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.
That's because Universal Health Care is freeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Nothing is free but the UK Citizens realise that the small tax which not only covers health care but retirement, unemployment, sickness benefits, home payments when unemployed or sick etc etc etc etc is worth it.
To have a perfect society is impossible but to aspire to a bad health system as in the USA today is pathetic!
A human right? Ok. No problem there. But a human right does not mean free, discounted, subsidized, or any other handout. If you want it, you are absolutely free to prioritize your life in order to achieve (pay for) it.
Do you disagree?
I don;t, I'm pretty adamant about people paying for their own healthcare. I can't get any conservatives to agree with me about opening up their wallet when needed. Well, the wealthy ones maybe.
I cannot conceive of having doctors, nurses, whomever work for free, or working for government-regulated fees.
Healthcare in this country is extremely expensive. Most people don't have to pay for it. Many people pay more than $250 a month just for their share of their employer's plans. That will increase steadily, as it does almost every year.
Eventually, many decide they just can't pay it anymore, which was especially true of those that lost jobs, or those that had pre-exiting conditions. I think you'd be surprised at how many self-employed people cannot afford HI, or can only afford basic plans with $100,000 deductibles. If HI is mandatory, the amount of high deductible plans will skyrocket.
It's time the HI discussion turned to reality. Without an employer plan, most will not have a good plan. This is in no way a commentary on Obamacare or any other plan. Just a fact of life. The government doesn't have enough of our money to cover us all either.
It has little to nothing to do with prioritizing anyone's life, budgeting better, etc... Given today's wages, HI is an enormous cost. In many areas, a family plan is more than the mortgage/taxes/insurance on a house. Or rent.
The me me me people here soon change their mind about health care when they discover that their health insurance will NOT pay for a loved ones illness. I have heard this a number of times from quite succesful people that they didn't realise the problems with the current insurance based health system here until they actually had to use it for a big health problem.
I read a study about that very issue and had it bookmarked for a while, until we got a new operating system and I lost all my bookmarks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuling
There were times when moms delivered their babies at home without the presence of any doctors
Well, yeah, there were times when diseases were treated by application of leeches and by bleeding, too. I'm not sure of your point here.
Even the home deliveries were usually attended by someone prepared in childbirth, e.g. a midwife.
I'm not sure I would have wanted all that mess in my house!
That's because Universal Health Care is freeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
It's not freeeeeeeee, but it demonstrably costs less to cover the same amount of people, and obtain better and more reliable outcomes.
Most people paying hundreds of dollars in private insurance premiums EACH MONTH would not have a correlative hundreds of dollars increase in taxes to move to a more comprehensive, Medicare for all, system.
Where would that now-free capital go? Straight into the consumer economy... which is the bedrock and driver of our economy (not debt servicing and insurance, like many conservatives apparently view as their ideal economic model).
Additionally, businesses in America that find themselves at a comparative and competitive disadvantage as compared to other UHC countries -- like Japan, Canada and Germany -- would suddenly be free of the yoke of legacy healthcare costs.
I read a study about that very issue and had it bookmarked for a while, until we got a new operating system and I lost all my bookmarks.
Well, yeah, there were times when diseases were treated by application of leeches and by bleeding, too. I'm not sure of your point here.
Even the home deliveries were usually attended by someone prepared in childbirth, e.g. a midwife.
I'm not sure I would have wanted all that mess in my house!
My point is that just because there is no doctor around, doesn't mean the mother or her baby will die or whatever. We have become quite dependent on doctors, at least mentally, and don't trust in nature anymore. In the past most women used to know what to do during childbirth, and they passed it on so to speak, helping with younger women's childbirths.
HMOs suck. They are criminal plans as far as I'm concerned. If I were you, be a good husband and get her off of that plan pronto!
She LOVES her HMO. Nice clean waiting rooms and being able to see your doctor at your appointment time. I have a PPO plan and would rather go back to Kaiser.
If No Med Mal claims were allowed at all, and there were No requirement to have Med Mal insurance, you'd not see any decrease at all in health care. You Might see some different decisions made by hospitals and doctors, but most wouldn't know about them.
The enormous amount of administrative costs in the current system boggles the mind, as does the percentage of GDP healthcare accounts for. It's getting bigger as well, every day. At some point, it will consume so much of GDP, people will wonder what else this country does.
There were times when moms delivered their babies at home without the presence of any doctors
There as a time that quite few of those babies died.
I once knew a woman that came from a family of 12 kids back in the 20's. The first six died before the age of three.
We don't need to go back to those times. Kind of like" If he lives till morning ;then we will take him to the doctor!"
As of 1998, the census reports, 30 percent of childless couples consisted of two college graduates, compared with 17 percent of those with kids. The childless are more likely to have professional or managerial occupations (24 percent versus 16 percent of dual-employed couples with children). Although there is little difference in income (55 percent of childless couples have incomes over $50,000 versus 54 percent of couples with children), childless families have no child-related expenses to contend with. They don't have to save for their child's college education, let alone pay preschool tuition. They don't need to pay for diapers or baby food or their children's health care. There are no pediatrician bills, no orthodontists and no family-size SUVs. They also don't structure their lives around the academic year and school vacations or choose their residence according to the quality of the school district.
Sure makes a difference if you have kids doesn't it?
You are right in one way:It is all about priorities.
Yep. We chose not to start a family for ALL OF THE ABOVE.
My point is that just because there is no doctor around, doesn't mean the mother or her baby will die or whatever. We have become quite dependent on doctors, at least mentally, and don't trust in nature anymore. In the past most women used to know what to do during childbirth, and they passed it on so to speak, helping with younger women's childbirths.
In general, some type of "health professional" has always been used. Here is an short history of childbirth:
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.
