Americans set to get standardised/universal healthcare

[Gorgon]

Denmark is in the black. We have been for a long time, we have no foreign debt and have universal health care, Britain, Sweden etc. aren't about to go bankrupt either so don't tell me it's not possible, or feasible.

 

Only difference is that here the doctors have 2 cars instead of 4, and that we are willing to pay for comprehensive public health care.

Edited April 26, 2009 by Gorgon

[Asol]

Denmark is in the black. We have been for a long time, we have no foreign debt and have universal health care, Britain, Sweden etc. aren't about to go bankrupt either so don't tell me it's not possible, or feasible.

 

I guess that was directed at me since I might be the only one against it, 'Denmark, Britain, Sweden ect are well off with no debt'

That is great but it doesn't help. The US is not in that financial condition, has 300+ million citizens and obscene debt.

Edited April 26, 2009 by Asol

[Pidesco]

Denmark is in the black. We have been for a long time, we have no foreign debt and have universal health care, Britain, Sweden etc. aren't about to go bankrupt either so don't tell me it's not possible, or feasible.

 

I guess that was directed at me since I might be the only one against it, 'Denmark, Britain, Sweden ect are well off with no debt'

That is great but it doesn't help. The US is not in that financial condition, has 300+ million citizens and obscene debt.

 

So what you're saying is that bad management in other areas makes universal health care not feasible in the US?

[Wrath of Dagon]

The problem with the US is that we have an extremely corrupt government and a population that always wants to have its cake and eat it too. So although there's definitely a healthcare crisis, I'm very pessimistic that government intervention will improve the situation. You only have to look at the Medicare fraud rate to see that.

[Darth InSidious]

Universal health care is fantasy induction, I wish the average dodo would look in the mirror and see the only 'free' health care provider anyone can give him.

And here we have proof positive that democracy is inherently a very, very bad idea.

 

Taxation without representation is the way foward.

Edited April 27, 2009 by Darth InSidious

[Asol]

Universal health care is fantasy induction, I wish the average dodo would look in the mirror and see the only 'free' health care provider anyone can give him.

And here we have proof positive that democracy is inherently a very, very bad idea.

 

Taxation without representation is the way foward.

 

It seems like you meant to insult me but if so you inverted the principle. You get your 'rights' such as they are from the rule of law.

If you hated my opinion democracy is actually the best way to marginalize it. A responsible opinion will be drowned in the 'free=give me, i deserve it sentiment'. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep discussing whats for dinner. Majority rule has nothing to do with 'rights' and 'ethics'...

 

In terms of this scenario the sheep is the general youth and future generations, taxation without representation is what you do to them with all this beg and borrow and heap debt on debt.

Edited April 27, 2009 by Asol

[thepixiesrock]

Raise my business tax?

[Hurlshort]

Actually, poor people get health care in the US. Hospitals and clinics cannot refuse service to anyone.

 

 

They do get a mountain of debt though.

 

 

But why did that heavy metal guy die a few years back because he couldnt afford an operation?

 

Did he need a new liver? I'm not sure what all the rules are, but there is a limited amount of organs available in the country, and so there are ways to get on the list. Money helps, but if I remember correctly, people who have drank themselves into a lousy liver are lower priority than people with other issues.

 

Do other countries just hand out hearts and livers and kidneys like candy?

[Rosbjerg]

Did he need a new liver? I'm not sure what all the rules are, but there is a limited amount of organs available in the country, and so there are ways to get on the list. Money helps, but if I remember correctly, people who have drank themselves into a lousy liver are lower priority than people with other issues.

 

Do other countries just hand out hearts and livers and kidneys like candy?

 

Of course not.. and I think every country prioritizes as well - the only difference is that in some countries, money doesn't help you get a liver/any organ faster..

[Humodour]

Universal health care is fantasy induction, I wish the average dodo would look in the mirror and see the only 'free' health care provider anyone can give him.

 

You're right: universal healthcare is a pipe dream. Why did all those silly countries-that-aren't-America bother implementing it? The fact that's it's been working for decades now is an illusion. Soon the debt fairy will come to collect all in one lump sum!

 

Of course you think this is untouchable. What aspect of 'working for decades' says sustainability to anyone in todays climate?

The unavoidable fact is that an ounce of prevention(responsibility) while free to begin with is worth a pound of cure. Why meet the demand for free pounds of cure except to capture the vote of the irresponsible. Another 'obama promise' to dig people out of the hole they dug themselves while piling on ever more debt.

 

If I recall, every single country with universal healthcare is in less government debt than America is, per capita, and also their governments spend the same amount of money on healthcare as America, per capita.

 

So much for that, mate.

[Kaftan Barlast]

To be serious for a while, I think that any system below universal healthcare is inhumane, imoral and unethical. To let personal wealth be a factor in wether a person lives or dies is bad enough, but to actually make it into a bussiness is just plain wrong.

[Rosbjerg]

That being said, It seems to me that the majority of Americans don't want universal healthcare - and as such they shouldn't be forced into it..

 

And the few Danes I know that have moved to America all say they are quite happy with the system and that it works about as well as ours (something are better - other things are worse etc) (note, of course none of them are in any way poor, so their opinion is pretty jaded)

 

Universal Healthcare isn't always the answer, but helping out those that really can't afford insurance is imo.

 

A system of choice is perhaps the best answer.. A social net to ensure that the unfortunate doesn't get left behind and a system of personal insurance that allows the wealthier to have acces to alternative treatments, I would personally be very much against that kind of system as I think it's unfair.. but as a compromise I would prefer it to no/minimum coverage for the poor.

[Meshugger]

Denmark is in the black. We have been for a long time, we have no foreign debt and have universal health care, Britain, Sweden etc. aren't about to go bankrupt either so don't tell me it's not possible, or feasible.

 

I guess that was directed at me since I might be the only one against it, 'Denmark, Britain, Sweden ect are well off with no debt'

That is great but it doesn't help. The US is not in that financial condition, has 300+ million citizens and obscene debt.

 

"There is no such thing as free lunch"

 

True, UHC is payed through taxes of course. But IIRC, studies have shown that the healthcare costs are lower in countries with UHC, thus the government would save money.

 

That's big would though, as i have no idea on the bureaucracy is in the US.

[Monte Carlo]

Federal programmes in the US have a mixed record, managing a universal healthcare system will be rolling a very big rock up a very tall mountain.

 

Obama aspires to a European social democratic model, i.e. he's moving against the grain of the American system. I mentioned this in my first post. Lefties have a tendency to impose centrist, top-down solutions - in a country like the US this is destined to fail. Enabling individual states to dwell on the actualitie whilst the centre provides broad guidelines and the funding would have more traction from my understanding of US politics.

 

Selling the notion of a healthy population = more productive nation should be a no-brainer, but the US health insurance lobby sees that as a secondary outcome compared to profits.

 

Cheers

MC

[Wrath of Dagon]

Actually our population is as healthy as anyone's, and most health problems are due to overindulgence, not anything else. Other things which play into this, we're bankrupt, we spend more on defense than anyone else by far, 50% of healthcare costs occur in the last few weeks of life, we have a huge non-productive underclass, we have Medicaid which pays for the poor, Medicare pays for the old, VA pays for veterans, and many localities but not all have a very extensive public health system. I believe something like half of the population is already on public healthcare.

Edited April 27, 2009 by Wrath of Dagon

[Gfted1]

*sigh*

 

This is just another pile of deadbeats Ill have to flip the bill for. Repeat after me, its not my responsibility to raise your sorry ass.

 

As an aside, I do find the mentality of different countries interesting. Those of you born and raised in that type of environment eat it up like candy and are always the first to find reason why you should support others. Very touching. I wonder if its a byproduct of two world wars.

[Monte Carlo]

^ Gfted1, that's all very well until you have a wife with a problematic pregnancy and the specialists tell you that protracted treatment is going to cost you a half a million dollars. Which you don't have. Are you a deadbeat? Would I resent paying for you to have access to that care free at point of delivery? Actually, I wouldn't.

 

Or would you go all Spartan on us and cast the infant into a pit?

 

I'm not that much older than some of you, but I'm older enough to have kids, elderly relatives and the start of some annoying health issues of my own. Sure, it gives me a different perspective.

 

Sure, the unproductive underclass issue is another thing that requires addressing. Traditionally, left-of-centre parties don't go there, relying on such people as their client state natural voters. But it's another issue entirely, Europe has precisely the same problem. Primary healthcare, free at the point of delivery, should in fact reduce overall healthcare costs via prevention strategies. Or, to use a more topical example, how many Swine Flu sufferers are shivering it out at home because they can't afford a trip to a clinic, infecting several hundred others before it's picked up?

 

To reiterate - Universal healthcare ain't perfect. I'm not even advocating full-blown NHS USA. What I'm suggesting is a critical safety net such as the one I describe. I repeat - your health insurance industry has a stranglehold on this that it won't release for reasons of utter self-interest.

 

Cheers

MC

[Gorgon]

The formation of the welfare state was in all likelihood the result of two world wars.

 

Provisions for health care regardless of ability to pay is the prevailing formation among rich countries though, the US is the odd man out here.

[Monte Carlo]

^ The UK Welfare State was unashamedly the product of WW2 - a left-wing government used the shared experience of all social classes who had fought together to argue for a more socialised, 'progressive' system. And they won that particular battle, setting socio-political parameters that remain until this day.

 

The USA wasn't bombed or occupied and was a relative land of plenty. The post-WW2 US baby boomer generation will probably go down as the most wealthy, cossetted, spoilt and wealthy people this planet ever produced. No wonder universal socialised healthcare wasn't at the top of the agenda.

 

The 21st century is looking, by comparison, to be pretty dystopic. It appears to be concentrating people's minds in the USA.

[Gorgon]

Gifted feels no sense of community unless it involves going somewhere and blowing something up. That's fine, we can't force it on him, or the us.

 

[Tongue in cheek] They're animals anyway so let them destroy themselves. [Tongue in cheek]

[Aristes]

Where I live, we have one of the highest life expectancies in the world. In fact, my city was cited by National Geographic some time ago as being one of the top three areas for longevity in the world. I have a major, world renowned medical center nearby, and enjoy sufficient insurance for my medical needs at the moment. I've been in the emergency room when folks with no medical insurance have been treated. So folks can talk about how dreadful things are in the United States, but it's not like some poor bastard with a medical emergency is kicked to the curb.

 

And countries who have paid virtually nothing by comparison for their own defense over the past several decades should be ashamed for citing American debt. I'm not saying my country is perfect. I'm merely saying that these issues are more complex than the two second message board posts would seem to indicate. Monte Carlo is the only person who has taken the time to look at it without trying to castigate the US.

 

Everyone makes decisions. Every country makes decisions as well. Now, to be fair, I think the overwhelming hubris of doctors in the US, not to mention the outright greed, has probably been the best case for UHC. However, I don't want to aim at the health care industry and end up shooting myself in the foot. There is no evidence that the excellent health-care I have received will improve with the government running it from top down. Poor folks with emergencies do get treatment. No matter their debt. No matter their social status. No matter how much money they have. That is sufficient for my conscience.

 

I'll be honest, I hate the idea that some folks don't have comprehensive health-care. I don't sit in my house on a mountain of cash laughing at poor people while lighting my cigars with $100 bills and drinking my coffee out of the bronzed skulls of the impoverished. I want everyone to be healthy. ...But the world in which we live is unfair, and sometimes we make it worse by ill-conceived plans to make it better. We should always try to do the right thing, but the system we have has served us well. I don't want to throw over our system for UHC until some of our more egregious problems are solved. Yes, some people get better health care than others in the United States. Newsflash, some people get better treatment, no matter the cause, everywhere. At least in the United States, the reason someone gets better treatment is because they have provided for the service through their own work. That's better than a bureaucrat in Washington deciding my fate.

 

As far as socialized health care? There's a long road between here and there in the United States. If it become law, then I guess it becomes law. I'll abide by it.

[Gorgon]

And countries who have paid virtually nothing by comparison for their own defense over the past several decades should be ashamed for citing American debt.

 

You overspent on defense to maintain a position of absolute supremacy. I suppose as demagogues go the US is better than the Ruskies or the Chinese, but the US didn't place the majority of it's medium range nuclear missiles smack in the middle of western Europe out of altruistic motives. Had push actually come to shove in the cold war Europe would have been a wasteland. And with a loon like Reagan with the finger on the trigger no less.

[Arkan]

To those that are against universal health care:

 

Are you also against public education, ie, you can't afford to pay for your child to go through k-12? Tough.

 

Are you opposed to public fire departments; would you rather have to pay them to come put out your house fires?

 

Are you opposed to Social Security?

 

Is your argument against UHC one of socialism or practicality?

[Gfted1]

^ Gfted1, that's all very well until you have a wife with a problematic pregnancy and the specialists tell you that protracted treatment is going to cost you a half a million dollars. Which you don't have. Are you a deadbeat? Would I resent paying for you to have access to that care free at point of delivery? Actually, I wouldn't.

 

MC, I know you have a vested interest and I dont mean this to belittle the situation you went through but again, why is that my problem? I can link you to hundreds of sad cases and while I agree they are sad that doesnt mean I want to take away from my family to raise your family (not you).

 

Gifted feels no sense of community unless it involves going somewhere and blowing something up. That's fine, we can't force it on him, or the us.

 

Yay, nice cheap shot.

 

To those that are against universal health care:

 

Are you also against public education, ie, you can't afford to pay for your child to go through k-12? Tough.

 

Are you opposed to public fire departments; would you rather have to pay them to come put out your house fires?

 

Are you opposed to Social Security?

 

Is your argument against UHC one of socialism or practicality?

 

1) Who cant afford school K-12? Its free.

2) You do pay for fire departments in your State/city taxes.

3) The same Social Security you pay into with the expectation of getting your money back when you retire?

4) Both. Not only can we not affors to pay for 300+ million people I dont feel I should be forced to.

[Aristes]

Those are silly arguments. Because, if you are struck by a medical emergency, you will receive care. In other words, if your house is on fire, the fire department will come put out the fire. However, you will receive better care if you have health insurance. If you have fire insurance, not only with the fire department put out the fire, but you'll probably have your home rebuilt.

 

Because, if you are struck by a medical emergency, you will receive care. In other words, your child will receive free education k through 12. However, you will receive better care if you have health insurance. If you provide for your child's education, you need not use public education. Instead, you can send your kids to private schools or augment their schooling with private tutors.

 

...And the argument that "well, you're okay with this, so why not this?" is the epitome of the slippery slope. Ha! And folks scoff at slippery slope arguments.

 

To be fair, however, my arguments are practical. I'm not implacable. If you convince me I'm wrong, I won't refuse to budge.