Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"The American Cancer Society says uninsured patients are 60 percent more likely to die within five years of their diagnosis. Without insurance, the diagnosis is twice as likely to come in the later stages of cancer."
30 years ago we had catastrophic "health insurance" to cover that.
I'm not going to lie and say Americans never had "health insurance" prior to that because it isn't true. Americans first got "health insurance" during WW II.
FDR had a wage and price freeze in place, and as an employer, if I wanted you to come work for me, I needed an advantage. I can't give you a pay raise because FDR has a wage freeze, but what I can do is offer you non-pay incentives and benefits. That's what led to vacation pay, holiday pay and "health insurance."
The "health insurance" was for catastrophic care, that is coverage for long term debilitating illnesses and injuries.
In the 1950s, emergency room visits were added to the coverage, and in the 1960s, child birth was added.
However, it did not cover routine doctor visits. That wasn't added until the early 1980s when the Great Proliferation of "health insurance" companies occurred.
The US went from 11 national and 5-6 regional "health insurance" companies to over 800 "health insurance" companies almost over night, in the space of 2-4 years. Later, after the dust settled and "health insurance" companies filed bankruptcy, or went out of business or were bought or merged, we were left with 600+ robber barons.
In the first place, how do you even know it costs $300,000?
If we applied the current health care scheme to other facets of your life, like say automobiles or homes, you'd throw a hissy-fit and be out shooting people.
Let's do that. Let's apply health care to buying a new car at a dealership.
You aren't insured? The car costs you $37,000
You have insurance through Sucme Insurance, the car costs you $24,000 and you have to pay a $2,500 deductible up front.
You have insurance through Biteme Insurance, the car costs you $19,000 with a $2,000 co-payment.
You have insurance through Medicaid, the car costs you $16,000
You wouldn't tolerate that for 3 seconds, so I don't understand why you would even think about tolerating it in health care, unless you're incredibly selfish.
I'm not joking. At Good Samaritan Hospital, someone on Aetna was billed $6,700 for child birth, they paid nothing because they'd already paid their deductible for the year, an uninsured person was charged $9,200 and for a Medicaid recipient the state of Ohio was charged just over $12,100.
So, how much does child-birth cost? We don't really know, do we?
You have a hole in the roof and every time it rains, you want the government to replace your rain-damaged carpet. Why you fix the hole in the roof?
I'm not exactly sure where you were going with thiis post.. but all I can say is you can't compare car or home insurance to health insurance. Your "health" is not a luxury.. your life is not a luxury nor is it a materialistic item.
"The American Cancer Society says uninsured patients are 60 percent more likely to die within five years of their diagnosis. Without insurance, the diagnosis is twice as likely to come in the later stages of cancer."
A doctor's office visit ranges from $15 to $45 without insurance and there are plenty of free clinics.
The issue isn't insurance, rather it's life-style and personal responsibility. Having insurance doesn't make people go to the doctor when they need, just as not having insurance doesn't either.
You still don't get it. All of US, as taxpayers, end up paying when others are uninsured, one way or another. Period. Except where people just forego treatment and die quietly in their homes or on our streets.
another thing conveniently overlooked intheir argument is they keep touting that it's FREE!!!
BUT. if a UHI is funded by income taxes than those they think are getting something for "free" are NOT getting anything for free.. they are contributing to it in their income taxes.
So.. are all the retired seniors now getting "free" money when they collect their SS check? NO.. they PAID INTO SOCIAL SECURITY while they were working!!
Same concept! The name Universal Health Care is NOT synonymous with FREE.
A) The social security being paid out today is from monies YOU pay today. Not from funds the senior paid into it.
Yes.. that is true but why? Because there were no stringent parameters set for how the government can use the SS fund and they have dipped into it for things OTHER than SS which as left us with what we have now. Should there be a tax for a UHI system we should take the lessons learned from SS and apply them.
B) Not everyone pay income tax (yes - there are those who should be but don't). I have to assume that they will not be covered under a UHC scheme
yes.. you're right, not everyone pays income taxes because they are at the poverty level.. and those people are already recieiving free health care that WORKING income tax paying citizens are paying for and NOT benefiting from.. it's called medicaid.. etc.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
