U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Agree or disagree: The U.S. health care system is "just fine".
Agree 19 22.62%
Disagree 65 77.38%
Voters: 84. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-05-2010, 12:19 PM
 
Location: on the edge of Sanity
14,269 posts, read 15,821,795 times
Reputation: 7898

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by southward bound View Post
Good questions. Does everyone deserve the "best care"?

If the premise is that everyone has the *right* to health care, then wouldn't you say that everyone has the right to the best care?
The reason why I do not like the proposed health care plan is because it definitely does NOT guarantee anyone better care or even lower costs.

As much as I support a "Medicare For All" type program, I am the first to admit that getting good medical or dental care is a hit or miss. I've paid top dollar and gotten poor results.

IMO the reason wealthy people have a much better chance of finding good medical care is mainly because they can go to private practices where insurance isn't accepted, pay for alternative medicine, procedures that aren't covered, or get personal, concierge service.

I mean, the last time I visited a surgeon (November) there were 5 or 6 other people in the waiting room. I asked "how many doctors are in this office?" and there was only one. One patient was waking up from outpatient surgery (so there was obviously an anesthesiologist too) and while the doctor was looking at my X-rays he had other people in different rooms. He was very nice, but that $275 I paid was for 5 or 10 minutes tops and an X-ray of my left foot. (and that's cheap compared to other estimates I got) Try reading your medical records some day based on what a doctor or his assistant scribbles and then the notes are transcribed. The mistakes are mind blowing.

In a earlier post, someone mentioned paying $1,000 for a dental procedure. I paid a little more for my last root canal & post and the tooth still hurts so much I can't chew on it. Once I paid several thousands for a porcelain/gold bridge that's been sitting in a plastic box for years. Since then I've worn a temporary bridge and suck my food because I got such bad headaches from the permanent bridge. Last quote to fix my mouth was over $30,000 with implants. Insurance will only pay for very limited care and there are annual limits. Same with most medical treatment. So, if I pay $30,000 will I get a guarantee? You get a 5 year warranty when you buy a car.

An insurance company usually pays for the cheapest procedure, not necessarily the best. So with or without insurance, the wealthy get better care, just like they get better cars, houses, eat in the best restaurants, have housekeepers, etc. It's just part of life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-05-2010, 12:38 PM
 
6,226 posts, read 6,811,025 times
Reputation: 3098
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
Yet, your solution is that of forced servitude.

You call him selfish because he makes a choice not solve the problems of everyone else be it for a wide range of possible reasons. He does not restrict anyone, force them, or require anything from them.

Now you on the other hand wish to force a decision to help. You restrict freedom of choice and take from him what you think he should be providing for others.

So what do we call you? A thief? A slave master? A tyrant?
.................................................. .................................................


The argument you are making would apply to all branches of government. I'm guessing you oppose social security, Medicare, food stamps, AFDC, SCHIPS, housing subsidies for the poor, environmental regulation, and anti-discrimination in employment regulations. If we follow your logic, you must also oppose a military, the police, the fire department, and public schools.
You left out the VA. Yes the government can vote itself a war but without the VA you can bet your bottom dollar the private for profit health insurance industry will not cover those soldiers under war conditions. It's printed in all their exclusion papers. An act of war, war time and even undeclared wars. B/C B/S even states that they can refuse treatment for those hurt in an undeclared war by armed insurgence, which sounds to me terrorist injuring americans on our own soil and then having your insurance company refuse treatment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2010, 01:31 PM
 
Location: Keonsha, Wisconsin
2,480 posts, read 2,865,598 times
Reputation: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by southward bound View Post
You are equating formal education with inelligence. Many people have the former, and not much of the latter.

Keep reading:



By being intelligent.



I do agree that's not affordable for millions of families.



That comes across as a bit sarcastic and antagonistic. I didn't mean to cause such upset. My attitude is that no one knows what can hit them in the course of a lifetime. That's what risk taking is. You assess your risk, and how much risk you're willing to take. But you DO have to go through that process and think through how you will cover whatever risks you assume. That's what insurance is too: They take a risk on you, hoping that you will never need so much in benefits that you eat up their profit margin, and that if you do, others in their plan will stay healthy enough to make up for it. You, on the other hand, need to know how much risk you are comfortable with and -- should the worst happen and you did not plan for it -- expect to lose all your assets to pay for it. Why would you expect others to pay for it? (There are programs that will sometimes do that, but I don't understand why people EXPECT it as if they're entitled to it.)
Your pal rush gets paid for his mouth and the nonsensical rhetoric he spews, nothing more, nothing less. He is the mouthpiece for the republican party of lies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2010, 02:20 PM
 
13,072 posts, read 11,381,913 times
Reputation: 2608
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
Yet, your solution is that of forced servitude.

You call him selfish because he makes a choice not solve the problems of everyone else be it for a wide range of possible reasons. He does not restrict anyone, force them, or require anything from them.

Now you on the other hand wish to force a decision to help. You restrict freedom of choice and take from him what you think he should be providing for others.

So what do we call you? A thief? A slave master? A tyrant?
.................................................. .................................................

I guess than you must believe that taxation to support government is robbery?

If we can't have "forced servitude" as you put it than we can't have government at all. I was against the war in Iraq. Do you think I should have had the right to not pay my taxes while that was going on? I shouldn't have, because the point is the President and Congress acquiesced in the decision to go to war and they were elected by the people. Like it or not, that's how things are decided in the USA.

The argument you are making would apply to all branches of government. I'm guessing you oppose social security, Medicare, food stamps, AFDC, SCHIPS, housing subsidies for the poor, environmental regulation, and anti-discrimination in employment regulations. If we follow your logic, you must also oppose a military, the police, the fire department, and public schools.

All modern nations have a social safety net. The European Countries, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and now even Taiwan have universal healthcare. America is the only modern industrialized nation in the world without such a system.

I realize some people hold what I would characterize as the sort of extreme libertarian ideas that you do. Suffice it to say, your viewpoint is a minority one. Unfortunately for you, decisions involving the budget and taxation are made by majority rule here.

I guess you can maintain that the rest of us who are pushing this universal healthcare thing are thieves, slavemasters, and tyrants. The point is though we've taken a vote and you have lost the argument--or at least you will very shortly.
All government? Government exist for the defense of nation (which benefits all and to which no single person can do themselves) and to safe guard the protections of the Constitution (again, another specific to which requires more than a singularity to handle). A person can not defend themselves against an invasion by another country alone. A person can not stand against in defense of their liberty to that of a state that violates their liberty. Those two specific roles serve all completely. It is the foundation to which this country exists.

Past that? No, I think the government takes money it has no right to take. Social security is not constitutional, nor is medicare, welfare, etc...

Those are schemes created to thieve from the people to serve various groups self interests. The government takes SS because it thinks I need to put money aside for my retirement and the like. It tells me that It knows better how to save and spend that money. It takes money for medicare and tells me that it is more responsible in attending to my management of my health than I am. It takes money from me and tells me it is better placed to decide how it should be spent when it concerns the welfare of others.

So no, I do not think past the two roles I listed that the government or more specifically YOU (because these schemes are empowered by the self interest of masses or that of the obnoxious individual) have the right to decide for me. I know what is best for me, you do not.

We are supposed to live in a free country. Individual liberty is the focal point to which this nation stands. You can live as you choose, spend your money as you choose, and more importantly live with the consequences of those choices just like I live with mine. That is true freedom, that is truly being responsible for yourself and your fellow man. No right is more important than an individuals right to choose for themselves. If they do not retain that right, then they are nothing more than slaves waiting for their masters direction.


I would like to focus specifically on this:

Quote:
I guess you can maintain that the rest of us who are pushing this universal healthcare thing are thieves, slavemasters, and tyrants. The point is though we've taken a vote and you have lost the argument--or at least you will very shortly.
This is the definition of oppressive behavior. You have stated in these words that you care not of an individuals right, freedom of choice, and the liberty to which this nation stands. You disregard them with simple claims of having a larger voice and think this justifies the disregard of the minority as it concerns individual rights. That comment defines the role of a thief, a slave master, and a tyrant.

And you wonder why people speak of revolution? Maybe you should open up your history book and read about how and why this country was founded.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2010, 02:24 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
4,085 posts, read 7,641,224 times
Reputation: 2646
What else would you expect from a fat drug-addicted pig??? It's like a drunkard saying that the alcohol content of everclear is "just fine"...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2010, 03:13 PM
 
6,760 posts, read 10,398,837 times
Reputation: 2996
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike from back east View Post
I don't recall reading anywhere that it was any sort of government mandate.
The HMO Act of 1973 required all businesses with 25 or more employees to provide HMO coverage, and allowed a tax deduction to businesses but not individuals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2010, 03:23 PM
 
20,812 posts, read 38,988,898 times
Reputation: 18999
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXboomerang View Post
The HMO Act of 1973 required all businesses with 25 or more employees to provide HMO coverage, and allowed a tax deduction to businesses but not individuals.
Thanks! Didn't know that. Hmmm... 1973.... Nixon was POTUS, and his conversations with John Dean were recorded ... to the effect the two of them were discussing that the Kaiser bunch had a scheme to make more money in health care by delivering less care for the money charged, i.e., the HMO scheme. Sounds about right for politics in America.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2010, 03:27 PM
 
Location: In the Axis of Time
164 posts, read 268,361 times
Reputation: 142
Of course it's the best in the world..... If you can pay for it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2010, 03:58 PM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
16,134 posts, read 20,737,586 times
Reputation: 8282
Poor Rush, I guess Viagra and Oxy don't mix well
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2010, 04:06 PM
 
Location: Holly Springs, NC
300 posts, read 564,644 times
Reputation: 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by 01Snake View Post
How about the "poor black man" goes out and gets a job so be can get insurance like the rest of us.
How condescending! I hope you never find yourself in a position where you lose your health insurance and have to pay for it out of pocket or are labeled as having a pre-existing condition and see your rates triple over a five year period.

There are plenty of people who have jobs that cannot afford health insurance. Mine is now close to $13k a year and I still pay plenty out of pocket on top of that. Not too many people can afford that, can they? It's not a matter of giving up cable or a cell phone in order to pay for health insurance as I've heard some people suggest, it's a matter of wanting to be able to eat and keep a roof over your head, too.

For all those people out there who have group coverage at a low rate, I'm truly happy for you. I used to be one of them. Unfortunately, due to surgery and unforeseen complications I was not able to resume my previous position and had to find a new job. I lost my health insurance when they chose not to renew it because of my pre-existing condition. This can happen to you if you lose your job, then COBRA benefits expire, then your rates can go through the roof. It is a potential problem for everyone and if you don't realize this can happen to you, I suggest you open your eyes and educate yourself on the system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top