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.
All our legislators get free healthcare and we don't mind paying for them and their families.
Healthcare Version O, seems to preclude the very important relationship between a patient and their doctor. Medicine is an art and a science and long term familiarity of a patient provides a doctor a reference point to evaluate changes over time. To see a new healthcare provider each visit is not the way it was meant to work.
It seems 'healthcare' as politicized today is treated as a cost only situation and not as a patient doctor relationship.
Friend in BE whose hubby has Chron's disease gets free healthcare but cannot get meds that would help him and are approved here.
A Polish doctor comes here and ends up as an xray tech.
Good luck with that free 'healthcare' in other countries.
When the president tells us, if the red pill does the same thing as the blue pill and the blue pill is cheaper then we mandate the blue pill be used by everyone. When your president demonstrates his total lack of understanding as to how medicine works it si best to not believe anyhting that he says.
When the legislation's main architect, a bio ethicist and tells you the president really meant you can keep your doctor if you want to pay more, when he said you can keep your doctor,.PERIOD! We know we are in trouble when that unethical statement comes from an ethicist who will be incharge of your healthcare.
This means the government is not the best caretaker and should not be trusted with your life.
The disaster that is obamadontcare has created the energy to make the changes needed to our already great medical care. There is no going back.
Remedies for access and care have been placed under harry reid's pet rock. Actually acces has been quite good to healthcare. Novel approaches arising in reaction to obamacare have promise. We just need the media and harry reid to allow them air time.
When lies are required to fool people into thinking that sweeping legislation with the name ppaca has anything to do with healthcare and passed without benefit of being tempered in argument, it is not healthcare they have passed. That environment does not allow an honest discussion to move healthcare forward.
Big pharma has the resources to do better but finding a drug is still serendipity and uber expensive despite thru put screening and computer chemistry. Management at big pharma rarely appoints leaders with vision, they instead choose placeholders and gauge success by ensuring they keep up with the middle of the pharma pack. they recycle rejects from other companies and otherwise waste human and financial resources. Still they produce life saving drugs but imagine what they could do.
to truely work on improving the US healthcare the media and journalist have to stir the pot not as the propaganda machines they have become but as meadiators or patient advocates in between legislators and the people.
Great damage has been done by the absence of political argument, suppression of ideas and lack of journalist integrity.
The OP's choice of words was poor, but I know he doesn't expect doctors and nurses to work for free.
The difference being, that he didn't stop and think, and so didn't remember that the doctors and nurses would HAVE to work for free is the health care was going to be free.
Or if they didn't work for free, then the money to pay them, would have to be stolen from someone else.
Liberals frequently make these mistakes.
It's the hardcore liberals for whom they aren't mistakes, that you have to watch out for.
Everyone should have some sort of healthcare plan.
Of course.
Just as everyone should have some sort of food plan, and a water plan, and a shelter plan, and a plan for breathing.
All of these things are vital to life. Health care is probably the least among them... though still vital, since sooner or later nearly everybody is going to come down with some serious disease, or have some seious injury from something.
Glad we got that cleared up. Actually, it's hard to imagine anyone believing otherwise.
The difference being, that he didn't stop and think, and so didn't remember that the doctors and nurses would HAVE to work for free is the health care was going to be free.
Or if they didn't work for free, then the money to pay them, would have to be stolen from someone else.
Liberals frequently make these mistakes.
It's the hardcore liberals for whom they aren't mistakes, that you have to watch out for.
I dunno, acorn. When I see 'free healthcare,' I'm smart enough to know that the person means 'universal healthcare.' I'm not here to bash anyone, liberals nor conservatives, so your results may vary.
Given many countries have either free or inexpensive healthcare, should Americans be entitled to free healthcare?
Quote:
Questionable Premise
If you have sufficient background information to know that a premise is questionable or unlikely to be acceptable, then you use this fallacy if you accept an argument based on that premise. This broad category of fallacies of argumentation includes appeal to authority, false dilemma, inconsistency, lying, stacking the deck, straw man, suppressed evidence, and many others
Your premise is refuted here, as healthcare is not free, and it is not inexpensive
Last update 25.10.11 Extracted on 06.01.13 Source of Data Eurostat UNIT Euro per inhabitant ICHA_HC Health care expenditure ICHA_HP All providers of health care
UNIT Euro per inhabitant ICHA_HF Private household out-of-pocket expenditure
Romania .......63.95 Germany....... 403.33 United States....... 697.13
Norway .......805.54 Switzerland....... 1,590.18
Source: Database EuroStat: The European Commission of the European Union.
Thanks to Obamacare, the private household out-of-pocket expenditures will be increasing for Americans.
This graph from the OECD also refutes your entire premise...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jedi000
Here are a few questions to consider:
1. How would it impact the economy and job creation?
It will increase unemployment and slow true economic growth, creating massive distress for Americans.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jedi000
2. What kind of structural changes to the healthcare industry are necessary?
Free Market reforms are necessary to reduce the cost of healthcare, which will in turn reduce the cost of health plan coverage.
Since healthcare is intra-State Commerce, such reforms must take place at the State level, although the pseudo-federal government can rescind regulations that impede the Free Market and drive up the cost of healthcare, which in turn drives up the cost of health plan coverage.
The government may also levy special taxes against hospitals to coerce Free Market reforms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jedi000
3. The effect on illegal immigration?
No effect......since you have already claimed that healthcare is free or inexpensive in other States, then illegals would be stupid to come to the US, right?
1] Under the Free Market, the cost really was $55,000;
2] Since the hospital accepted $11,000, then that is proof that Market value of services rendered never was $55,000 and that the hospital was attempting to price-gouge.
3] It's possible that the price of $11,000 is still inflated.....
...unless and until their are Free Market reforms in place we well never know the real cost....
Mircea
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.
