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.
I haven't researched this particular kids' case, though I will yield to the dr. from Iowa who says the parents should do everything they can to get this kid treatment.
For all I know, I may be paying for his treatment, if his family has the same insurance as I do, and the ins. pays for it after all.
I was disagreeing with your argument that roads, fire protection, police protection are "infrastructure", therefore it's OK to pay taxes for them, but health care is not, therefore shouldn't be tax supported. I was pointing out we pay taxes for a lot of non-infrastructure facilities and services.
Last edited by Katarina Witt; 02-12-2010 at 09:23 PM..
Reason: Typo
No, it isn't.
Budgeting is using the money you have most effectively.
Profit is extracting ever-increasing amounts of money from a resource (sick people, in this case).
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCyank
So you think enough money will be collected to pay for every procedure and test for everyone? That's what money has to do with it...unless you want to pay the doctors with chickens.
Enough money will be collected because the rates will be set by the same entity that collects the money.
I don't think you get it: with insurance companies out of the picture, there is no driving force to raise costs. The only reason medical care is so expensive is because insurance companies want to squeeze doctors and patients for every last dollar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinstyler
That is infrastructure. Please try to stick to the point. I can tell you believe this to be a clever remark, but it's very fouled logic. Stick to the topic of Healthcare. You are simply arguing that because I gave an inch, I should give a yard. That makes no sense.
Health care is a part of basic societal infrastructure in every other industrialized nation on the planet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinstyler
The aforementioned items are impersonal infrastructure. They don't have the same "built in" problems that healthcare does.
What the "built in" problems of healthcare? Elaborate please.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinstyler
Great concept...now, where's the solution?
I said it. A single-payer healthcare system.
Look at any other first-world nation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinstyler
So, we should do it because other nations do it?
No, we should do it because people are sick and dying for lack of money and availability of care.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinstyler
Which of these Nations would have covered this and other experimental treatment?
No one knows this for sure. However, there is a better chance of coverage in a non-profit UHC system than in a profit-driven system like we have now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinstyler
Is that so?
Why don't you call my friend whose 80 year old father is dying and can't get his experimental medicine to extend his life? See what she has to say about "fair". Medicare was originally intended to be a "just the basics" service. You agree we should all go to "just the basics?" Oh...I mean, unless you're really really poor, then you can have better service than other people...?
What experimental medicine does he need? Be specific.
Also, just because your father is unhappy with the system does not mean the system itself is broken. Edge cases are not proof.
That said, there are many more people who are dissatisfied with health insurance corporations than with Medicare.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinstyler
The government. And if you don't know they are not running a solvent program, enjoy that thought. If you want proof of a failing system, google is your friend.
The reason for Medicare's problems is due to it being a dumping ground for the uninsured. That an the thousand "mobility scooter" scams.
Don't forget that Republicans hate Medicare and have been crippling it for a long time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinstyler
Now, Medicare as a theory works, but in practice it certainly does not.
The same concept works in every other industrialized nation. Why not here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinstyler
Just search in the forums on Healthcare debate. Take your pick. Your version of "Do you want someone to die?" was in one of your earlier posts. It's a common method of arguing why we should pass this poorly written in impotent piece of legislation rather than taking our time and going back to the drawing board. Ready FIRE, oh yea...AIM
I'm not going to comment on or defend unofficial comments posted on the forums. From what you've said, I can agree that it's hyperbolic and a bad strategy. Lets leave it alone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinstyler
You need to check on this. If the guv'ment can audit the process, they have access.
First, the government is not some giant hive mind. Different departments do different things.
What are you concerned about, exactly? Someone knowing that you got a cold last month? What motive is there in knowing this information?
Second, insurance corporation accountants can look at what procedures you've had in order to find some way to deny you care. They do this now. Are you comfortable with this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinstyler
But hey, let me not add any common sense or logic to obstruct your trust in the guv'ment. I am aware of who already has my information.
I don't think you know who has your information, really. Do you trust health insurance corporations?
[I'm not going to respond to the rest of your post ranting about Hitler and and genocide. It's off-topic and nonsensical.]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
Public schools and college, some arts venues, most football and baseball stadiums, many museums, most libraries and many other facilities and services are tax supported and are not "ifrastructure".
If they're tax supported and available to everyone, then they are infrastructure. Societal infrastructure -- something that society collectively decided would bring benefit to the public good and is financed by the public.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinstyler
Do you feel we should just pay for it since we pay for other things without verifying what we are paying for is actually proven effective?
No one is arguing doing this. UHC has been proven effective in every other industrialized nation and has a long track record.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
I was pointing out we pay taxes for a lot of non-infrastructure facilities and services.
It's all infrastructure: infrastructure |ˈinfrəˌstrək ch ər|
noun
the basic physical and organizational structures and facilities (e.g., buildings, roads, and power supplies) needed for the operation of a society or enterprise.
Just because it's not a power line or a fire truck doesn't mean it isn't infrastructure. The concept of food stamps is part of our societal infrastructure, for example. Another is unemployment.
Health care is a basic requirement for a functioning society.
I haven't researched this particular kids' case, though I will yield to the dr. from Iowa who says the parents should do everything they can to get this kid treatment.
For all I know, I may be paying for his treatment, if his family has the same insurance as I do, and the ins. pays for it after all.
I was disagreeing with your argument that roads, fire protection, police protection are "infrastructure", therefore it's OK to pay taxes for them, but health care is not, therefore shouldn't be tax supporte. I was pointing out we pay taxes for a lot of non-infrastructure facilities and services.
Feel free and "yield", but I plan on continuing my due diligence in the matter of Health care and knowing for sure what will be covered and what won't.
I do not believe that the boy would have had any higher percentage pf receiving the experimental treatment if the Health care were Universal under the Fed Guv'ment
So far, the proposed legislation does not clearly guarantee the coverage of the experimental procedure this boy needed. The thread started with a slant indicating that Guv'ment run health care may have prevented this.
Now, on to your segue relative to taxes on infrastructure. You are mixing up a ton of different funding programs and taxes into one lump sum. I am speaking directly to a small Federal Government.
The roads, fire protection and police protection ARE INFRASTRUCTURE . The Fed Guv'ment handles the Interstate as per their Constitutional charge to handle interstate commerce.
Fire Protection and Police Protection are funded locally, There is a real good reason why many are "Volunteer Services" They are grossly underfunded in many areas of the country.....
There are Grants and Incentives from the Fed and the Department of Homeland Security has added more Fed money into that arena. But,
Schools and colleges are funded in a more complicated manner but are the requirement of the States. The Federal kicks in incentives, but the money comes from the State or Private enterprise and Alumnus often augmented with Bond issues that require a vote in the community.
Gas, Sewer and Water are things I don't directly pay the FED Gov'ment for. That also is a more local issue and only something I pay if I need it.
If I don't own property, I have no requirement to pay property tax either, so it is somewhat a privilege tax. I know I shouldn't use that term as it's not entirely accurate, but hopefully my point is made.
Stadiums are bond issue and a local funding issue.
I don't really wish to spend my time swimming on the deep end of the pool discussing the Guv'ment funding as a whole.
If you have a need for discussion on taxation and infrastructure, it would be a great idea to start a new thread because we could go for weeks on those topics alone and never even get to the tip of the iceberg on Health care and its ability to benefit patients in a similar situation of the boy being discussed.
Last edited by Robinstyler; 02-12-2010 at 09:10 PM..
No, it isn't.
Budgeting is using the money you have most effectively.
Profit is extracting ever-increasing amounts of money from a resource (sick people, in this case).
Enough money will be collected because the rates will be set by the same entity that collects the money.
I don't think you get it: with insurance companies out of the picture, there is no driving force to raise costs. The only reason medical care is so expensive is because insurance companies want to squeeze doctors and patients for every last dollar.
Health care is a part of basic societal infrastructure in every other industrialized nation on the planet.
What the "built in" problems of healthcare? Elaborate please.
I said it. A single-payer healthcare system.
Look at any other first-world nation.
No, we should do it because people are sick and dying for lack of money and availability of care.
No one knows this for sure. However, there is a better chance of coverage in a non-profit UHC system than in a profit-driven system like we have now.
What experimental medicine does he need? Be specific.
Also, just because your father is unhappy with the system does not mean the system itself is broken. Edge cases are not proof.
That said, there are many more people who are dissatisfied with health insurance corporations than with Medicare.
The reason for Medicare's problems is due to it being a dumping ground for the uninsured. That an the thousand "mobility scooter" scams.
Don't forget that Republicans hate Medicare and have been crippling it for a long time.
The same concept works in every other industrialized nation. Why not here?
I'm not going to comment on or defend unofficial comments posted on the forums. From what you've said, I can agree that it's hyperbolic and a bad strategy. Lets leave it alone.
First, the government is not some giant hive mind. Different departments do different things.
What are you concerned about, exactly? Someone knowing that you got a cold last month? What motive is there in knowing this information?
Second, insurance corporation accountants can look at what procedures you've had in order to find some way to deny you care. They do this now. Are you comfortable with this?
I don't think you know who has your information, really. Do you trust health insurance corporations?
[I'm not going to respond to the rest of your post ranting about Hitler and and genocide. It's off-topic and nonsensical.]
If they're tax supported and available to everyone, then they are infrastructure. Societal infrastructure -- something that society collectively decided would bring benefit to the public good and is financed by the public.
No one is arguing doing this. UHC has been proven effective in every other industrialized nation and has a long track record.
It's all infrastructure: infrastructure |ˈinfrəˌstrək ch ər|
noun
the basic physical and organizational structures and facilities (e.g., buildings, roads, and power supplies) needed for the operation of a society or enterprise.
Just because it's not a power line or a fire truck doesn't mean it isn't infrastructure. The concept of food stamps is part of our societal infrastructure, for example. Another is unemployment.
Health care is a basic requirement for a functioning society.
I understand you want Universal Health Care but you're not sure whether it would have helped this boy.
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,766,887 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair
I guess all those people who screamed bloody murder at town hall meetings across America are happy at this news.
I mean, that little jerk doesnt deserve to live anyway-does he?
Way to Love thy Neighbor as thyself.
Jesus would not want him to live or be treated. Jesus only likes the rich according to the Baptist. I saw a bumper sticker WWJK- wonder if that is a radio station or Who Would Jesus Kill.
This is probably a bit off topic (which you acknowledge after writing quite a lenghthly discourse).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinstyler
Feel free and "yield", but I plan on continuing my due diligence in the matter of Health care and knowing for sure what will be covered and what won't.
I do not believe that the boy would have had any higher percentage pf receiving the experimental treatment if the Health care were Universal under the Fed Guv'ment
So far, the proposed legislation does not clearly guarantee the coverage of the experimental procedure this boy needed. The thread started with a slant indicating that Guv'ment run health care may have prevented this.
Now, on to your segue relative to taxes on infrastructure. You are mixing up a ton of different funding programs and taxes into one lump sum. I am speaking directly to a small Federal Government.
The roads, fire protection and police protection ARE INFRASTRUCTURE . The Fed Guv'ment handles the Interstate as per their Constitutional charge to handle interstate commerce.
I believe you are the one who brought up "infrastructure".
Fire Protection and Police Protection are funded locally, There is a real good reason why many are "Volunteer Services" They are grossly underfunded in many areas of the country.....
There are Grants and Incentives from the Fed and the Department of Homeland Security has added more Fed money into that arena. But,
Schools and colleges are funded in a more complicated manner but are the requirement of the States. The Federal kicks in incentives, but the money comes from the State or Private enterprise and Alumnus often augmented with Bond issues that require a vote in the community.
About 8% of spending on K-12 education nationally is federal money. The feds are involved in schools in other ways, as well, e.g. school lunch program.
Gas, Sewer and Water are things I don't directly pay the FED Gov'ment for. That also is a more local issue and only something I pay if I need it.
If I don't own property, I have no requirement to pay property tax either, so it is somewhat a privilege tax. I know I shouldn't use that term as it's not entirely accurate, but hopefully my point is made.
If you are renting, you pay property tax indirectly. The landlord is not going to pay the tax bill w/o getting the money from the tenant.
Stadiums are bond issue and a local funding issue.
They are still paid with taxes. In some states, the state has built stadiums (Pennsylvania, for one).
I don't really wish to spend my time swimming on the deep end of the pool discussing the Guv'ment funding as a whole.
If you have a need for discussion on taxation and infrastructure, it would be a great idea to start a new thread because we could go for weeks on those topics alone and never even get to the tip of the iceberg on Health care and its ability to benefit patients in a similar situation of the boy being discussed.
That is absolutely disgusting. And it's such a painful disease, to deny treatment for it is barbaric. Sadly I have seen cases like this before, and we will continue to until real reforms occur.
The insurance company didn't deny this boy treatment. They simply refused to pay the doctors for a procedure. Nothing's to stop those doctors from performing the procedure anyway. They just aren't going to get paid. So it's the doctors that ara barbaric, isn't it?
Feel free and "yield", but I plan on continuing my due diligence in the matter of Health care and knowing for sure what will be covered and what won't.
You don't really know for sure. Your coverage depends on the weather, the phase of the moon, and what the health insurance corporation CEO had for breakfast.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinstyler
Fire Protection and Police Protection are funded locally, There is a real good reason why many are "Volunteer Services" They are grossly underfunded in many areas of the country.....
Funded locally... by the people (socialized police & fire departments)
Thanks for your lengthy explanation of how things are funded, but you're missing the forest for the trees:
Doesn't matter if it's on a federal, state, or local level -- it's still considered "for the public good" and is paid for through taxes. If my community decides to build a new football stadium, I can't simply say I don't want it and refuse to pay. The same goes for police and fire departments -- I can't say "well my house isn't on fire!" and withhold my taxes. It doesn't work like that!
I'll make it simple: what kind of community would decide to let one of its members die for lack of money?
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.
