Wow, you are even going to register to vote? Such a titanic endeavor! Sure it looks like you really cared about your country!
Should Americans be required to buy health insurance?
- Thread starter TheLonelySquire
- Start date
I haven't made any assumptions. I've instead posted well known facts about the cost and quality of health care in the US compared to other countries and you have ignored them. Since you bring it up, you ignored facts in the Science forum as well, opting instead to talk about heavily biased politics, so at least you're consistent.
And for the record, not that it matters, but I've lived in both the US and Canada. I have first hand experience with health care in both countries. Do you have first hand experience with health care anywhere except for the US? Do you know anything about how the systems in other countries work beyond what the talking heads on Fox News tell you? Because this statement:
...indicates that you do not. There are plenty of people here who live in countries with UHC. Maybe you should try asking them what they think about their own health care instead of operating on false assumptions about it?
I am also aware that it has nothing to do with the issues that we were directly talking about and the fact that you chose to bring it up when you did... you know, after everyone jumped on you for your dishonest "metaphor"... is telling.
Not just tort reform, but waste (buying over priced items), unecessary proceedures performed (not sure how common, but some docs will do this just to make money -- read the news articles), medical supply theft. And, quite frankly, people wanting to become doctors, not paying out their ass for decades -- that is a discouragement.
$600 toilet seats.
$400 hammers
That expensive meat or deal a bit back (don't recall enough details)
Some country we sent multi millions of dollars to take of stuff they should have paid for. They spent none of the money on it.
ALL THIS
$10 billion a year Obama wants to give to other countries for the biggest scam on Earth: Global Warming
And these are just common examples from the last couple decades. There are hundreds more.
$600 toilet seats.
$400 hammers
That expensive meat or deal a bit back (don't recall enough details)
Some country we sent multi millions of dollars to take of stuff they should have paid for. They spent none of the money on it.
ALL THIS
$10 billion a year Obama wants to give to other countries for the biggest scam on Earth: Global Warming
And these are just common examples from the last couple decades. There are hundreds more.
Becasue he won't want to hear their answers because the majority of people in countries with UHC (which would include both liberals and conservatives) generally want to keep their systems.
A few years back, in Australia my GP wanted me to see a specialist to look into the cause of my high blood preasure. I got into see him with in 3 months, had tests (bloods, x-rays, urine, ultrasound) and second appointment a couple of months later. Cost me about $1000.
Now 5 years later I'm going through the same thing in Canada covered by OHIP in Ontario. Three months to get into the cardilogist (who btw makes has the bedside manner of a newly activated EMH) and back to see him within 3 months but I put one of the tests off which through the schedule out the window. Cost to me? $50 for the 24hr BP monitor.
Doesn't sound like rationing to me.
No. Do you think Jesus would be opposed to Universal Health Care?
TheLonelySquire
Vice Admiral
Um, okay....
I believe our Lord and Saviour would want everyone to have access to affordable care. If they cannot afford it there should be a social safety net in place to help.
I also believe He would want and expect people to help themselves and not take what is not theirs.
Does that answer your question?
Should a Christian nation have such a safety net in place?
Would it have been written in Hebrew or Aramaic?
BTW, I do agree generally about Jesus' views on the poor, he seemed to call his followers to live a fairly Franciscan lifestyle.
I also tend to think this biblical language topic has greater potential for something new to be said than the health care one
The argument from some scholars is that Matthew wrote his gospel in Aramaic using Hebrew letters
which was later translated into Greek (then to Latin I think, before into English)Of course, the Bible has been heavily edited through the ages too...but that's another thread
Oh, and my doctor's waiting list for a full physical is about 6 weeks, but I've seen her twice while waiting because of my back (once for meds, and once for referrel to physio). Cost to me...$0.
TheLonelySquire
Vice Admiral
Are you saying we are a Christian nation?
No - but YOU say we are. I'm asking if YOU think a Christian nation should have a safety net for those who cannot afford proper healthcare.
Would it have been written in Hebrew or Aramaic?
BTW, I do agree generally about Jesus' views on the poor, he seemed to call his followers to live a fairly Franciscan lifestyle.
I also tend to think this biblical language topic has greater potential for something new to be said than the health care one
The argument from some scholars is that Matthew wrote his gospel in Aramaic using Hebrew letters
I wonder what the Aramaic word used would have been. As a semetic language, it probably has a similar use to the Hebrew one.
Of course, since He was quoting a Psalm, it doesn't matter if the Greek one is different, since the reference is to the Hebrew word. Also, Jesus certainly would have spoken the sermon on the mount in either Aramaic or Hebrew, not Greek.
TheLonelySquire
Vice Admiral
Oh, I was wondering if you had changed your tune.
Anyway, absolutely we should. But it should not be a permanent thing for able bodied adults. It's simply not fair to take what is not yours.
It is a fear, and it will have to be faced and dealt with. We will not be able to continue with the current inefficiencies and stupidities of our approach to medicine.
For instance, 70% of breast cancers are caused by strains of HPV, which is carried asymptomatically by males, and yet there is currently no way to test for it in males. That's pretty retarded.
A lot of people felt that way about the Patriot Act, too. I share the distrust. I don't want to see UHC turned into a way to force pharmeceuticals on the population any more than they currently are.
I think its the high-cost stuff - surgeries - that should be heavily covered, and the everyday stuff can be a bit higher to compensate. Otherwise working, lower income people will be screwed when they really need the full power of western medicine.
That would be the march into Marxism, no doubt.
I agree these problems are very compound in nature, but I think it's all fixable. When natural medicine and whole foods regain their proper place, overall health will increase dramatically.
Canadian, trying to understand the furor.
As a taxpayer, don't your taxes pay for -
- roads you don't drive on?
- fire engines that don't come to your house?
- police that protect other people?
- sewage treatment you don't need?
- street lights over other people's homes?
In Canada, all three 911 services are government-run and paid, and I can't imagine it any other way. Why is health care not a right when all the others are?
Now I will say that I think the Canadian system is helped by having the American one next door. There was a story of a woman having quints (in Vancouver, I think?) a few years ago, and she was airlifted to Seattle. It's more cost-effective for Canadian health care to pay out once in a while to treat rare conditions, rather than own the equipment themselves.
I'm also curious about the "per capita" statistic. My guess is, Americans pay more for "elective medicine" than anyone on the planet, so their per capita is inflated by the Joan Riverses and the tummy tuckers. Plus, if a Canadian wants something expensive done, they often go away to do it, because with money, you can skip the line-ups.
I have a health plan in addition to the government plan - the government plan covers basics, and the extra is for things the gov't won't pay for - orthotics, for example, and therapeutic massage. So to say that gov't care will eliminate the incentive to get care seems goofy to me. The gov't provides a basic, low-level, necessities-of-life kind of care, and most employed people have additional coverage.
As a taxpayer, don't your taxes pay for -
- roads you don't drive on?
- fire engines that don't come to your house?
- police that protect other people?
- sewage treatment you don't need?
- street lights over other people's homes?
In Canada, all three 911 services are government-run and paid, and I can't imagine it any other way. Why is health care not a right when all the others are?
Now I will say that I think the Canadian system is helped by having the American one next door. There was a story of a woman having quints (in Vancouver, I think?) a few years ago, and she was airlifted to Seattle. It's more cost-effective for Canadian health care to pay out once in a while to treat rare conditions, rather than own the equipment themselves.
I'm also curious about the "per capita" statistic. My guess is, Americans pay more for "elective medicine" than anyone on the planet, so their per capita is inflated by the Joan Riverses and the tummy tuckers. Plus, if a Canadian wants something expensive done, they often go away to do it, because with money, you can skip the line-ups.
I have a health plan in addition to the government plan - the government plan covers basics, and the extra is for things the gov't won't pay for - orthotics, for example, and therapeutic massage. So to say that gov't care will eliminate the incentive to get care seems goofy to me. The gov't provides a basic, low-level, necessities-of-life kind of care, and most employed people have additional coverage.
Nope it's not the cosmetic surgery - that blows it out - it's the cost of the treatment - $100 bucks to visit a dr, from hundreds to $1000s for E.R treatment (one poster recently had a bill for $1800 for an E.R visit - that was treated with ice).
And when you stay in hospital everything is charged - right down the dressings and over the counter pain meds.
Then you get the cost of prescription meds. In Canada and Australian you don't have to pay for the enormous ad campaigns that the drug companies run.
And we don't have to pay for the $199 million spend by big pharma and associated groups fighting the healthcare reforms (and the money they spend on lobbying in general).
But in general it's so much more expsensvie in the U.S because you have the health insurers who are protected by law from interstate compeitors, add nothing to health care, charge huge fees, cut what they pay to Dr's (unlike Australia which has a single payer system and the goverment increases the scheduled fee each November in line with the CPI) etc and generally suck the system dry.
I actually just realized I was confusing two statistics (and I'm surprised no one else caught it either, I probably wouldn't have realized if I didn't need to pull the data again)... in terms of health care per capita the US ranks 3rd worldwide. Chart here. In terms of percent funding of GNP, the US ranks first by a significant margin. Chart here. The US's spending on health care has risen much faster then other countries. Chart here.
The thing with the rich elite getting elective surgeries is that this will happen in all western countries... I'm not sure if percent wise this will be significantly more in the US then, say, the UK or Canada. But the other thing to keep in mind is that even with such a high amount of health care spending in the US there are still thousands of people with absolutely no coverage and a culture that discourages people from getting regular, preventative care which are two major factors in driving costs up.
This is exactly what I have over in Alberta. I've not looked in to it, but I assume that people who don't get "extra" care from their employers can purchase it on their own. England, as I understand it, goes a step farther and has an entire private system that runs in parallel to their public one which in my opinion is even better.
Oh, and my doctor's waiting list for a full physical is about 6 weeks, but I've seen her twice while waiting because of my back (once for meds, and once for referrel to physio). Cost to me...$0.
I had a sore throat last week, after a couple days I called a random ear-nose-throat doctor in my district (I had never been to one), got an appointment on the same day (december 22nd), he said I have pharyngitis and gave me a prescription for antibiotics and some pain medication which worked fine. Cost to me: €11 for the meds. The horror of UHC.
Oh, and my doctor's waiting list for a full physical is about 6 weeks, but I've seen her twice while waiting because of my back (once for meds, and once for referrel to physio). Cost to me...$0.
I had a sore throat last week, after a couple days I called a random ear-nose-throat doctor in my district (I had never been to one), got an appointment on the same day (december 22nd), he said I have pharyngitis and gave me a prescription for antibiotics and some pain medication which worked fine. Cost to me: €11 for the meds. The horror of UHC.
That's right. Add more salt to our wounds.
(have a health care card)
