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.
It might be a good thing for those Oregonians but I can't imagine how this is sustainable???
You do realize that most every other industrial country in the world provides universal free health care for all of their citizens, right? Even a lot of small third world countries, like Cuba and the Central African Republic manage it. If the Central African Republic can provide universal free healthcare to 100% of their citizens, do you really have to ask if it can be sustainable for Oregon to provide free healthcare to 26% of Oregonians?
Here is a hint for you. If OHP shut down tomorrow, 26% of the healthcare jobs in Oregon would go with it. What do you think it would do for the state's economy to lose about 100,000 of some of the best paying jobs in Oregon?
Here's a hint for you, Cloudy. A leading cause of bankruptcy among America's middle class is medical bills. That's not the case in other countries; their middle classes aren't being bled dry to pay for those who can't or won't support themselves. So no, it's not sustainable as it's currently funded in this country.
You do realize that most every other industrial country in the world provides universal free health care for all of their citizens, right? Even a lot of small third world countries, like Cuba and the Central African Republic manage it. If the Central African Republic can provide universal free healthcare to 100% of their citizens, do you really have to ask if it can be sustainable for Oregon to provide free healthcare to 26% of Oregonians?
Here is a hint for you. If OHP shut down tomorrow, 26% of the healthcare jobs in Oregon would go with it. What do you think it would do for the state's economy to lose about 100,000 of some of the best paying jobs in Oregon?
I don't think that's what would happen Cloudy. I'm sorry but as a "numbers" professional I don't see how this is sustainable.
Here's just a little bit of information from a 2-minute google search on the Central African Republic. I think at this point I am going to stop reading your posts. You're confrontational. I like discourse. But prefer educated, measured, and intelligent debates.
Despite its significant mineral deposits and other resources, such as uranium reserves, crude oil, gold, diamonds, cobalt, lumber, and hydropower,[8] as well as significant quantities of arable land, the Central African Republic is among the ten poorest countries in the world. As of 2015, according to the Human Development Index (HDI), the country had the lowest level of human development, ranking 188th out of 188 countries.[5] It is also estimated to be the unhealthiest country[9] as well as the worst country in which to be young.
Healthcare
Main article: Health in the Central African Republic
Mothers and babies aged between 0 and 5 years are lining up in a Health Post at Begoua, a district of Bangui, waiting for the two drops of the oral polio vaccine.
The largest hospitals in the country are located in the Bangui district. As a member of the World Health Organization, the Central African Republic receives vaccination assistance, such as a 2014 intervention for the prevention of a measles epidemic.[80] In 2007, female life expectancy at birth was 48.2 years and male life expectancy at birth was 45.1 years.[81]
Women's health is poor in the Central African Republic. As of 2010, the country had the 4th highest maternal mortality rate in the world.[82] The total fertility rate in 2014 was estimated at 4.46 children born/woman.[8] Approximately 25% of women had undergone female genital mutilation.[83] Many births in the country are guided by traditional birth attendants, who often have little or no formal training.[84]
Malaria is endemic in the Central African Republic, and one of the leading causes of death.[85] According to 2009 estimates, the HIV/AIDS prevalence rate is about 4.7% of the adult population (ages 15–49).[86] Government expenditure on health was US$20 (PPP) per person in 2006[81] and 10.9% of total government expenditure in 2006.[81] There was only around 1 physician for every 20,000 persons in 2009.[87]
I don't think that's what would happen Cloudy. I'm sorry but as a "numbers" professional I don't see how this is sustainable.
Here's just a little bit of information from a 2-minute google search on the Central African Republic. I think at this point I am going to stop reading your posts. You're confrontational. I like discourse. But prefer educated, measured, and intelligent debates.
Despite its significant mineral deposits and other resources, such as uranium reserves, crude oil, gold, diamonds, cobalt, lumber, and hydropower,[8] as well as significant quantities of arable land, the Central African Republic is among the ten poorest countries in the world. As of 2015, according to the Human Development Index (HDI), the country had the lowest level of human development, ranking 188th out of 188 countries.[5] It is also estimated to be the unhealthiest country[9] as well as the worst country in which to be young.
Healthcare
Main article: Health in the Central African Republic
Mothers and babies aged between 0 and 5 years are lining up in a Health Post at Begoua, a district of Bangui, waiting for the two drops of the oral polio vaccine.
The largest hospitals in the country are located in the Bangui district. As a member of the World Health Organization, the Central African Republic receives vaccination assistance, such as a 2014 intervention for the prevention of a measles epidemic.[80] In 2007, female life expectancy at birth was 48.2 years and male life expectancy at birth was 45.1 years.[81]
Women's health is poor in the Central African Republic. As of 2010, the country had the 4th highest maternal mortality rate in the world.[82] The total fertility rate in 2014 was estimated at 4.46 children born/woman.[8] Approximately 25% of women had undergone female genital mutilation.[83] Many births in the country are guided by traditional birth attendants, who often have little or no formal training.[84]
Malaria is endemic in the Central African Republic, and one of the leading causes of death.[85] According to 2009 estimates, the HIV/AIDS prevalence rate is about 4.7% of the adult population (ages 15–49).[86] Government expenditure on health was US$20 (PPP) per person in 2006[81] and 10.9% of total government expenditure in 2006.[81] There was only around 1 physician for every 20,000 persons in 2009.[87]
The point still stands, almost the entire world now has free universal healthcare. Wondering if free healthcare in Oregon is sustainable or not is as silly as wondering if free public schools are sustainable, or free public roads are sustainable. It's already proven they are. Free public schools were invented in the US. Free public libraries were invented in the US. Free fire protection was invented in the US. Now we are playing catch up to the rest of the world for free healthcare. That is just sad.
There's no such thing as free health care, just like there's no such thing as free public schools, although I suppose from the vantage point of someone who has never paid for anything, it would seem that way. Someone pays for those schools, those roads, that health care, and that subsidized housing. The present tax structure in the U.S. can't sustain this "free health care." If it could, the middle class wouldn't be going bankrupt in record numbers because of medical bills while the unproductive class gets everything handed to them.
And it's complete BS, as usual, that "almost the entire world has free health care." And trying to hold the situation in the Central African Republic up as somehow superior to that of the United States is a bit beyond silly -- ridiculous, perhaps.
Last edited by Metlakatla; 03-10-2018 at 10:47 PM..
There's no such thing as free health care, just like there's no such thing as free public schools, although I suppose from the vantage point of someone who has never paid for anything, it would seem that way. Someone pays for those schools, those roads, that health care, and that subsidized housing. The present tax structure in the U.S. can't sustain this "free health care." If it could, the middle class wouldn't be going bankrupt in record numbers because of medical bills.
And it's complete BS, as usual, that "almost the entire world has free health care." Trying to hold the situation in the Central African Republic up as somehow superior to that of the United States is a bit beyond silly -- ridiculous, perhaps.
Of course there is no thing as free health care and I'm sure that the person who posted that realizes that if an individual does not pay for healthcare someone else does, i.e. the government or their employer. I believe that the point they were trying to make is that all first world countries except the US have some form of universal healthcare, and while most are achieved through taxation and a single payer system, much like our medicare system; some have a hybrid private/public system. But the point is they provide care to all of their residents, healthcare in those countries is considered a right not a privilege.
Of the top 50 of highly developed nations, of the top 33 all have universal healthcare, the only one without it is the US. The remaining countries (34-50) have some form of universal healthcare, are developing one, or have one that is not fully functional
As far as claiming that we can't afford it; the United States spends a dramatically greater percentage of GDP on healthcare than other countries with universal health care systems. Yet, the U.S. covers fewer people, provides less care, and there are worse public health outcomes https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/...ther-countries
The problem is that there are too many lobbyists out there convincing elected officials to keep the current system no matter how bad it is because their profits depend on it.
Of course there is no thing as free health care and I'm sure that the person who posted that realizes that if an individual does not pay for healthcare someone else does, i.e. the government or their employer. I believe that the point they were trying to make is that all first world countries except the US have some form of universal healthcare, and while most are achieved through taxation and a single payer system, much like our medicare system; some have a hybrid private/public system. But the point is they provide care to all of their residents, healthcare in those countries is considered a right not a privilege.
Of the top 50 of highly developed nations, of the top 33 all have universal healthcare, the only one without it is the US. The remaining countries (34-50) have some form of universal healthcare, are developing one, or have one that is not fully functional
As far as claiming that we can't afford it; the United States spends a dramatically greater percentage of GDP on healthcare than other countries with universal health care systems. Yet, the U.S. covers fewer people, provides less care, and there are worse public health outcomes https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/...ther-countries
The problem is that there are too many lobbyists out there convincing elected officials to keep the current system no matter how bad it is because their profits depend on it.
My point was that under our current tax structure, it's not going to work for many more years. I was not exactly advocating against universal health care, if you'll notice, and certainly wasn't trying to say that first world countries don't have it. One more time, my point was that there's something seriously wrong with a system where many in the middle class are going bankrupt due to medical costs yet are expected to pay for healthcare for the poor. In case you missed it, my point was that free health care isn't sustainable under the current model of the middle class carrying the poor. I really don't need some silly lecture on how other countries do it. I'm well aware of that.
Quote:
But the point is they provide care to all of their residents, healthcare in those countries is considered a right not a privilege.
Again, my point was that the Oregon Health Plan doesn't accomplish this. Health care in Oregon is only a "right" if you're very low income.
Last edited by Metlakatla; 03-11-2018 at 12:00 AM..
My point was that under our current tax structure, it's not going to work for many more years. I was not exactly advocating against universal health care, if you'll notice, and certainly wasn't trying to say that first world countries don't have it. One more time, my point was that there's something seriously wrong with a system where many in the middle class are going bankrupt due to medical costs yet are expected to pay for healthcare for the poor. In case you missed it, my point was that free health care isn't sustainable under the current model of the middle class carrying the poor.
As in any country the people with the most disposable income pay for the poor, I'm not sure how you could change that? You could have a VAT but the people who consume the most will still be the middle class and the wealthy, and the tax revenue will pay for the poor as well as everyone else.
I think the goal is to reduce the overall cost of healthcare, at least by reducing administrative costs and provide everyone with at least enough medical benefits that they won't die of some curable condition or suffer needlessly. I have no issue with people who have the means buying supplemental policies if they feel they need them.
Switzerland doesn't have single payer & they use private physicians and hospitals, but premiums are capped at 8-10% of salary with a maximum $2500 deductible. People who want to can spend up to another $450-$500 to buy supplemental policies to cover extra services or absorb some of the deductible. The policies for the poor are supplemented or paid for in full by the government. But they do have an individual mandate and if you don't have coverage and show up at the hospital you will be treated but billed for up to two years of premiums that you failed to pay.
I think we could do it if we had the will to but everytime someone starts talking about it it ends up being called "socialism" and that's the end of the discussion.
As in any country the people with the most disposable income pay for the poor, I'm not sure how you could change that? You could have a VAT but the people who consume the most will still be the middle class and the wealthy, and the tax revenue will pay for the poor as well as everyone else.
In what other countries are medical bills the most common cause of bankruptcy for the middle class? And if you'll actually notice, the middle class are not the ones with the "most disposable income" in this country. The ones with "the most disposable income" actually contribute very little to the precious poor. You've pretty much twisted what I've been trying to say by throwing the wealthy into the mix.
You keep typing at me like I'm here advocating against universal health care, but that's not the case (and you aren't really getting that I'm only talking about the present reality of the health care situation and not a theoretical "should be" situation). Again, what I'm saying is that something's got to give when people are going bankrupt over medical bills, yet those same people are expected to shoulder the costs for the poor. This isn't a social issue for me; it's an economic one, and I really don't see how anyone can look at the current situation and claim that it's sustainable.
Last edited by Metlakatla; 03-11-2018 at 01:30 AM..
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.
