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 don't think that we need any part of a system that forces 80% of physicians to participate in a scheme that negatively affects their performance and livelihood.
What we cannot overlook here is the principles involved in such a system. The COTUS does not provide for the intrusion of the federal government into the healthcare industry. Nor is the taking of resources from one taxpayer to give directly to another a function of a free society.
First off..there doesn't need to be any "forcing" as far as what physicians will choose. Also, we are not talking about eliminiating private health insurance.. In the UK system a Dr takes both NHI and private insurance. Private insurance is used to cover those extra elective surgeries and to purchase a patient a "private" room.
Unfortunately your attitude comes across as rather selfish. We're not talking about taking from one to pay for another. We're talking about eveeryone contributing to the pot and each one having equal access to everything .. rather than the rich get what they need and to hell with the rest.
Most of the people that have a hardtime making insurance payments and medical payments are not free loaders.. far from it. They are the backbone of this country.. the working middle class. We all can't be Dr's and lawyers making a lot of money.. but does that now mean that I or anyone else that works a middle wage job not have access to the best care possible for the preservation of their life because they are not "rich" or "above middle class". I do not believe one persons life is worht more than anothers simply because his salary may be larger. We're not talking about anybody getting anything for FREE! We all contribute and we all have access.
Let's see..right now I'm sure you are content with your health care. Are you aware that 50% of bankruptcies in this country are caused by excessive medical bills and 3/4 of those bankruptcies are from families that WERE insured? Did you hear about the lady in California whos health insurance dropped her when she needed them most.. when she was diagnosed with breast cancer? She had health insurance.. she felt "secure" that all was well with the world.. and guess what? There are tons of stories like that!
I for one do not trust a system that is driven by profit. For 20 years we've been made promise after promise of "fixing" the system we have and NOTHING has worked.. it's made it worst. The number one reason for that is because until the greedy profit margin is removed from healthcare... well health insurance I should say, than everything will be the same and only get worse. It's about time that medical decisions get put in the hands of the consumer and their physicians.. NOT some bean counter protecting the shareholders pockets and ignoring our health and well being in the proccess.
NCPA - Brief Analysis 370, Would National Health Insurance Benefit Physicians? (http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba/ba370/ - broken link)
The only links you provided TM were a column by a liberal journalist/pundit and from a group of physicians who have an agenda to advance. Maybe you could provide a more credible source for your information.
The NCPA isn't exactly the most unbiased source, considering that, despite its innocuous name ("National Center for Policy Analysis"), it is a conservative think tank.
Leaving that aside, the issue for people pushing for UHI is benefits to consumers/patients, not necessarily physicians.
About the only way you will get anything done in the Congress, both Houses, is to get rid of every Senator, and Congressperson, and start over.
Additionally, you will have to prohibit each and every politican from taking any money from any Doctor, Lawyer, and their respective organizations. You will also have to prohibit any candidate from taking any money from any insurance company.
Unless, or until the above happens, nothing of substance is likely to happen in the health insurance arena.
Just curious...being that physicians are people who need health care for themselves, and therefore consumers, would one or the other be a conflict of interest for them?
The NCPA isn't exactly the most unbiased source, considering that, despite its innocuous name ("National Center for Policy Analysis"), it is a conservative think tank.
Leaving that aside, the issue for people pushing for UHI is benefits to consumers/patients, not necessarily physicians.
I knew when he mentioned that "one" article that it would be a very biased one..
Meanwhile.. what he says is completley untrue.. I've sent links to government websites, to websites run by .. yes physicians.. but with links to many government and others studies on data etc, as well as links to New England Journal of Medicine.. VERY credibel sources if you ask me...
Health insurance IS about the people.. and there are Dr's out there who actually care about their patients and are appalled at how the system currently works. UHI doesn't only beneift patients & consumers, but Dr's as well.. It would allow them to concentrate more on medicine and focus on their patietns as opposed to all the paperwork crap they have to deal with and the beaurocracy nonsense.
First off..there doesn't need to be any "forcing" as far as what physicians will choose. Also, we are not talking about eliminiating private health insurance.. In the UK system a Dr takes both NHI and private insurance. Private insurance is used to cover those extra elective surgeries and to purchase a patient a "private" room.
Unfortunately your attitude comes across as rather selfish. We're not talking about taking from one to pay for another. We're talking about eveeryone contributing to the pot and each one having equal access to everything .. rather than the rich get what they need and to hell with the rest.
Most of the people that have a hardtime making insurance payments and medical payments are not free loaders.. far from it. They are the backbone of this country.. the working middle class. We all can't be Dr's and lawyers making a lot of money.. but does that now mean that I or anyone else that works a middle wage job not have access to the best care possible for the preservation of their life because they are not "rich" or "above middle class". I do not believe one persons life is worht more than anothers simply because his salary may be larger. We're not talking about anybody getting anything for FREE! We all contribute and we all have access.
Let's see..right now I'm sure you are content with your health care. Are you aware that 50% of bankruptcies in this country are caused by excessive medical bills and 3/4 of those bankruptcies are from families that WERE insured? Did you hear about the lady in California whos health insurance dropped her when she needed them most.. when she was diagnosed with breast cancer? She had health insurance.. she felt "secure" that all was well with the world.. and guess what? There are tons of stories like that!
I for one do not trust a system that is driven by profit. For 20 years we've been made promise after promise of "fixing" the system we have and NOTHING has worked.. it's made it worst. The number one reason for that is because until the greedy profit margin is removed from healthcare... well health insurance I should say, than everything will be the same and only get worse. It's about time that medical decisions get put in the hands of the consumer and their physicians.. NOT some bean counter protecting the shareholders pockets and ignoring our health and well being in the proccess.
No way can you cover all citizens without taking from some to provide for others. One does not possess principles if one is willing to compromise them for personal benefit.
The case you provided excluded the fact that she defrauded the insurance company to be covered in the first place. She is as much to blame for the hardship she acquired from not receiving her payments as the insurance company.
The system will only be "fixed" by removing governmental regulations and red tape, encouraging competition, and removing the influence of the healthcare industry lobbyists.
I knew when he mentioned that "one" article that it would be a very biased one..
Meanwhile.. what he says is completley untrue.. I've sent links to government websites, to websites run by .. yes physicians.. but with links to many government and others studies on data etc, as well as links to New England Journal of Medicine.. VERY credibel sources if you ask me...
Health insurance IS about the people.. and there are Dr's out there who actually care about their patients and are appalled at how the system currently works. UHI doesn't only beneift patients & consumers, but Dr's as well.. It would allow them to concentrate more on medicine and focus on their patietns as opposed to all the paperwork crap they have to deal with and the beaurocracy nonsense.
The NCPA may be right-leaning yet the studies they quoted were not.
The NCPA isn't exactly the most unbiased source, considering that, despite its innocuous name ("National Center for Policy Analysis"), it is a conservative think tank.
Leaving that aside, the issue for people pushing for UHI is benefits to consumers/patients, not necessarily physicians.
I think what most people want is more benefits at lower cost. I don't think this is likely to happen under any system. I frankly favor some sort of universal system, but I think people are being sold a bill of goods if they think they'll pay less, get more. There's no way to make that happen. Administration still has to be done. I think the admin for some of these systems is more indirect. I base that on my experience with Medicare, which i posted about yesterday.
NCPA - Brief Analysis 370, Would National Health Insurance Benefit Physicians? (http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba/ba370/ - broken link)
The only links you provided TM were a column by a liberal journalist/pundit and from a group of physicians who have an agenda to advance. Maybe you could provide a more credible source for your information.
Ok thanks for posting an organization with the opposite agenda. Read thier mission statement. To promote privatizing gov't services since 1983. Almost all these efforts are by those who want to eliminate high wages and benifits. It may eliminate some patronage, but it replaces one problem for another (read union vs nonunion). A true national health care solution will help here too.
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.
