State-run health care

[TheLonelySquire]

Yes yes...those foolish blacks.

I'd say we have finally reached the real reason TLS is against universal health care.

Yep.

 

[Roger Wilco]

I'd say we have finally reached the real reason TLS is against universal health care.

Yep.

That's not the smilie I would use.

 

[MarianLH]

I haven't chimed in yet, as I've found this whole thread just a fascinating read. The one thing I've noticed that pretty much sums up the arguments is this:

What is the government's job?

I'd argue that the government's primary job is to keep its citizens safe. Any other job the government does is meaningless if the citizens are not cared for on the most basic level: In my mind, this includes being treated for illness.

If a person can't afford food or shelter, the government has ways to help out. How is being sick any different?

We don't need to speculate about it--the preamble of the constitution explicitly outlines the US government's job. And as RJDiogenes has already pointed out at least twice, it includes "promote the general welfare".

UHC--or rather, ending the iniquities of the current system--could also arguably fall under "establish justice".


Marian

 

[RoJoHen]

Let me guess, you feel that if you can't pay your mortgage you should be able to keep your house? Is home ownership a right now as well?

I would argue that people have a right to shelter. Actually OWNING a home is not a right; it's something to work for.

I haven't chimed in yet, as I've found this whole thread just a fascinating read. The one thing I've noticed that pretty much sums up the arguments is this:

What is the government's job?

I'd argue that the government's primary job is to keep its citizens safe. Any other job the government does is meaningless if the citizens are not cared for on the most basic level: In my mind, this includes being treated for illness.

If a person can't afford food or shelter, the government has ways to help out. How is being sick any different?

I agree, and someone who is sick can get immediate medical care at no cost to them. Revamp the system properly and they will be able to pay for their own healthcare out of their own pocket.

But for things like food, clothing, and shelter, even homeless people with no income have ways to obtain them. They may have access to immediate emergency care, but they are probably not able to get help for chronic or long-term medical conditions.

I realize that your viewpoint is that they need to pay for their own treatment, but there are people out there who simply CAN'T. It's not because they're lazy. It's not because they don't want a job. And even if they reform the current healthcare plan, there will still be people in this situation!

 

[Kira's Mom]

And that is just a cruel, hateful way to think. It makes me sad that there are Americans who think that way.

Just in case it's not clear I don't believe that, I was attempting to be facetious.

Nor am I American.

I know you don't- but there are people who do think that way.

Yep.

That's not the smilie I would use.

Yeah.

 

[RoJoHen]

That's not the smilie I would use.

Yeah.

was the first thing that popped in my head.

 

[sidious618]

Are you honestly surprised? He already blatantly generalized black people on the last page.

 

[Kira's Mom]

Are you honestly surprised? He already blatantly generalized black people on the last page.

Quite true.

 

[Crash]

And, yet, another case.

As a result of being denied insurance coverage, a six-year-old child in Missouri may never be able to hear again.
Fox2Now in Saint Louis has word of the sad story of Madison Leuchtmann. Madison's family, who live in Lincoln County, Missouri, faces a grim choice: pay a $20,000 medical bill that's not covered by their insurance company or let their daughter lose her hearing.


Madison was born with a rare condition called bilateral artesia, which essentially means she was born without ear canals. The condition occurs in about one in 20,000 births.


The malady, however, can be remedied with the use of a hearing device That device, according to a written statement provided to Fox2Now, was not deemed "medically necessary."

Link

Again, it's obviously the kid's fault. She was so lazy she didn't bother to grow ear canals.

 

[sidious618]

She should've worked harder.

 

[Crash]

She should've worked harder.

Oh, totally. It's so painfully obvious that she should have shopped around for a policy that would cover her self-made problem while in the womb, y'know?

Stupid, lazy fetus. Now she has to lie in the bed she made.

 

[Roger Wilco]

Thank the Lord you don't have socialised health care or that girl would be rationed out of her hearing device.

 

[Crash]

Thank the Lord you don't have socialised health care or that girl would be rationed out of her hearing device.

That's right. You Europeans can suck it, because you have rationed care!

Truly, this is what freedom is about. At least this girl was liberated from hearing all the right wing screeching about socialism, though!

 

[sidious618]

She should've worked harder.

Oh, totally. It's so painfully obvious that she should have shopped around for a policy that would cover her self-made problem while in the womb, y'know?

Stupid, lazy fetus. Now she has to lie in the bed she made.

Why should I be forced to pay to help a child who can't think ahead? She should've saved that allowance money instead of spending it on candy.

 

[nevermore]

I agree, and someone who is sick can get immediate medical care at no cost to them.

This is not true. They can get stabilizing care if the illness or injury is emergent, but are billed later. They cannot get continuing or non-emergent care at all.

Revamp the system properly and they will be able to pay for their own healthcare out of their own pocket.

How do you propose to do that?

 

[Roger Wilco]

Paying for health care out of one's own pocket is completely unrealistic even for many many people who aren't "poor" by any reasonable standards, even for routine stuff, but especially for serious medical issues.

 

[Guartho]

Assuming for a moment that TLS has supplied a verifiable and accurate number, does it bother anyone else that health insurance is 1/6th of the economy? That's a tremendous chunk of our economy that's really just CEOs and staticians making bets about how sick you're likely to get.

 

[TheLonelySquire]

I would argue that people have a right to shelter. Actually OWNING a home is not a right; it's something to work for.

I haven't chimed in yet, as I've found this whole thread just a fascinating read. The one thing I've noticed that pretty much sums up the arguments is this:

What is the government's job?

I'd argue that the government's primary job is to keep its citizens safe. Any other job the government does is meaningless if the citizens are not cared for on the most basic level: In my mind, this includes being treated for illness.

If a person can't afford food or shelter, the government has ways to help out. How is being sick any different?

I agree, and someone who is sick can get immediate medical care at no cost to them. Revamp the system properly and they will be able to pay for their own healthcare out of their own pocket.

But for things like food, clothing, and shelter, even homeless people with no income have ways to obtain them. They may have access to immediate emergency care, but they are probably not able to get help for chronic or long-term medical conditions.

I realize that your viewpoint is that they need to pay for their own treatment, but there are people out there who simply CAN'T. It's not because they're lazy. It's not because they don't want a job. And even if they reform the current healthcare plan, there will still be people in this situation!

I've already said that people who are permanently disabled should have government assistance. If they are not permanently disabled they should be able to partake in a temporary assistance program. I've never known anyone who is able-bodied that was unable to find employment for their entire adult life. If you can't, you're lazy or you're not doing something else right. Again, I have no problem with social safety nets for a certain period of time for the able-bodied and permanently for the disabled.

 

[Praxius]

Thank the Lord you don't have socialised health care or that girl would be rationed out of her hearing device.

Once again, more baseless crap.

Just a couple of months ago there was a similar case here in Canada of a child born without any sense of hearing. She was covered by our UHC to get one Cochlear Implant and is working just fine.

There was however an issue with trying to get a second Cochlear Implant with an argument about it being "Experimental" ~ Something I've heard a number of times from many US Medical Insurance companies and seemed as though they might have been trying to pull an American on their medical coverage.

See in the US.... once the insurance company decides they're not going to cover it, that's pretty much it..... in fact, they'd be lucky to get one implant in the first place.

However in our system, the family appealed the decision (that's right, it is possible) and now last I heard they're getting ready to give her the second one so she can finally not just hear.... but hear in stereo, which will greatly help her learning and social skills while she's still young.

Source:

Ont. group lobbies for hearing-impaired children
http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2009/10/19/to-deaf-children.html

HOPING FOR ‘SURROUND SOUND’
http://www.trurodaily.com/index.cfm?sid=89626&sc=68

“I’m excited. I’m definitely going to be all over it, looking to see if she can do or not,” said Kristen Horton, of her daughter Abbie.
Her comment was in response to a Department of Health announcement decision that in January it will begin funding medically approved double cochlear implants......

------------------------------

Yeah, Socialized Health Care would have Rationed her out of her hearing divice you say?

Our system is now providing/covering double implants.... meanwhile you guys in the US have to fight tooth and nail just to be approved for one.

Yeah... there's that evil socialism again.... giving people the things they need without having to lose their homes and be so far into debt...... how horrible.

You guys should really do some research before you run your mouths about things you know nothing about..... it just looks silly.

 

[TheLonelySquire]

Are you honestly surprised? He already blatantly generalized black people on the last page.

Only 93% of them in terms of their voting record in the last election. Numbers are numbers bro.