or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Is there any form of Government HealthCare you could get behind?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is there any form of Government HealthCare you could get behind? - Page 7

Poll Results: What would you Consider an acceptable reform of Health Care?

 
  • 60% (15)
    Full Gov't health care with public option
  • 0% (0)
    Full Gov't health care no public option
  • 4% (1)
    Gov't care only for low income who cannot afford their own plan
  • 0% (0)
    A gov't instituted health exchange or Co-op.
  • 4% (1)
    Gov't vouchers or tax breaks to constituents for purchase of health insurance.
  • 12% (3)
    One of the above with tort reform and follow through on medicare savings.
  • 4% (1)
    Legislation on Tort reform and follow through on medicare savings only.
  • 16% (4)
    Close it all down for Gov't involvment and let the free market work.
  • 0% (0)
    Leave it alone, things are fine as is.
  • 0% (0)
    My option is not up here! (Please explain.)
25 Total Votes  
post #241 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Only if providing health care to people is what matters. As you can see, some believe we are only meant to receive health care when doing so doesn't violate their particular ideological principles.

I'm guessing it all revolves around their frame of reference. The for-profit, private insurance based model is all they know, so anything that's not that just doesn't fit in their frame. So they end up trying to modify the existing system rather than replacing it. It's natural for people to fear what they don't understand.
post #242 of 383
It really comes down to this: Some people feel healthcare is a right for all. Others feel that it's a privilege. I find the folks in the latter group to hold quite a repugnant view.

All this ceaseless bickering about what should and shouldn't go into healthcare reform won't be resolved because the two sides are approaching it from fundamentally clashing perspectives. What I find to be a problem, they do not. Thus, my solution to what I consider to be a real problem is a waste of money on a non-problem to them.

The real debate should be about whether or not everyone deserves to be treated when he or she falls victim to sickness or injury without being turned away or bankrupted. And again, the repugnance I feel when I hear those fighting against a Medicare-for-All system stems from the fact that the logical conclusion to the opponents' position is the statement "Sorry, sucks to be you. Go die in peace and leave my money alone."

What sickens me even further is that the party whose supporters claim to have a stranglehold on the morality high road are taking the absolutely least moral position possible. Let them die, let them suffer, let them struggle is certainly not moral and is far from being Christian. Oh, they'll shout from the rooftops about killing "babies", but when it comes to giving death sentences to living, breathing human beings with friends and families, there is nothing but a thundering silence.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #243 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

It really comes down to this: Some people feel healthcare is a right for all. Others feel that it's a privilege. I find the folks in the latter group to hold quite a repugnant view.

What it really comes down to is the arrogant attitude of people who do little in the real world to resolve problems, but are always first in line to boast about their compassion because they advocate the useless idea that more government can solve humanity's problems.

For the record, every human being on the planet deserves food and clothing as well.

Clearly the Obama administration needs to nationalize Walmart. Hunger and want will then disappear.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #244 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka View Post

I'm guessing it all revolves around their frame of reference. The for-profit, private insurance based model is all they know, so anything that's not that just doesn't fit in their frame. So they end up trying to modify the existing system rather than replacing it. It's natural for people to fear what they don't understand.

I believe it goes significantly deeper than this. The frame of reference is thoroughly ideological. The basic concept at work is that the market and the market alone provides all goods and services that people need. The corollary is, if the market does not provide a good or service, then people don't actually need that good or service. In an effort to resolve the cognitive dissonance created by the obvious differences between theory and reality in this instance, an additional layer of rationale is created whereby it is theorized that if the government simply removed itself completely from any particular market, that supply and demand would come magically back into balance and everybody would get what they need (or what they deserve).

It's a nice, neat package of theory that never has to be tested by reality. It's internally consistent, because it is completely unaffected by any outside data.

I don't mind people espousing these theories, even though I will disagree with them much of the time, or point out the flaws in the theories when it's clear they don't apply to specific instances. What I do mind is the disingenuous attitude that frequently accompanies them. Few who promote these theories are prepared to admit that applying them to health care simply leaves many people without health care. I think we could advance this debate immeasurably if they'd admit that their approach cuts out tens of millions of people, who they believe deserve no better.

Then the debate could about which approach is more consistent with our national values. It could be about which methods best achieve our goals, the costs of doing so, etc..
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #245 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post


What sickens me even further is that the party whose supporters claim to have a stranglehold on the morality high road are taking the absolutely least moral position possible. Let them die, let them suffer, let them struggle is certainly not moral and is far from being Christian. Oh, they'll shout from the rooftops about killing "babies", but when it comes to giving death sentences to living, breathing human beings with friends and families, there is nothing but a thundering silence.

If anyone believes that life doesn't start at birth, why do they celebrate birthdays, like Christmas?
Shouldn't they celebrate "Conception Days"?

BR, I feel you!
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
post #246 of 383
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

It really comes down to this: Some people feel healthcare is a right for all. Others feel that it's a privilege. I find the folks in the latter group to hold quite a repugnant view.

If healthcare is a right then we need to do something about decreasing the actual cost of care, not find ways to spread that cost to others through insurance. Those costs come from somewhere, find a way to reduce those real costs.

Quote:
All this ceaseless bickering about what should and shouldn't go into healthcare reform won't be resolved because the two sides are approaching it from fundamentally clashing perspectives. What I find to be a problem, they do not. Thus, my solution to what I consider to be a real problem is a waste of money on a non-problem to them.

The real debate should be about whether or not everyone deserves to be treated when he or she falls victim to sickness or injury without being turned away or bankrupted. And again, the repugnance I feel when I hear those fighting against a Medicare-for-All system stems from the fact that the logical conclusion to the opponents' position is the statement "Sorry, sucks to be you. Go die in peace and leave my money alone."

Your signature makes this post quite ironic. \

Quote:
What sickens me even further is that the party whose supporters claim to have a stranglehold on the morality high road are taking the absolutely least moral position possible. Let them die, let them suffer, let them struggle is certainly not moral and is far from being Christian. Oh, they'll shout from the rooftops about killing "babies", but when it comes to giving death sentences to living, breathing human beings with friends and families, there is nothing but a thundering silence.

I don't hear anyone saying to let them suffer or to let them die. Who gives out death sentences? This is not the same as abortion where the mother makes a conscious decision to terminate the childs life, makes an appointment, then goes in and actively removes the child like a cancer. And if you feel like going down this patently false path with this discussion I for one will not participate.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #247 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

I believe it goes significantly deeper than this. The frame of reference is thoroughly ideological. The basic concept at work is that the market and the market alone provides all goods and services that people need. The corollary is, if the market does not provide a good or service, then people don't actually need that good or service. In an effort to resolve the cognitive dissonance created by the obvious differences between theory and reality in this instance, an additional layer of rationale is created whereby it is theorized that if the government simply removed itself completely from any particular market, that supply and demand would come magically back into balance and everybody would get what they need (or what they deserve).

Ideology is certainly a factor in almost every political debate, but it's certainly not the only (or ever the major) factor at play for many people on the conservative side. Experience is a big factor as well.

I currently live in a country with single payer, government-run health care. I understand how it works, and where it falls short.

I was diagnosed with viral influenza several weeks ago after visiting my doctor. Though I've been to the Doc plenty of times before, this time around (possibly because of this thread) I paid attention to the system itself.

---

I waited for over an hour for my appointment, sitting in a cramped, uncomfortable waiting area. There were no electronic or phone reminders sent out to remind me of my appointment, as is the case with my dentist.

Hand sanitizers and masks abounded, but I had to hand over my health card to the nurse rather than swipe it myself. That nurse has to open the glass window and handle everybody's card herself. May the Lord keep her healthy. Though there are signs asking everywhere, obviously sick people are not bothering to wear masks (which is more a failure of human nature than the medical system.)

I get to the "small waiting room" as Seinfeld calls it, and the Doc checks me and diagnoses the viral influenza. The room itself looks like it was designed by a bureaucrat and decorated by pre-school students. Though viral influenza is usually the first stage of H1N1, I am never told this nor offered Tamiflu (which Canada has huge stockpiles of.)

After my situation deteriorates in a week and I return for another visit (no opportunity for email questions or phone calls - Docs get paid by the visit) I get a few tests and x-rays but no follow up afterward. Though I'm suspected of having H1N1, there's no general testing being done locally for relatively mild cases and I can't pay for a personal test. I now have no idea whether I need to get the vaccine.

The coup de grace comes toward the end of my visit, when I notice the doctor is typing my details into the province's new electronic records system. It's browser-based on a PC, and I cringe upon realizing the URL is http, not https.

---

Most of the problems with my visit are directly linked to a lack of customer service. You see, in Ontario, there's a shortage of doctors directly caused by government budget cutting in the 90's. (Health bureaucrats cut medical school enrolments to save money.) I can theoretically change doctors under Medicare, but you need good luck to find one taking new patients.

So there's no incentive to have nicer waiting areas, reminders, on-time performance, post-visit follow-up, etc. etc. This is where market competition would help.

Furthermore, the coming American shakeup of health care is, as Gretzky would say, skating to where the puck used to be. It's focused on paying the exorbitant medical bills of the current generation based on a 1960's ideology.

The medical system of the future has to be more about keeping people healthy, not just treating them when they're sick (which is far more expensive.) Single Payer will do nothing to lower American obesity rates or cancer treatments. Both Canada and Europe are now moving to increased private sector involvement for treatment and an increasing role for government in education and prevention.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #248 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

The medical system of the future has to be more about keeping people healthy, not just treating them when they're sick (which is far more expensive.) Single Payer will do nothing to lower American obesity rates or cancer treatments. Both Canada and Europe are now moving to increased private sector involvement for treatment and an increasing role for government in education and prevention.

Starting at the end, since single payer isn't even on the table here. What is on the table is more results-based compensation rather than traditional fee-for-service. This could make a big difference in costs vs. results, if anyone figures out how to get there. It's part of the debate, unfortunately in a not very productive fashion at the moment.

For example, a government panel just released their findings about the effectiveness of mammograms for women under 50, suggesting that most women don't need them before age 50 or as often as previously recommended after that. Right on cue, the opponents of health care reform starting complaining that this was an example of how "Obama wants to ration your health care." Never mind that this was only an effectiveness study, and not binding on anyone, not even Medicare. And tomorrow those same people will be complaining about over-use of the healthcare system, and excessive defensive medicine practice. The reality is, it's all about opposition to change, not about actually improving anything.

Shortages of primary care doctors are a big problem in the U.S. as well, especially in rural areas. Long waits in shabby waiting rooms for five minute visits with the doctor are common here as well. Doctor's offices not returning patient phone calls are also common here.

I don't know what to tell you about your experience with the flu. Most people aren't treated at all for the flu. The message we're getting here is to stay home and get over it without going to the doctor, unless you have complicating underlying medical conditions. Hardly anyone is being tested for H1N1 here, since there's really no use in knowing, except for epidemiologists who like to track disease spread.

We're still trying to figure out how to do electronic records here. Some doctors are keeping them now, many more are not. Most records are still kept by hand, and if a doctor or you want a copy, they are generally faxed. Is this efficient or secure?

Every system has its problems. Ours has far more than most, and the opposition to making it better is absolute and often purely ideological.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #249 of 383
More rantings from the unamerican swastika waving evil mongers of the world. This one claim to the be dead of harvard medical school. Psychopath!

Health 'Reform' Gets a Failing Grade


Quote:
Health 'Reform' Gets a Failing Grade
The changes proposed by Congress will require more draconian measures down the road. Just look at Massachusetts.


By JEFFREY S. FLIER

As the dean of Harvard Medical School I am frequently asked to comment on the health-reform debate. I'd give it a failing grade.

Instead of forthrightly dealing with the fundamental problems, discussion is dominated by rival factions struggling to enact or defeat President Barack Obama's agenda. The rhetoric on both sides is exaggerated and often deceptive. Those of us for whom the central issue is health—not politics—have been left in the lurch. And as controversy heads toward a conclusion in Washington, it appears that the people who favor the legislation are engaged in collective denial.


...

Maybe Baucus can threaten to pull his medical school's accreditation until this dean learns to grab a mop!
post #250 of 383
Quote:
There is unrest in the forest
There is trouble with the trees
For the maples want more sunlight
And the oaks ignore their pleas

The trouble with the maples
(And they're quite convinced they're right)
They say the oaks are just too lofty
And they grab up all the light
But the oaks can't help their feelings
If they like the way they're made
And they wonder why the maples
Can't be happy in their shade

There is trouble in the forest
And the creatures all have fled
As the maples scream 'Oppression!'
And the oaks just shake their heads

So the maples formed a union
And demanded equal rights
'The oaks are just too greedy
We will make them give us light'
Now there's no more oak oppression
For they passed a noble law
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe and saw

hmmm....

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #251 of 383
Having read this editorial, I see that Dr. Flier is advocating for more comprehensive reform than is currently proposed. Is that what the political opponents to reform are proposing? No. Is more comprehensive reform possible in this political environment? No.

Can this be read as anything but more misdirection? No.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #252 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

If healthcare is a right then we need to do something about decreasing the actual cost of care, not find ways to spread that cost to others through insurance. Those costs come from somewhere, find a way to reduce those real costs.

Fine, but start from the position that healthcare is an inalienable right and go from there on how to make it the most affordable without sacrificing the quality.

Quote:
Your signature makes this post quite ironic. \

It doesn't. My signature is referring to the idea that if someone is suffering and willingly chooses to die with assistance, that person has every right to. You have a right to be treated for every condition and you also have the right to say enough is enough. The two viewpoints don't conflict at all.

Quote:
I don't hear anyone saying to let them suffer or to let them die. Who gives out death sentences? This is not the same as abortion where the mother makes a conscious decision to terminate the childs life, makes an appointment, then goes in and actively removes the child like a cancer. And if you feel like going down this patently false path with this discussion I for one will not participate.

Preexisting condition: DENIED!
Can't afford it: DENIED!

My point is that compassion for the well being of a person should not end as soon as it exits the vagina. It is hypocritical to oppose abortion and also oppose healthcare for all.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #253 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Fine, but start from the position that healthcare is an inalienable right...

But that's immediately where things break down.

Personally I don't think health care is a right. The primary reason, for me, is that it would be a positive right (vs. a negative right) and positive rights are rights that imply someone has a "right" that entitles them to something someone else has a right to.

For example, if I have the inalienable right to my own life, liberty and property and you claim to have a right to health care. Then it implies that you have a "right" to demand health care from me (directly or indirectly) thus violating my rights to my life, my liberty and/or my property because, in order to fulfill and provide for this so-called "right" of yours there must be some diminishment of those other rights. That's how the "right" has to be fulfilled. I cannot see any other way.

Now you can claim those other things are not inalienable rights, but then we have a whole other discussion to have.

Do you have a right to try to achieve good health and to manage your body in a way that maintains good health? Sure, I suppose if you word it that way. But that's really saying nothing more than no one can directly interfere with your actions to be and stay healthy. But that's not really what people mean when they say "health care is a right". The more precise way to say what they mean is to say: "people have to a right to obtain and demand health care products and services". Furthermore, if it is a right, then what business would we have charging for it at all?

When you declare health care a "right" is raises some complicated and non-trivial questions that must be addressed.
post #254 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

But that's immediately where things break down.

Personally I don't think health care is a right. The primary reason, for me, is that it would be a positive right (vs. a negative right) and positive rights are rights that imply someone has a "right" that entitles them to something someone else has a right to.

For example, if I have the inalienable right to my own life, liberty and property and you claim to have a right to health care. Then it implies that you have a "right" to demand health care from me (directly or indirectly) thus violating my rights to my life, my liberty and/or my property because, in order to fulfill and provide for this so-called "right" of yours there must be some diminishment of those other rights. That's how the "right" has to be fulfilled. I cannot see any other way.

Now you can claim those other things are not inalienable rights, but then we have a whole other discussion to have.

Do you have a right to try to achieve good health and to manage your body in a way that maintains good health? Sure, I suppose if you word it that way. But that's really saying nothing more than no one can directly interfere with your actions to be and stay healthy. But that's not really what people mean when they say "health care is a right". The more precise way to say what they mean is to say: "people have to a right to obtain and demand health care products and services". Furthermore, if it is a right, then what business would we have charging for it at all?

When you declare health care a "right" is raises some complicated and non-trivial questions that must be addressed.

Start caring about other people. Seriously. Other people getting sick inconvenience me! Waaah.

And yes, healthcare should be freely accessible to all. It's high time we start looking at what our priorities really are. A civilized society doesn't let sick people who could be treated die.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #255 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Start caring about other people. Seriously. Other people getting sick inconvenience me! Waaah.

A clever way to address some other point than the one I was trying tot make.

You and Millmoss, you think because people don't agree with your point of view they don't care about other people or that they are merely concerned about their own convenience. Is it comfortable in that smug little world of yours?


Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

And yes, healthcare should be freely accessible to all. It's high time we start looking at what our priorities really are. A civilized society doesn't let sick people who could be treated die.

Fine, but then you need to deal with the issues I mentioned and their implications rather than simply dismiss them because they are too hard (or you don't want) to think.

I would like to see everyone have access to all of the health care products and services they need (and want)...and affordably too! I simply think that you (and other's that hold the same position) are trying to take a short cut that seems easy and convenient but ultimately will not work and will not accomplish what you think it will.
post #256 of 383
Caring is more than just a theory. It's more than just a word you use, if it's to have any meaning. I'm afraid some of us have your number. Sorry if that makes you feel defensive.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #257 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

I would like to see everyone have access to all of the health care products and services they need (and want)...and affordably too! I simply think that you (and other's that hold the same position) are trying to take a short cut that seems easy and convenient but ultimately will not work and will not accomplish what you think it will.

Do you believe Medicaid and Medicare should be scrapped and why not scrap the subsidized VA care too?
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #258 of 383
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Fine, but start from the position that healthcare is an inalienable right and go from there on how to make it the most affordable without sacrificing the quality.

I am not sure that is where you begin because healthcare is not a right. YOu might be able to make a case for health in general. You have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Quote:
It doesn't. My signature is referring to the idea that if someone is suffering and willingly chooses to die with assistance, that person has every right to. You have a right to be treated for every condition and you also have the right to say enough is enough. The two viewpoints don't conflict at all.

What if you cannot speak to that? What then?

Quote:
Preexisting condition: DENIED!
Can't afford it: DENIED!

Yeah, that is the same as making an appointment to end a life. How could I have missed that? "Claim denied, please show up at the South Haven office to be peacefully euthanised."

Quote:
My point is that compassion for the well being of a person should not end as soon as it exits the vagina. It is hypocritical to oppose abortion and also oppose healthcare for all.

Who says compassion for their well being ends? This is not a either/or conversation. And nobody is opposing healthcare, they are opposing the method through which some are trying to get there. There is a difference.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #259 of 383
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Do you believe Medicaid and Medicare should be scrapped and why not scrap the subsidized VA care too?

Medicare and Medicaid have their purposes that they have been setup for. They do not necessarily do the best job, but they are there now. If I could think of a better system to put in place I would. Some of these systems take the responsibility of the person away as they don't have to worry now, the government will take care of that. Some need it, others abuse it. And apparently anyone who tries to distinguish between the two are simply uncaring bastards. \

The VA however is a benefit of working for the United States in the Military. I look at that like a Pension for a job well done. Not even the same thing. People who serve their country in active duty deserve to be cared for, especially in a job that carries such high risk.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #260 of 383
And this friends is how you fashion yourself as a defender of Medicare, and an opponent of health care for everybody else. No, it doesn't make sense, but then, it doesn't have to -- so long as the status quo is preserved.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #261 of 383
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

And this friends is how you fashion yourself as a defender of Medicare, and an opponent of health care for everybody else. No, it doesn't make sense, but then, it doesn't have to -- so long as the status quo is preserved.

Yeah, I oppose health care. That is what was said. \

And I am for the status quo too. I even used the word "status quo..." errr, maybe not... Maybe I just said we should keep things the same.... No, perhaps i simply said I would not change a thing and they were fine the way they are???? Nope. Shoot, I'm stumped where does your interpretation come from exactly?

You are so biased in your view that apparently there is no room for any opinion but your own.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #262 of 383
No, that is not what I said. Don't be calling others biased when you are simply are not paying attention, not only to what I have been saying, but what others have been saying. And please, don't ask me to repeat everything I've already said five times before.

Maybe I am biased -- in favor of everyone having access to health care, because I don't think that any other result is fair, humane, reflects the values of a civilized society, or is cost effective. If you don't believe that then fine -- but do us a favor, and admit it so we can have an honest debate. What are your principles related to health care? What do you think needs to be achieved? How can it be achieved? I've been clear about this. Have you?

Before you answer, consider that people outside of the U.S. have a difficult time even comprehending this debate. That might form a useful frame of reference for you.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #263 of 383
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

No, that is not what I said. Don't be calling others biased when you are simply are not paying attention, not only to what I have been saying, but what others have been saying. And please, don't ask me to repeat everything I've already said five times before.

Seems clear what you said:

"And this friends is how you fashion yourself as a defender of Medicare, and an opponent of health care for everybody else."
Backpedal all you want. Your words are clearly written. No need to even read between the lines.

Quote:
Maybe I am biased -- in favor of everyone having access to health care, because I don't think that any other result is fair, humane, reflects the values of a civilized society, or is cost effective. If you don't believe that then fine -- but do us a favor, and admit it so we can have an honest debate. What are your principles related to health care? What do you think needs to be achieved? How can it be achieved? I've been clear about this. Have you?

Everyone has access to health care. Be honest, they have it. Just because they all don't have the same health care as everyone else does not change that fact. And you have to get back to reality. Insurance is not health care, it is a way to help pay for something that is entirely too expensive. You have to make the care less expensive. How are you going to do that? Hint, it is not insurance. That just masks the underlying problem.

Quote:
Before you answer, consider that people outside of the U.S. have a difficult time even comprehending this debate. That might form a useful frame of reference for you.

I do not care if others outside of this country have a hard time understanding. If they understand or not does not change the system we have. Should I be ashamed of the system that I did not create? If I say I am does it make me a better person? \
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #264 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Before you answer, consider that people outside of the U.S. have a difficult time even comprehending this debate. That might form a useful frame of reference for you.

Count me in that group.

It makes little sense to me that anyone is opposed to universal healthcare, and it makes even less sense when I read/hear the arguments they make against it that are predominantly based on bizarre misconceptions of how the single payer systems work.
post #265 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Before you answer, consider that people outside of the U.S. have a difficult time even comprehending this debate. That might form a useful frame of reference for you.

We actually have no problems with the comprehension. Thank you very much.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #266 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Before you answer, consider that people outside of the U.S. have a difficult time even comprehending this debate. That might form a useful frame of reference for you.

An excellent point.

In Europe at least it's generally considered by both right and left alike that America's health care model is at worst immoral and at best expensive and over-complicated.
post #267 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka View Post

Count me in that group.

It makes little sense to me that anyone is opposed to universal healthcare, and it makes even less sense when I read/hear the arguments they make against it that are predominantly based on bizarre misconceptions of how the single payer systems work.

Count me in too. As an American living abroad who has always lived with some form of universal healthcare.

In Australia there was single payer. In the Army I didn't pay because I was a soldier. And now in Korea I use the government subsidized health insurance (you have to opt-in and its about $30 a month).

I have never experienced "rationing" or poor quality of care. I also don't go on healthcare binges, i.e. going to the hospital for every little thing which I've heard mentioned here before. Other people don't seem to either.

The arguments against universal healthcare really are bizarre and I feel sorry for my fellow Americans right now.
post #268 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

Seems clear what you said:

"And this friends is how you fashion yourself as a defender of Medicare, and an opponent of health care for everybody else."
Backpedal all you want. Your words are clearly written. No need to even read between the lines.

I'm not peddling anywhere. The point being (assuming it matters to you, which I realize it probably doesn't) is that virtually everyone who is not covered by Medicare (or another government program) is swimming in the shark-infested pool known as the private health insurance market. If you haven't been eaten alive yet, your turn will probably come. Lose your job? Change jobs? Go into business for yourself? Run up really big medical bills? In any one of those circumstances, you will become shark food.

Quote:
Everyone has access to health care. Be honest, they have it. Just because they all don't have the same health care as everyone else does not change that fact. And you have to get back to reality. Insurance is not health care, it is a way to help pay for something that is entirely too expensive. You have to make the care less expensive. How are you going to do that? Hint, it is not insurance. That just masks the underlying problem.

And what, pray tell, is the "underlying problem?" Are you for rationing procedures to save money? Not that, then what?

BTW, having to use emergency rooms for crisis care is not the same thing as having access to health care. if you're at all concerned about cost, then you should agree with this.

Quote:
I do not care if others outside of this country have a hard time understanding. If they understand or not does not change the system we have. Should I be ashamed of the system that I did not create? If I say I am does it make me a better person? \

Maybe you should care. I've asked you to explain your principles in this debate, but you refuse to do so.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #269 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsLan^ View Post

The arguments against universal healthcare really are bizarre and I feel sorry for my fellow Americans right now.

I'd feel a lot better about this debate if the opponents to universal healthcare were honest about their goals. On the one side, we've got the people who believe universal access is the direction we should be headed and who propose specific measures for getting there. One the other, we've got -- what? The opposition to everything that has been proposed, what is their goal? Maintaining the status quo, and hoping it gets better? If not that, then what?

I say, give us something we can actually compare, so we can decided which way is more in line with our national interest. Not going to happen.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #270 of 383
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

I'm not peddling anywhere. The point being (assuming it matters to you, which I realize it probably doesn't) is that virtually everyone who is not covered by Medicare (or another government program) is swimming in the shark-infested pool known as the private health insurance market. If you haven't been eaten alive yet, your turn will probably come. Lose your job? Change jobs? Go into business for yourself? Run up really big medical bills? In any one of those circumstances, you will become shark food.

Fear fear fear...

Quote:
And what, pray tell, is the "underlying problem?" Are you for rationing procedures to save money? Not that, then what?

The actual cost of the procedures, the pay of the doctors, how much it costs to see the doctor, what does it cost to be in the emergency room. Those are all main contributing factors to the cost of being seen for a medical condition. Cost of drugs, and the penchant of doctors nowadays to prescribe drugs to mask rather than cure a problem is another issue. Drugs for ADD, pills to lower cholesterol, weight loss drugs, pill to manage your blood pressure, pills for sleeping at night, pills for moods, all trying to treat the symptoms and never resolve the problems. And they are generally very expensive over the long term.

This is not something you can legislate a fix for. People in the US want a pill to fix what ails them. They don't have time for the cure or the willpower to see it through in many cases.

"I can't exercise, unless it is on this wonder machine for 5 minutes a day..."
"Having trouble with your weight, take this pill and turn on your bodies fat burning machine..."
"Feeling Depressed? Take our pill and you will be normal again (Possible side effects include mood swings, thoughts of suicide, urges to kick puppies, death...)"

And tell your doctor you want a solution to a long standing problem and see the blank stare you get. I have seen it over and over again with personal family issues. One of my children has very bad acid reflux, if the child is not on a bed that inclines they are guaranteed to wake up and vomit every night. Very bad for the teeth, and setting the pattern for throwing up early on. Doctors answer, Prevacid or one other acid reducer/blocker. Did absolutely nothing for my child as the issue is not the production of acid, but the reflux. We finally gave up trying to get a solution from a doctor because it looked like the only real solution was either, wait for the child to grow out of it, or surgery. They already took the tonsils and adenoids claiming that would fix the vomiting, but it had zero effect. Thanks specialists.

How do you fix that? What legislation are you going to put in place to repair a system that is stuck on prescribing you out of the problems, rather than fixing the core issue in your health? Tell me that. Anything else is deflecting away from the issue. Making care cheaper is fine, but if the care is only going to prescribe you a recurring cost for pills what have you gained?

Quote:
BTW, having to use emergency rooms for crisis care is not the same thing as having access to health care. if you're at all concerned about cost, then you should agree with this.

Maybe you should care. I've asked you to explain your principles in this debate, but you refuse to do so.

I don't believe there is anything I could say to you at this point that you would respect enough to make a difference. With every person you speak with if they don't agree with you they have been relegated to the idiots box. I don't trust or know you well enough at this point to respect your opinion more than you respect mine.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #271 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

Fear fear fear...



The actual cost of the procedures, the pay of the doctors, how much it costs to see the doctor, what does it cost to be in the emergency room. Those are all main contributing factors to the cost of being seen for a medical condition. Cost of drugs, and the penchant of doctors nowadays to prescribe drugs to mask rather than cure a problem is another issue. Drugs for ADD, pills to lower cholesterol, weight loss drugs, pill to manage your blood pressure, pills for sleeping at night, pills for moods, all trying to treat the symptoms and never resolve the problems. And they are generally very expensive over the long term.

This is not something you can legislate a fix for. People in the US want a pill to fix what ails them. They don't have time for the cure or the willpower to see it through in many cases.

"I can't exercise, unless it is on this wonder machine for 5 minutes a day..."
"Having trouble with your weight, take this pill and turn on your bodies fat burning machine..."
"Feeling Depressed? Take our pill and you will be normal again (Possible side effects include mood swings, thoughts of suicide, urges to kick puppies, death...)"

And tell your doctor you want a solution to a long standing problem and see the blank stare you get. I have seen it over and over again with personal family issues. One of my children has very bad acid reflux, if the child is not on a bed that inclines they are guaranteed to wake up and vomit every night. Very bad for the teeth, and setting the pattern for throwing up early on. Doctors answer, Prevacid or one other acid reducer/blocker. Did absolutely nothing for my child as the issue is not the production of acid, but the reflux. We finally gave up trying to get a solution from a doctor because it looked like the only real solution was either, wait for the child to grow out of it, or surgery. They already took the tonsils and adenoids claiming that would fix the vomiting, but it had zero effect. Thanks specialists.

How do you fix that? What legislation are you going to put in place to repair a system that is stuck on prescribing you out of the problems, rather than fixing the core issue in your health? Tell me that. Anything else is deflecting away from the issue. Making care cheaper is fine, but if the care is only going to prescribe you a recurring cost for pills what have you gained?



I don't believe there is anything I could say to you at this point that you would respect enough to make a difference. With every person you speak with if they don't agree with you they have been relegated to the idiots box. I don't trust or know you well enough at this point to respect your opinion more than you respect mine.

Excellent post Noahj. I don't know if you've researched "alternative therapies" but I believe that they can produce positive results. I really hope your child recovers soon.

I listened to c-span very briefly earlier today and caught, who I expect was a Democratic Senator, talking about the current proposed bill in the Senate. He was stressing that the bill addresses some of the issues you mentioned; doctors prescribing unnecessary treatments. I don't know how it does this exactly but there may be something of significance there. Basically, what he said was that at present doctors get reimbursed for the treatments they offer, regardless of their outcomes. The new bill would somehow reward the results of those treatments instead. Like I said, I don't know the details and I also don't know much about how the current system functions, but maybe there's something to it.
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #272 of 383
Actually, it was just another spew. No stated principles whatsoever, which is what I suggested makes for an honest debate. Multiple invitations to do so declined. That doesn't make someone an "idiot" (a description I have never used of anyone here), but it does make someone argumentative for no obvious purpose.

The truth is, 70-80% of all health care costs in the U.S. are for chronic diseases, such as heart disease, cancer, stroke, diabetes. These are also the big killers.

How do you control those costs? As much as can be, with preventive care -- which is precisely what the uninsured lack. It's one of the main reasons why our costs are so high, and our results are so low. This not a matter of opinion, it's not an anecdote, it's a fact.

You could look it up.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #273 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Actually, it was just another spew. No stated principles whatsoever, which is what I suggested makes for an honest debate. Multiple invitations to do so declined. That doesn't make someone an "idiot" (a description I have never used of anyone here), but it does make someone argumentative for no obvious purpose.

The truth is, 70-80% of all health care costs in the U.S. are for chronic diseases, such as heart disease, cancer, stroke, diabetes. These are also the big killers.

How do you control those costs? As much as can be, with preventive care -- which is precisely what the uninsured lack. It's one of the main reasons why our costs are so high, and our results are so low. This not a matter of opinion, it's not an anecdote, it's a fact.

You could look it up.

I agree and I've been arguing along the same lines. Noahj though, has brought up some good points that are a symptom of why so many people are sick and why costs are so high. It would be cynical of me to ascribe his intentions of posting wider issues as a way to lessen the importance of providing insurance coverage, though he may for all I know, not deem that necessary. You, I think, think that's not a priority for him and I'm really not sure what his take is on that.
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #274 of 383
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Actually, it was just another spew. No stated principles whatsoever, which is what I suggested makes for an honest debate. Multiple invitations to do so declined. That doesn't make someone an "idiot" (a description I have never used of anyone here), but it does make someone argumentative for no obvious purpose.

Thanks for ignoring anything I had to say and proving my last part of my post.

Quote:
The truth is, 70-80% of all health care costs in the U.S. are for chronic diseases, such as heart disease, cancer, stroke, diabetes. These are also the big killers.

And what is a major contributing factor to all those diseases? How do they care for those Diseases in the early stages? Is it only a doctor that can help prevent these things? Here's a hint, insurance will not help you to lose weight, or eat healthy. You keep ascribing the responsibility for all health to Doctors, and others on this board (perhaps you as well) believe the people that cannot see those doctors are being systematically being murdered by the insurance companies for profit.

Quote:
How do you control those costs? As much as can be, with preventive care -- which is precisely what the uninsured lack. It's one of the main reasons why our costs are so high, and our results are so low. This not a matter of opinion, it's not an anecdote, it's a fact.

You could look it up.

Personal responsibility be damned, give me my pills and don't tell me that I eat too much or exercise too little. Diabetes, I need insulin! High Cholesterol, give me Lipitor! Who knows what causes cancer? (Diet and exercise can prevent this as well in many cases.) Costs are so high and results are so low because people don't care to alter their lifestyle. Just give them a pill, it is worth it to them to not be inconvenienced.

Yes there are those that will get sick even with proper diet, good exercise, and everything being done right. But those numbers would be MUCH lower. However, you can throw money at the issue and see where it gets you. Insurance will let people see the doctor, so he can prescribe his pills, that insurance can help pay for so he can not make any other changes that he will not listen to his doctor tell him to make as well.

Fix the underlying costs, the underlying problems, otherwise you will not fix the real problem. The need for insurance is only a symptom.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #275 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

Thanks for ignoring anything I had to say and proving my last part of my post.



And what is a major contributing factor to all those diseases? How do they care for those Diseases in the early stages? Is it only a doctor that can help prevent these things? Here's a hint, insurance will not help you to lose weight, or eat healthy. You keep ascribing the responsibility for all health to Doctors, and others on this board (perhaps you as well) believe the people that cannot see those doctors are being systematically being murdered by the insurance companies for profit.



Personal responsibility be damned, give me my pills and don't tell me that I eat too much or exercise too little. Diabetes, I need insulin! High Cholesterol, give me Lipitor! Who knows what causes cancer? (Diet and exercise can prevent this as well in many cases.) Costs are so high and results are so low because people don't care to alter their lifestyle. Just give them a pill, it is worth it to them to not be inconvenienced.

Yes there are those that will get sick even with proper diet, good exercise, and everything being done right. But those numbers would be MUCH lower. However, you can throw money at the issue and see where it gets you. Insurance will let people see the doctor, so he can prescribe his pills, that insurance can help pay for so he can not make any other changes that he will not listen to his doctor tell him to make as well.

Fix the underlying costs, the underlying problems, otherwise you will not fix the real problem. The need for insurance is only a symptom.

Quote:
And what is a major contributing factor to all those diseases? How do they care for those Diseases in the early stages? Is it only a doctor that can help prevent these things? Here's a hint, insurance will not help you to lose weight, or eat healthy.

Actually all of those are familial and you don't have to necessarily do anything to get the condition.

My wife's family has cancer all over the place. Mine no one has ever been diagnosed with it. With us it's all cardio vascular but there's very little of that in my wife's family.

Sometimes all you have to do is get old enough for the condition to present itself without smoking or over eating or anything. A lot of the tendencies we have are in our genes. When it happens all of sudden you're faced with a lot of extra cost that sometimes you did nothing to create ( except being born ).

You can do all of the right things and still have crappy things happen to you.

I'm guessing you haven't gotten to the point of discovering these things yet.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #276 of 383
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Actually all of those are familial and you don't have to necessarily do anything to get the condition.

My wife's family has cancer all over the place. Mine no one has ever been diagnosed with it. With us it's all cardio vascular but there's very little of that in my wife's family.

Sometimes all you have to do is get old enough for the condition to present itself without smoking or over eating or anything. A lot of the tendencies we have are in our genes. When it happens all of sudden you're faced with a lot of extra cost that sometimes you did nothing to create ( except being born ).

You can do all of the right things and still have crappy things happen to you.

I'm guessing you haven't gotten to the point of discovering these things yet.

Did you even read my post?

Yes there are those that will get sick even with proper diet, good exercise, and everything being done right.

I have seen many cases of people with those conditions, both in real life and also on TV (Biggest Loser Being the Only show I give any credence to that I have seen) who found that the conditions were reversed with proper diet and exercise.

Proper diet does not mean diet cola, "lite" food, and low fat hot dogs either.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #277 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

Did you even read my post?

Yes there are those that will get sick even with proper diet, good exercise, and everything being done right.

I have seen many cases of people with those conditions, both in real life and also on TV (Biggest Loser Being the Only show I give any credence to that I have seen) who found that the conditions were reversed with proper diet and exercise.

Proper diet does not mean diet cola, "lite" food, and low fat hot dogs either.

Noahj watch this- http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/watch2.html
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #278 of 383
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Noahj watch this- http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/watch2.html

Interesting video. I am still reading the transcript but I have one observation off the cuff.

Quote:
\tBILL MOYERS: You told Congress that the industry has hijacked our health care system and turned it into a giant ATM for Wall Street. You said, "I saw how they confuse their customers and dump the sick, all so they can satisfy their Wall Street investors." How do they satisfy their Wall Street investors?


\tWENDELL POTTER: Well, there's a measure of profitability that investors look to, and it's called a medical loss ratio. And it's unique to the health insurance industry. And by medical loss ratio, I mean that it's a measure that tells investors or anyone else how much of a premium dollar is used by the insurance company to actually pay medical claims. And that has been shrinking, over the years, since the industry's been dominated by, or become dominated by for-profit insurance companies. Back in the early '90s, or back during the time that the Clinton plan was being debated, 95 cents out of every dollar was sent, you know, on average was used by the insurance companies to pay claims. Last year, it was down to just slightly above 80 percent.
So, investors want that to keep shrinking. And if they see that an insurance company has not done what they think meets their expectations with the medical loss ratio, they'll punish them. Investors will start leaving in droves.
I've seen a company stock price fall 20 percent in a single day, when it did not meet Wall Street's expectations with this medical loss ratio.
For example, if one company's medical loss ratio was 77.9 percent, for example, in one quarter, and the next quarter, it was 78.2 percent. It seems like a small movement. But investors will think that's ridiculous. And it's horrible.


\t\t\tBILL MOYERS: That they're spending more money for medical claims.


\t\t\tWENDELL POTTER: Yeah.


\t\t\tBILL MOYERS: And less money on profits?



\t\t\tWENDELL POTTER: Exactly. And they think that this company has not done a good job of managing medical expenses. It has not denied enough claims. It has not kicked enough people off the rolls. And that's what-- that is what happens, what these companies do, to make sure that they satisfy Wall Street's expectations with the medical loss ratio.


You see this with any publicly listed company. The investor on the other side looking to make money pressures a company to cut costs and increase profit at any cost. Some companies do not cave to the pressure and they continue to put quality and longevity of their product over short term profits. Others play the game and we end up in these type of situations. Making health care a commodity to be bought and sold on the stock market is a bad idea.


And the portion earlier that talked about the influence peddling that happens, that is a problem that needs to be addressed. Whether it be Congress or other institutions, it comes down to Legalized Bribery and Blackmail.



This happens both inside Congress: Don't like a bill, we'll just sweeten it with a few hundred million for your state if you sign on.


And from outside congress: Vote for a bill we don't like, we will cut our donations to your campaign and donate to your opponent instead.



Overall though, fascinating. As I said, still reading.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #279 of 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

I agree and I've been arguing along the same lines. Noahj though, has brought up some good points that are a symptom of why so many people are sick and why costs are so high. It would be cynical of me to ascribe his intentions of posting wider issues as a way to lessen the importance of providing insurance coverage, though he may for all I know, not deem that necessary. You, I think, think that's not a priority for him and I'm really not sure what his take is on that.

Several ironies here. First, the bill under consideration (in the House at least, I'm not sure about the Senate) attempts to get a start on moving from fee-for-service to a more capitated (fee-for-treatment) system. Experts all seem to agree that large savings and more effective healthcare can be found here. But all the opponents need to do to squelch that discussion is invoke the bogeyman of "rationing," and it's over.

Second, the personal example cited is perfect example of what's wrong with this entire debate. On the one hand, costs must be controlled, but on the other, I want more healthcare for myself and my family. Wasteful use of healthcare is something other people do. How can we have a productive debate about healthcare when this kind of rationale is in control? What he might spend a moment considering is what kind of treatment he'd get for his child if he was uninsured. Tens of millions of Americans have to cope with that reality every day. So what about them? I keep asking.

Third, preventive care is what we need to have more of. If people get more preventive care, which is relatively inexpensive to provide, we get less cost for acute care, which is the most expensive to provide. Again, not a controversial thing on a factual basis, but just try to talk about getting more preventive care to people who currently have little or no access to it. That discussion gets dismissed because it costs money upfront. The fact that it saves money in the long run doesn't even have to be considered. It's a "government takeover!" Discussion over.

So what we get as an alternative are claims (made right here in this thread) that if the government just got completely out of the business of providing and regulating healthcare, that magically 99% of people would have it. And we'll have pie in the sky when we die.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #280 of 383
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Several ironies here. First, the bill under consideration (in the House at least, I'm not sure about the Senate) attempts to get a start on moving from fee-for-service to a more capitated (fee-for-treatment) system. Experts all seem to agree that large savings and more effective healthcare can be found here. But all the opponents need to do to squelch that discussion is invoke the bogeyman of "rationing," and it's over.

Second, the personal example cited is perfect example of what's wrong with this entire debate. On the one hand, costs must be controlled, but on the other, I want more healthcare for myself and my family. Wasteful use of healthcare is something other people do. How can we have a productive debate about healthcare when this kind of rationale is in control? What he might spend a moment considering is what kind of treatment he'd get for his child if he was uninsured. Tens of millions of Americans have to cope with that reality every day. So what about them? I keep asking.

Third, preventive care is what we need to have more of. If people get more preventive care, which is relatively inexpensive to provide, we get less cost for acute care, which is the most expensive to provide. Again, not a controversial thing on a factual basis, but just try to talk about getting more preventive care to people who currently have little or no access to it. That discussion gets dismissed because it costs money upfront. The fact that it saves money in the long run doesn't even have to be considered. It's a "government takeover!" Discussion over.

So what we get as an alternative are claims (made right here in this thread) that if the government just got completely out of the business of providing and regulating healthcare, that magically 99% of people would have it. And we'll have pie in the sky when we die.

Still you miss my point. Why do we need insurance to begin with? The problem is not the insurance, but the NEED for it. If healthcare is a right, why would someone need insurance to get it? Anything that costs so much you cannot afford it is not a right, it is a want or a luxury. The framing of the debate I keep seeing is that insurance companies are trying to deprive us of our right to healthcare. They ae the boogeymen who should be punished for profiting off our misfortunes.

But why do we need the insurance companies? Because healthcare costs so much.
Why does it cost so much or even cost at all if it is a right?

We have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Which of those do you have to pay for out of your own pocket? In reality, they are all free. It is when you try to make them more than what they are that they start to cost money. Life involves? Liberty is? What is the pursuit of happiness?

Healthcare is a need, not a right. You do not have the right to tell someone to give you something for nothing. If you have to pay them for it, it is not a right. It might be a need, but it cannot be called a right.

Name me a defined right that has to cost something. The cost comes in with the convenience factor.

IF you want to frame it as a right then the costs of healthcare should be examined. But then how do you bring those costs down? When that is brought up you start turning the conversation to rationing healthcare. Or you turn back to the healthcare system and put the people back in line for the doctor.

How did people ever stay healthy without monthly visits to their doctors?

Go ahead, tear apart my post, ignore anything good in it and tell me how uninformed and stupid I am. I tried the doctor route for my child that needed more than I could give. And you know what, with insurance many feel that you HAVE to use the care, or you have thrown your money away. What a vicious cycle it is.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Is there any form of Government HealthCare you could get behind?