What Can Americans do About Health Care? (politician, elect, federal government)

[TriMT7]

Originally Posted by Amaznjohn

No, all properties are treated the same. However, this wouldn't be a bad idea. Actually, the "rich area homes" don't require as much assistance from public services as the poorer areas because of the devices available to detect and extinguish fires and the quality of the electrical systems in the wealthier homes. The same can be said for police protection since the wealthier homes have better security systems. So, in this country and probably yours as well, the wealthy pay more taxes to pay for public services that are primarily used by the poor. Now, the poor want the wealthy to pay for their health insurance as well. It's time personal responsibility is expected.

The rich take a disproportionate benefit from the government overall than the "poor."

The entire legal and military system is geared towards the protection of business and property, when there is no Constitutional mandate to do so. Ever wonder why soooo much time was spent in the legislature debating what to do about the "estate tax," which effects like, 1/2 of 1% of all people in the United States? It is because the "poor" will EVER have a chance of being effected by the "estate tax," or because the "rich" have a disproportionate hand in the government to enact THEIR special interests?

How much did the invasion of Latin American countries by the US military to secure land resources for the United Fruit Corporation cost the American taxpayer? Whose benefit did that acrrue to? Whose benefit did Gulf War 1, and the lives and treasure lost protecting one despotic country's oil reserves from another despotic country's oil reserves REALLY help? Exxon-Mobil? Or Average Joe? Why do we waste so much taxpayer money securing resources that should be OUTSIDE the market if too dangerous to secure? Do you think Average Joe gives a damn how his energy needs are met?


The middle class MORE than uphold their end of the bargain when it comes to funding this nation, and THEY'RE the ones who are stuck with sub-standard or no health insurance.

ANSWER THE QUESTION about "personal responsibility": If you develop cancer or have a pre-existing condition, WHAT company is going to insure you? The very PREMISE of the movie "Sicko" was not about the "poor" not having healthcare, but how people who THINK they have healthcare through private insurance companies are dropped, denied coverage, and hosed by the "free market," profit-driven model of health access. People who WANT insurance can't find it, or can't afford it.


Guess they should have been more responsible though. They SHOULD have thought ahead before coming into this world and made arrangements to be born into a wealthy family!

[famenity]

Originally Posted by Amaznjohn

No, all properties are treated the same. However, this wouldn't be a bad idea. Actually, the "rich area homes" don't require as much assistance from public services as the poorer areas because of the devices available to detect and extinguish fires and the quality of the electrical systems in the wealthier homes. The same can be said for police protection since the wealthier homes have better security systems. So, in this country and probably yours as well, the wealthy pay more taxes to pay for public services that are primarily used by the poor. Now, the poor want the wealthy to pay for their health insurance as well. It's time personal responsibility is expected.

If all properties are traeted the same in the States that is more socialist than what we are, bet you never thought anyone would say that

Sorry to disillusion you but whilst it might be true in the States that the wealthy pay more in taxes than the poor, certainly not true in the UK, some richer people don't pay tax at all, we have all sorts of get out clauses built into the system, anybody paying tax through a salary or wage can expect not to challenge how much they pay it's deducted at source.
If you employ an accountant and a good one at that as a self employed person or someone drawing directors fees then all is well.

The gap between the rich and poor over here is widening, no wonder with this tax system.

When Tony Bliar was questioned on this apsect he shrugged it of saying that so long as some of it filtered down to the poorer classes it is ok.

hawkeye said;

"I assume you read my posts on this and know by now the health care in the UK is a shambles, believe me it is read posts above"

This is not strictly true we have a postcode system over here that works rather well. A wealthy area will generally have a better equipped and managed surgery, and the doctors here respect the wealthier patients more.

However, if a patient can afford private treatment through insurance cover/ownership it does not always work out satisfactorily. Personally when I used BUPA my wife and I found out rather late in the day (after using the paid for service that the consultant said was covered ) that what we required was not covered under the contract, cost me £1200/2400 dollars seventeen years ago, ouch.

We once had a good service but we now are following in a slavish way the US's more selfish approach to everything, going is co-operation, the new slogan is the old US one "don't give a sucker an even break".

[wehotex]

I've worked in the medicare hmo industry, (most recently secure horizons) for over 12 years as a salesman. In that time, i have seen much wastes in the form of highly overpaid upper and middle management. the management does very little to help the bottom line out and usually are hugely disconnected from the salespeople that they are intended to help. at secure horizons, there is a manager, then a director, then a VP, then another VP, get the picture?. each takes a portion of the medicare $$$ that is intended to go to the patient. in addition, the medical group also takes a portion of the "profits". in virtually all of the companies where i have worked(secure horizons, blue shield of calif), the upper management positions have been filled with inexperienced, mediocre people who were good at one thing, **ssing butt. I just wish that medicare would reprimand these companies for having so much deadwood and force the companies to either trim these useless people from the equation or lose the profitable contract that they so zealously want ot maintain.

[burdell]

Originally Posted by Amaznjohn

Now, the poor want the wealthy to pay for their health insurance as well. It's time personal responsibility is expected.

Good! I can't wait. When people want to buy a personal aircraft let them figure out for themselvs if they're safe or not, I don't want to pay taxes for creating and enforcing aircraft standards.

Great! When people want to buy a luxury yacht let them figure out for themselves if they're safe or not. I don't want to pay taxes for creating and enforcing maritime regulations that apply only to the wealthy.

Good! I can't wait. When people choose elective cosmetic surgery let them figure out for themselves if they're safe or not. I don't want to pay taxes to create and enforce standards for elective cosmetics.

Yep! You are correct! It's time for a little personal responsibility.

[dreamofmonterey]

Originally Posted by Amaznjohn

No, all properties are treated the same. However, this wouldn't be a bad idea. Actually, the "rich area homes" don't require as much assistance from public services as the poorer areas because of the devices available to detect and extinguish fires and the quality of the electrical systems in the wealthier homes. The same can be said for police protection since the wealthier homes have better security systems. So, in this country and probably yours as well, the wealthy pay more taxes to pay for public services that are primarily used by the poor. Now, the poor want the wealthy to pay for their health insurance as well. It's time personal responsibility is expected.

I lived in Palm Beach County- the wealthiest area. We paid more taxes because the police force was over-staffed. Police were in every gated prestigious area.

Delray Beach, near US Route 95 is besieged with crime and crack houses- a very impoverished area. The police avoid it- it is considered less priority- The poor do NOT have any protection or help- because its all about $$$$$$.

I cannot believe how deluded you are on civic issues.....

[dreamofmonterey]

Originally Posted by burdell

Good! I can't wait. When people want to buy a personal aircraft let them figure out for themselvs if they're safe or not, I don't want to pay taxes for creating and enforcing aircraft standards.

Great! When people want to buy a luxury yacht let them figure out for themselves if they're safe or not. I don't want to pay taxes for creating and enforcing maritime regulations that apply only to the wealthy.

Good! I can't wait. When people choose elective cosmetic surgery let them figure out for themselves if they're safe or not. I don't want to pay taxes to create and enforce standards for elective cosmetics.

Yep! You are correct! It's time for a little personal responsibility.

I cannot believe how in denial (and selfish) some people are.

[remember-voltaire]

famenity

the health care in the UK is a right state, it's totally or well nearly on the brink of collapse

a postcode system well try M6 all the way to M30, it's rubbish , a total disaster

you have had BUPA no one round knows anything about that but what we know is that we see nothing for our tax money except the council forcing locals out to make way for yuppies, out of town students and now the bbc(champagne socialists) wants to move up here.
maybe that's why were the first in england to have talking cameras as well as listening cameras



how on earth do you explain why a senior citizen woman has to wait nearly 6 months to get checked for cancer, her husband has just died , she's scared and still waiting

why someone has to wait 3 years to get their varicose veins removed

my local doc in england has been looking to get out of the UK, nurses have to be brought in from places like the phillipenes,(sp) infact form anywhere who will be willing to work overtime and get paid peanuts.

a hospital in our city has now closed and thus there is only one.
of course two gangs ended up having a shoot out in the hospital so now those with emergencies has to go much further to get medical care



I think no one should have health care denied but certainly if america does their health care like the UK then they will be in for a major shock and it won't be good.

[dreamofmonterey]

Well, I have a friend from Germany and they have an excellent system.

American health care is a mess- PPOs and HMOS are being sued daily because they refuse people to get vital treatment. Our system is badly broken, if you lived here you would see.

[famenity]

remember-voltaire said;

"the health care in the UK is a right state, it's totally or well nearly on the brink of collapse"

I am quite sure you are generally correct, however this raises the question why.

I contend it's not because of our free at point of need approach.

It's happened since government started selling of parts into private ownership.

Since PFI and LIFT.

Private hospitals are getting some juicy plums at the expense of the NHS.

NHS picks up the difficult cases after the private guys have botched.

Consultants are trained by the NHS and work few hours for NHS the rest private, in this way as in many others NHS subsidises private treatment.

As in other things when government has not the skills to control some organisation that they have ruined, they then use the get out "sell it".

I could go on but I agree in the outcome it will get worse following the private route, as these American users have shown on this excellent site.

[TriMT7]

I think it's important at this point to take some time to define some key terms:

"Socialized Medicine" = the government owns the hospitals, the clinics, and doctors are government employees. Example: NHS in England

"Single-payer" = the government "insures" the people, and people go out to private doctors and clinics, and expenses are reimbursed by the government. Example: Canada, United States Medicare.

Mitt Romney's "Massachusettes plan" = Horrendous idea. Requiring everyone to buy PRIVATE health insurance is a tax on people that flows directly to the benefit of private insurance companies with no benefit in quality of care, affordability, or access.


I like the idea of "single payer" health insurance the best.

It sure would be nice for "conservatives" to get their labels straight when attacking any plan that isn't the broke down, 20 kinds of busted up status quo, however!