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.
This has turned into a cyclical argument that will never be solved here. The quality of care issues aside TM still doesn't get when a company pays a "tax" for healthcare 12% (her stated number) it isn't paid by the company, it's paid by the consumer of it's goods and taken from the payroll of those employees. Healthcare costs go up, compensation goes down or stays flat and cost of finished goods to consumer goes up so the company really pays nothing we do.
Until you get that TM there's no hope...
Well. then doesn't that actually then also apply to the health insurance premiums paid by the employer for it's employee.. that cost is actually passed down too in the product.
I think 12% is far better than 23% .. don't you think???
I get that.. BOY do I get that.. why do you think the U.S is having problems competing in a GLOBAL MARKET??? BECAUSE their products have to CHARGE more in order to make up the difference it pays out for it's labor force.. GEEZ.. that's easy to get..
YOu are the one not getting it? IN the end a UHI will cost American companies less
It could cost us less now if American companies continue to drop coverage or water down the coverage (think underinsured) but then that ENTIRE burden shifts to .. guess who.. the rest of us and we are left with more and more uninsured!
And WHAT do you think keeps the insurance rates rising??? COST SHIFTING.. when bills go unpaid because of someone not being able to pay.. cost for things must go up.. and cost to the insurance company must go up. .. and so then premiums go up .. etc etc etc.
that's why I used the analogy of the vase with all the holes.. it's a multitude of problems.. not just one.. and they ALL need to be addressed at the SAME TIME.. and the system needs to be changed.. otherwise..we are just plugging one hole only to leave others open or create new ones.
President Obama has made it clear that he intends to "reform" the health care business, and some of his more vocal and powerful supporters have openly stated that a part of the plan is to destroy the private health care industry. The concern here is Obama's idea of change - what does he propose to give us instead? Can we learn from the experience of other countries? Is he (and Congress) willing to learn?
For example, I've heard the argument here that "France is rated number 1" in health care, yet it also has the world's third most expensive healthcare system and regularly runs a deficit. That's not a model we need. We can do a good job of running our own deficits without modeling another country's.
Those who would advocate for nationalized (socialized) health care, the following has good information:
Conservatives for Patients' Rights (http://www.cprights.org/2009/04/todays-daily-dose-european-health-care-system-not-a-good-model.php - broken link)
clipped from Google - 5/2009
For a thorough review of Health care systems around the world, please see "The Grass is Not Always Greener: A Look at National Health Care Systems Around the World" by Michael Tanner of the CATO Institute. www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9272
· Health Care in Canada
· Health Care in France
· Health Care in Germany
· Health Care in Great Britain
· Health Care in Greece
· Health Care in Italy
· Health Care in Japan
· Health Care in Norway
· Health Care in Portugal
· Health Care in Spain
· Health Care in Switzerland
"They are libertarian in their policy positions, typically advocating diminished government intervention in domestic, social, and economic policies and decreased military and political intervention worldwide. Specific policy proposals advanced by Cato scholars include such measures as abolishing the minimum wage,[42] reforming illegal-drug policies,[43] eliminating corporate welfare and trade barriers,[44] diminishing federal government involvement in the marketplace[45] and in local and state issues,[46] enhanced school choice,[47] abolishing government-enforced discrimination, including both traditionally conservative racial profiling and traditionally liberal affirmative action, and abolishing restrictions on discrimination by private parties.[48]"
"They are libertarian in their policy positions, typically advocating diminished government intervention in domestic, social, and economic policies and decreased military and political intervention worldwide. Specific policy proposals advanced by Cato scholars include such measures as abolishing the minimum wage,[42] reforming illegal-drug policies,[43] eliminating corporate welfare and trade barriers,[44] diminishing federal government involvement in the marketplace[45] and in local and state issues,[46] enhanced school choice,[47] abolishing government-enforced discrimination, including both traditionally conservative racial profiling and traditionally liberal affirmative action, and abolishing restrictions on discrimination by private parties.[48]"
And, your point is?
This has nothing to do with the information that was posted about nationalized health care in other countries. If you look at the links, you would see that there is a sizeable collection of articles from myriad sources. They didn't write the articles. They just gave links to all of them.
btw, I see nothing wrong with much of the libertarian position.
If your philosophical bent is this: "diminished government intervention in domestic, social, and economic policies ", you are not going to be in favor of UHC of any kind. Not government funded, not private insurance funded if mandatory for employers to provide.
If your philosophical bent is this: "diminished government intervention in domestic, social, and economic policies ", you are not going to be in favor of UHC of any kind. Not government funded, not private insurance funded if mandatory for employers to provide.
And the oposite side of this is the current democratic side, full government intervention, full government funding and a very large government intervention (control) of all social and economic polices and companies. Just look at what they're doing with the car companies and how well that's worked so far.
And the oposite side of this is the current democratic side, full government intervention, full government funding and a very large government intervention (control) of all social and economic polices and companies. Just look at what they're doing with the car companies and how well that's worked so far.
WHAT?
First off.. government is intervening to prevent more financial crisis with the complete collapse of the auto industry.. THEY.. came to WASHINGTON.. ASKING for help.. because apparently NO GOVERNMENT intervention or regulation was getting them in trouble all on their own WITHOUT the US involvement...
As for democrats wanting entire government intervention.. NO.. WE WANT A BALANCE!! I've always touted a mixed healthcare system with both government AND private working side by side so that a) people are protected from capatalistic greed and b) all people have access.
Just as an entirely private run system is failing so too would an entirely government run system.. I've always said that with ANYTHING in life there needs to be BALANCE and when one thing is tilted to much to one side or the other.. diasaster ensues...
For the last 8 years it's been balanced far too much to the right..and needs to be brought center yet again...
I cannot see the point of this argument on Universal Health Care on here.
I read with laughter when some people on here spout about the evils of a UHC system when they have absolutely NO idea of how it works or what it is like to use it long term.
Reading articles does NOT make anyone an expert on how a health care system works. The only way to know if a system works or not is to USE IT.
It is a fact that the American health care system is NOT working for the good of all Americans.
The american system is more expensive to run than almost any other health care system of any industrialised country and covers less people.
I have spoken to many Americans and the only ones who want the system to stay the same are the complaicent ones who can afford good cover or have work related health care..this is becoming the minority of the American people.
To say that a UHC system was easy to start in thr UK and would not be possible in the USA is RUBBISH. The UK had just come from WW2 and was nearly bankrupt. The USA have 50 states who could all individually get on with the job of building hospitals and creating a UHC System. This would have Govt guidlines but be individual to the specific needs of each state.
It's about time that ALL americans recieve top class health care. It is possible and has been proven by many countries to work and work well
STOP whinging about how it is impossible or how YOU do not want to pay for others (You do anyway) YOUR PREMIUMS ARE BASED ON AMOUNT OF CLAIMS MADE BY OTHERS And get on with the job of giving Amerian's the health system they deserve. In other words...STOP BEING PATHETIC!
What % of my income do the UHC lovers feel entitled to? You can be honest. Let's say I make $160k/year but for 7 years I made nothing and in fact borrowed the money to pay for living expenses (student loans; I didn't qualify for grants.).
I didn't go out on the weekends (grades are important for that $160k job). I didn't buy a house (I lived in a grungy 1 bedroom apartment because it's all my student loans could cover.) I worked the first few years for <$50k/year while I got practical experience. Finally, I landed the dream job. I can start paying the loans back in earnest and not just minimum payments. I can finally afford to buy a house!
How much are you entitled to? I need to know if it's worth the 50-60 hours per week I work. So, could you just tell me now if I should even bother.
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.
