government is trying to cram this bill down our throats even though most of the US pop is crying out "No".

 

[Kaiten]

No, most of the U.S. population is not crying no. Those are soundbites on TV. And at town halls. Some Americans, many Americans are in favor. Some are ambivalent, they know something needs to change, but worry about things like taxes. And of course there are those that oppose. By no means think this is an unpopular measure because of what you see on CNN International. Please, please don't think you can understand the heartbeat of a country the size of continental Europe with a population of 307,000,000 from what you see on TV and read in the news. With that size and diversity even people in different regions have trouble knowing what the other is thinking.

By the way, that "minority", who don't have health care, is 47,000,000 people, almost 5 times the total population of Portugal.

 

[kadoman]

Thanks for that info - that is exactly what I have been wondering: is it the whole of America who is opposed to this proposal or is it just some or a mixture?

And yeah, we don't get a very good impression of those who are against the proposal over here anyway - lots of footage of crazed people in town halls having to be restrained and swinging fists, carrying placards with silly slogans eg death panels, slagging off NHS etc...so it is hard to know what to think or believe based on that kind of info. Thanks for clarifying it.

 

[blai]

Spoiler

Don't you dare say anything bad about a socialist country like Sweden's healthcare.

Top notch!

 

[redcometfm]

No, most of the U.S. population is not crying no. Those are soundbites on TV. And at town halls. Some Americans, many Americans are in favor. Some are ambivalent, they know something needs to change, but worry about things like taxes. And of course there are those that oppose. By no means think this is an unpopular measure because of what you see on CNN International. Please, please don't think you can understand the heartbeat of a country the size of continental Europe with a population of 307,000,000 from what you see on TV and read in the news. With that size and diversity even people in different regions have trouble knowing what the other is thinking.

By the way, that "minority", who don't have health care, is 47,000,000 people, almost 5 times the total population of Portugal.

Of course, because CNN is the unbiased bane of truth. Or MSNBC, etc. /sarcasm
You also going to buy what your politicians tell you? Along with their corporate bought media? There is a HUGE outcry against this bill.

This healthcare reform debate is a joke. Its not needed. People get by fine in hospitals without it and pay for their treatments in other ways, with the occassional illegal who changes his billing address and makes the hospital lose a little bit. The one thing that would fix all of this (capping malpractice) isnt even being touched.

Its all a big political, financial power play and we are the pawns with limited power to stop those who have power from passing the bill.

You can buy the emotionally-charged bullshit shpiel that Obama and the media, lawyers and lobbyists give to you. But in the end you lose. This is the play for government expansion, something desired by the current party in power because they have this absurd elitist notion that Americans are stupid and that they know what is best for them.

Of course, if you have the same belief, then its pointless to keep talking to you (also since you would lose my complete respect and all credibility).

 

[thsv]

There is a HUGE outcry against this bill.

This healthcare reform debate is a joke. Its not needed. People get by fine in hospitals without it and pay for their treatments in other ways, with the occassional illegal who changes his billing address and makes the hospital lose a little bit. The one thing that would fix all of this (capping malpractice) isnt even being touched.

So the fact that 50 million Americans don't have healthcare insurance doesn't bother you? or are you going to tell me it's their own fault? The fact that there could be an option that doesn't exclude people from healthcare because of pre existing conditions at the point when they really need it doesn't bother you? Because if it doesn't you are one cold individual and i hope you are never left to make life and death decisions on anyone's behalf.

 

[Kaiten]

Thanks for that info - that is exactly what I have been wondering: is it the whole of America who is opposed to this proposal or is it just some or a mixture?

And yeah, we don't get a very good impression of those who are against the proposal over here anyway - lots of footage of crazed people in town halls having to be restrained and swinging fists, carrying placards with silly slogans eg death panels, slagging off NHS etc...so it is hard to know what to think or believe based on that kind of info. Thanks for clarifying it.

Most of the coverage here has been focused on the crazyies as well

Very little, maybe no, attention has been paid to people in favor of or with rational questions about reform. At least not on TV. The New York Times, Washington Post, and Wall Street Journal are better places to go for a more well rounded view of the discussion. A lot of this "death panel" nonsense has been fostered by Sarah Palin and other members of the Republican far right. Moderates like John McCain have raised nothing but legitimate questions. Since most Americans no nothing about the NHS, how it works, etc. (including myself), take any insults to British health care with a grain of salt. Same goes for Canadians.

Don't you dare say anything bad about a socialist country like Sweden's healthcare.

Top notch!

Most liberal Americans consider Sweden utopia. Everything we've wanted for years has long been enacted and seemingly works smoothly, to the benefit of all.

 

[Kusachu]

Communism the most used word in politics, right behind liar.

I wonder if people to fling the word Communist/Socialist/Marxist around like they are devised by the devil to help evil rule world actually know much about the actual underlying concepts.

As far as health care goes, I have an idea! Eliminate the middle man. GET RID OF INSURANCE COMPANIES! No one person deserves better care/coverage than another, so what the heck do we need them for? Think of all the six figure saleries (WE HAVE TO PAY FOR) that would be eliminated if we got rid of just the people who work the insurance companies specifically to sit there and figure out ways to deny people coverage. Not to mention the executives. The reason people hate universal health care is because politics in America is sponcored by big business, and big business, like the private health industry doesn't want anything to do with anything that would keep them from getting rich off of the misery of the masses.

 

[thsv]

One of the misconceptions about the British system is that it's completely run by the government. National insurance covers everybody to a certain standard. If you can afford to you can get private insurance to give you that step up. If you feel that an ailment isn't worth bumping up your insurance premiums use the NHS. If you want prompt service use your private provider. The NHS even covers us if we need medical attention anywhere within the EU at no extra cost.

 

[Digital_Eon]

Of course, because CNN is the unbiased bane of truth. Or MSNBC, etc. /sarcasm

Yeah, better go to Fox News to find out the real truth. They're totally unbiased. Just look at their slogan!

You also going to buy what your politicians tell you? Along with their corporate bought media? There is a HUGE outcry against this bill.

As huge as the number of Americans who don't have health insurance?

This healthcare reform debate is a joke. Its not needed. People get by fine in hospitals without it and pay for their treatments in other ways, with the occassional illegal who changes his billing address and makes the hospital lose a little bit. The one thing that would fix all of this (capping malpractice) isnt even being touched.

1) If it's not needed, why do so many people seem to think it is? - Don't say "because the government said so and they just believe the government", because obviously, people were calling for reform long before the issue was even brought up by the Obama administration. Heck, long before Obama was even elected.

2) Are the uninsured getting by fine in hospitals?

3) What are these "other ways" in which people pay for their treatments?

4) How would capping malpractice fix the health care problem?

Its all a big political, financial power play and we are the pawns with limited power to stop those who have power from passing the bill.

Except these so-called pawns elected the government in the first place. They had plenty of power.

You can buy the emotionally-charged bullshit shpiel that Obama and the media, lawyers and lobbyists give to you. But in the end you lose. This is the play for government expansion, something desired by the current party in power because they have this absurd elitist notion that Americans are stupid and that they know what is best for them.

How does Obama sound emotionally charged at all? That sounds much more like the people against any changes to the health care system - they're full of rage and try to evoke anger and fear in the hearts of everyone they speak to. That's emotionally charged, not appealing to logic that says "everyone should have access to health care".

So, um, how does everyone lose?

Of course, if you have the same belief, then its pointless to keep talking to you (also since you would lose my complete respect and all credibility).

After hearing about the health care debate, I'm very much of the opinion that many Americans are stupid and need someone else to make their decisions for them. After all, some of these people are completely unable to use simple logic to determine that such things as death panels are complete bull and do some research rather than listen to "emotionally charged" drivel, which they then base their opinion on. That's my definition of stupid. It doesn't take a lot of effort to educate oneself, but hey - some people just don't feel like doing that.

I'd appreciate it if you answered my questions above. =)

 

[redcometfm]

It must be incredibly hard for Europeans and others on here to imagine not having government-run healthcare. And I dont blame you, its a system youve been indoctrinated/grown up with, etc for 50+ years and you havent experienced anything else.

The town hall protestors are normal citizens of the US. Sure, a majority of the media (liberally biased btw) has covered the VERY FEW instances of organized groups that didnt protest appropriately but otherwise its been honest, heartfelt and tense debate. The only thing they got in response were representatives acting like theyre there to inform, not really debate, just listen, because the bill is inevitable (some even using their cell phones as, for example, a woman with cancer tells her story and argument against the bill). Its complete misrepresentation.

People are still able to pay for treatment and get treatment in the US. People are not turned away because they dont have insurance. Treatment is recieved no matter what, that is the job of hospitals, doctors and nurses. People act like if you dont have healthcare in the US, youll be turned away and forced to bleed to death, etc. Its completely illogical. Since people still get treated and get treated well (if not at least decently at worst), this healthcare debate is a ****ing joke for the government to extend their hands beyond their reach. Sure people have been asking reform, but the reforms should be aimed at the insurance companies. Again, the main solution to the whole problem is CAPPING MALPRACTICE, but no that's too good a solution for many politician's careers.

Eon, if you seriously dont understand how capping malpractice can solve this issue, then you dont know enough about this issue. Your elitist attitude alone does not give you credibility and nor does your nationality give you any amount of greater intelligence than your neighbors to the south. I dont even need to mention your age.

 

[Digital_Eon]

Eon, if you seriously dont understand how capping malpractice can solve this issue, then you dont know enough about this issue.

You're right; I clearly don't know enough about the issue. Care to explain it to me, then? Why would capping malpractice solve all the problems?

Your elitist attitude alone does not give you credibility

Credibility, as far as I am aware, is defined by knowing what you're talking about, not by any particular attitude or even belief system.

and nor does your nationality give you any amount of greater intelligence than your neighbors to the south.

I fail to see how this is relevant, especially since I made no generalizations.

I dont even need to mention your age.

How is my age relevant, either?

Please answer my questions so that I may have a greater understanding of this debate. Right now, all I see are personal attacks dismissing my post.

 

[redcometfm]

You're right; I clearly don't know enough about the issue. Care to explain it to me, then? Why would capping malpractice solve all the problems?

If you cap malpractice, the hospitals lose less money. You also keep them from doing pointless, unnecessary procedures on patients to avoid a malpractice suit, all of which is included in the monthly health insurance bill. With malpractice capped, that monthly bill is taken down by a third. Cheaper health insurance, everyone is happy.

Credibility, as far as I am aware, is defined by knowing what you're talking about, not by any particular attitude or even belief system.

Certain attitudes or belief systems can depict the ignorance of an individual.

I fail to see how this is relevant, especially since I made no generalizations.

You brought nationality into your statement.

How is my age relevant, either?

Because it shows your level of life experience, maturity, essentially what you could possibly know and comprehend in your current stage in life.

 

[Drmke]

Because it shows your level of life experience, maturity, essentially what you could possibly know and comprehend in your current stage in life.

Life experience doesn't necessarily mean anything. It all depends on the person. I know plenty of people who have years and years more life experience then me, but they are dumber than a box of rocks.

Maturity has nothing to do with age...

Neither does comprehension. And you are only two years older than the person you're accusing all of this of.

 

[Digital_Eon]

If you cap malpractice, the hospitals lose less money. You also keep them from doing pointless, unnecessary procedures on patients to avoid a malpractice suit, all of which is included in the monthly health insurance bill. With malpractice capped, that monthly bill is taken down by a third. Cheaper health insurance, everyone is happy.

Well, for one, there's only so much you can do to cap malpractice. Bad things are still going to happen. And to do so would take a lot of money, wouldn't it?

From what I understand, the reason unnecessary procedures are done is to avoid malpractice suits, however - to rule out every possibility so that something isn't overlooked and the patient sues. "Capping malpractice" doesn't really fit with this concept. As long as people are willing to sue the doctors for everything that goes wrong, whether it was malpractice, a mistake, or something the doctors had no control over (and don't get me wrong, I believe doctors should be responsible for what they actually do wrong), it won't reduce the number of otherwise unnecessary tests. To do that, you'd need to change the entire system to make it so that people have more confidence - doctors and patients alike.

I'm also pretty sure the pay system for doctors has something to do with this, but I can't remember how right now, so here's hoping someone else can elaborate on that.

Certain attitudes or belief systems can depict the ignorance of an individual.

Believing that one needs to educate themselves on a topic in order to make decisions for themselves is not ignorance. In fact, I'm supporting the opposite.

You brought nationality into your statement.

"Many Americans" does not mean "only Americans".

Because it shows your level of life experience, maturity, essentially what you could possibly know and comprehend in your current stage in life.

I'm nineteen, not twelve.

By the way, since one is granted voting rights at the age of eighteen, would that mean that you, as you feel a nineteen-year-old is unable to comprehend such issues, believe that the age of majority, and therefore the age at which one is able to vote (since how could a nation deny any legal adult the right to vote), be raised? =P