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.
Last I checked, every country that is "socialized" spends far less of their GDP on health care than we do with our system. Doesn't some modification moke sense?
I see patients all the time that neglect problems due to 1) primary docs being unavailable or 2) primary docs being too expensive. By the time they get to the ER a simple fix has become a big problem. Not a lot of fiscal sense there.
At the very least, can we agree that children should be entirely paid for as well as those with genetic problems (Down's syndrome, spina bifida, other handicaps)? Last I checked, no kids asked to be born. Yet they're ones that are punished if mommy and daddy can't afford care for them and there isn't some form of care available. (call me a socialist but I don't think the kids should be punished on that one)
I can just see it now. 10 year old Timmy has cancer, mom and dad can't afford treatment: "sorry Timmy, you gotta suffer and die because your parents don't make enough money, and we don't want you to develop a sense of entitlement"
At the very least, can we agree that children should be entirely paid for as well as those with genetic problems (Down's syndrome, spina bifida, other handicaps)? Last I checked, no kids asked to be born. Yet they're ones that are punished if mommy and daddy can't afford care for them and there isn't some form of care available. (call me a socialist but I don't think the kids should be punished on that one)
I can just see it now. 10 year old Timmy has cancer, mom and dad can't afford treatment: "sorry Timmy, you gotta suffer and die because your parents don't make enough money, and we don't want you to develop a sense of entitlement"
What children are you talking about? Is a child born within our borders more entitled to unlimited care at taxpayer expense than one born in Africa? They didn't "ask to be born" either.
You think the average health of the pool can be lowered without increasing costs??? I guess there is a free lunch after all!
Where did I say that? I am not of the opinion that UCH would result in a much lower cost of health care. There may be some savings, such as people getting more preventive and primary care (before a problem gets bad).
Perhaps you can tell me if my daughter should be forever banned from having insurance because she had cancer at age 14?
Quote:
Originally Posted by iwonderwhy2124
Medicare and Medicaid currently take up about 5% of our GDP. If allowed to remain as is, they would have eventually taken up about 15%-20% of our GDP. In other words, we would have gone (and possibly still could go) bankrupt. If we go bankrupt then nobody gets anything anyway. One of the ways to avert this is to potentially ration care (i.e., let people die).
I think the number progression is a stretch. I have seen such projections claiming that 50% or more of GDP will be taken up by health care if present tends continue. That, of course, is absurd. Projections beyond a couple of years (at most) are spurious.
The insurance companies ration care now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iwonderwhy2124
The socialist European countries have different setups I gathered. I thought they had full-blown governmental control over the health-care system, not government subsidizing of health insurance.
And, I can agree that rationing might be the only thing that can avert fiscal insolvency.
Please educate yourself on the European systems. They're all different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iwonderwhy2124
I always got the impression that the vast majority of costs coming from Medicaid were from poor people breeding (and the associated birthing and child health-care costs). I also got the impression that a lot of Medicare's costs come from trying to keep old people alive another 6-12 months when they should have been allowed to die.
"Breeding", how gauche! Poor people do not have significantly more kids than others. Regarding Medicare costs being higher at the end of life, all that says is that people are sicker at the end of their lives. It's a no-brainer. I don't think that people are being kept alive "too long".
Where did I say that? I am not of the opinion that UCH would result in a much lower cost of health care. There may be some savings, such as people getting more preventive and primary care (before a problem gets bad).
Perhaps you can tell me if my daughter should be forever banned from having insurance because she had cancer at age 14?
I guess when you said in post #67 that my comment about premiums going up was drivel, I mistakenly took that to mean that you disagreed. I see that I still have a long way to go to master this English language of yours.
I also can't find where I said that covering pre-existing conditions was wrong. I was just pointing out that it's not free, as many seem to wish us to believe.
I guess when you said in post #67 that my comment about premiums going up was drivel, I mistakenly took that to mean that you disagreed. I see that I still have a long way to go to master this English language of yours.
I also can't find where I said that covering pre-existing conditions was wrong. I was just pointing out that it's not free, as many seem to wish us to believe.
As for the drivel, I was referring to this:
It's kinda like letting you buy car insurance after the accident...
I see people saying that over and over here on CD when referring to pre-existing conditions, though usually they say "it's like insuring your house after it's on fire".
FWIW I have no interest in listening to or reading conservative commentators such as those you mentioned. My views are my own, just as I assume yours are, even if they sometimes resemble those on MSNBC or DKos...
FWIW I have no interest in listening to or reading conservative commentators such as those you mentioned. My views are my own, just as I assume yours are, even if they sometimes resemble those on MSNBC or DKos...
Hmmm, did you ever consider the fact that when you do not listen to, view, read, etc., ALL viewpoints you have a very small and limited amount of information upon which to derive any kind "of view?"
I listen across the board, and as much as some make me see red and cuss the output sprewed, I can honestly say that I have taken in all aspects possible and available and thus my "views" are based upon fact and not spin, in addition to being respectful of our Constitution.
Hmmm, did you ever consider the fact that when you do not listen to, view, read, etc., ALL viewpoints you have a very small and limited amount of information upon which to derive any kind "of view?"
I listen across the board, and as much as some make me see red and cuss the output sprewed, I can honestly say that I have taken in all aspects possible and available and thus my "views" are based upon fact and not spin, in addition to being respectful of our Constitution.
You know, we all have only a certain amount of time each day to read, eat, sleep, watch TV, entertain ourselves and so forth, especially those of us who work. Forgive all of us who don't spend hours watching Beck, then Maddow, then Hannity, etc from not having a world view as broad as yours.
Hmmm, did you ever consider the fact that when you do not listen to, view, read, etc., ALL viewpoints you have a very small and limited amount of information upon which to derive any kind "of view?"
I listen across the board, and as much as some make me see red and cuss the output sprewed, I can honestly say that I have taken in all aspects possible and available and thus my "views" are based upon fact and not spin, in addition to being respectful of our Constitution.
And what exactly do you gain from listening to people whose views are exactly the same as your own? To me that's a complete waste of my time.
If you hadn't heard. We have Blue Cross Blue Shield and much to our surprise we are in for 7.1% decrease starting Jan 1 (with state ok). I was thinking its Obamacare insurance providers have to pay 80% to medical expenses on individual policies.
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.