Socialized Medicine

Ken Majors wrote: OS deserves to have his healthcare paid for....if you don't believe that....feel free to walk a mile in his shoes.

we dont need to. it was his choice to join. if we wanted to walk in his shoes, we would join too

Well I am against Healtcare reform, because:

Joe The Plumber is

Linus wrote: Not to get too personal-- How do you pay $1,500 a month in insurance premiums?

I am self-employed.  Thus I pay ACTUAL healthcare premiums, instead of only half like employees do.  Most people paying $500-$700 (or whatever) each month think that's what their insurance costs.  They are off by 100%.

Someone in your family, or you, have a pre-existing condition?

Nope - healthy non-smokers.

But think about the question you just asked.  What does it say about our healthcare system when those in need of financial help the most are merely aided on their way to financial doom instead?

"Pre-existing conditions" is one of the central reasons why we need true universal coverage.

But honestly, if you can afford $18,000 a year in health insurance, I'm not too worried about you going broke ;)

You should be - I am.

I am going to keep harping on this until it catches on.  If I get cancer it will bankrupt me unless I die fast.  If I suffer major trauma and I can't sue somebody for a bucket of money over it, it will bankrupt me.

Check your health insurance policy.  Look closely at the limits.  Annual limits, lifetime benefit, etc.  Most of us are not as protected as we think.  One major illness will blow right through the coverage most of us have.

The leading cause of personal bankruptcy in the United States is illness.  It is a major contributing cause in something like 55% of all bankruptcies.

It worries me a whole lot.

But for black holes I was aiming more for Medicare, Medicaid, support for 3rd world style nursing homes. I've experienced the waste... it's pitiful.

It was obvious where you were headed, so I didn't go there.  My point here, as before, was that government actually does a pretty good job providing a host of valuable services at a pretty good price.

Not a single European country has a population of over 300,000,000. TOTALLY different effect when it comes to providing something to everyone when you only have to do it for 10mil, even if you take GDP into effect.

That is such a complete copout.  Not to mention that it makes no sense.  If it makes you feel better, we could have state-level programs.  Is the government of France that much smarter than the government of Texas?

But there is no reason to believe that what can be done for 50,000,000 people cannot be done for 300,000,000.  If anything, it should simply lead to greater efficiencies.

It's not the governments job to provide everyone with healthcare.   I haven't seen it stated in the Constitution. Not in the Bill or Rights. Not in the Declaration of Independence. Not even in the Confederate papers.

What an odd statement.  As pointed out by others, there is a bunch of other stuff the government does that is also not in the Constitution - like education.

But here is an exercise for you:  do a search in any legal document of your choosing for the phrase "public health and safety."  You will quickly discover that this phrase appears in countless statutes, regulations, court opinions, legislative communicados, and so forth.  It is extraordinarily pervasive in the legal discourse in the country, and has been from the very beginning. 

If it is not a function of the government to care for the public health, somebody ought to tell them - the government has apparently been wrong for the last 200 years or so.

Again, I'm not against healthcare. I'm against the money being spent on the wrong thing. You honestly can not tell me putting the proposed healthcare budget into the education budget won't be better for the country as a whole.

Ok - it still isn't taking: GOOD HEALTHCARE REFORM WILL SAVE US MONEY.  There is no increased cost.  There is a SAVINGS.

And, if you like, we could put some of that savings into education.



Oh, and why does Firefox hate me?  I keep getting logged out for no reason.  Usually in the middle of a post.

Linus wrote: And yet, there is the rush to find "where to get the couple of billion needed".

Don't mind my made up numbers.

Raise everyones taxes by say $100. That goes to the government for universal healthcare.

Everyone now has healthcare.

You and your employers stop giving $200 to insurance companies.

You/employers save, government makes it and can now afford the billions.

...

And I'd rather not provide healthcare to those who don't contribute a cent to it themselves. Call me selfish, but I feel people should work for what they get, and not expect it just for being born here instead of 30ft over the Rio Grande.


Having said that, you, or any person I have ever asked the question to, has yet to provide a legit answer-


Why is healthcare a right that everyone should get for free, but no push for food, water, or shelter?

Peter Parker wrote: - Puts aside $20k/year for retirement savings

Americans saving money? You must be drunk.

Linus wrote: And I'd rather not provide healthcare to those who don't contribute a cent to it themselves. Call me selfish, but I feel people should work for what they get, and not expect it just for being born here instead of 30ft over the Rio Grande. Having said that, you, or any person I have ever asked the question to, has yet to provide a legit answer- Why is healthcare a right that everyone should get for free, but no push for food, water, or shelter?

Ok first of all if the do it right everyone will pay at least something. Probably through a tax on unhealthy things such as soda, non olestra chips (the uncontrollable anal seepage makes them good for you). Second, you'd rather pay more for something just to prove a point to poor people rather than pay less, get more or at the worst off, the same, just to prove that point? Are you nuts?

Where is that Jesus guy when you need him about helping out those in need?


Also at least you can agree on federally funded prenatal care and all the costs of actually having a baby within a hospital so we can at least assure that the precious life that comes with a newborn starts off in the healthiest fashion possible?

Linus wrote: I'm not against helping people. I'm against helping people that take advantage of the system. .

You must be against damn near every system instituted then...

Legal, health, defense, medical, educational...


If there is a system in place, if there are rules or guidelines - some people will find a way to exploit it, hell a person created it, a person will find a way to use it differently than intended.


Because there are some people who will exploit and rip something off, is not a legitimate reason for argument on why not to institute it.



 


Edited by *Stealth* - 26 July 2009 at 1:04am

No, you never did. You worked your way around it bringing up another, quite well thought out, idea, but never answered what I asked directly. Unless I missed a whole paragraph.



Again... emergency medicine =/= long term care. You can't compare "heart attack man" to "ghetto man who fakes pain for drugs" or "haunky that would rather spend money on alcohol then his own health".

His argument was would I kicked "heart attack man" out of my rig because he couldn't pay. "Heart attack man" is an emergent situation that needs to be dealt with.


Chronic alcoholic with thiamine deficiency? Not an emergency.


That's the difference.





PS-- You'd be surprised what people call 911 for, or consider an emergency. One example? Gas.   Again, education is the answer, not free healthcare.

Edited by Linus - 26 July 2009 at 1:31am