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.
Why dont you ask someone with out health care if theyd rather have none in the US, or whatever Canada offers.
Most people in the US do have health care. Your scenario makes no sense. Ask a homeless man if he wants a half eaten burger. Would he want it? If so, should we feed the entire nation half eaten burgers?
Most people in the US do have health care. Your scenario makes no sense. Ask a homeless man if he wants a half eaten burger. Would he want it? If so, should we feed the entire nation half eaten burgers?
First of all, many people who "have healthcare", rarely use it because they cannot afford the copays or cost of prescriptions. So simply being "covered" does not mean you are receiving adequate care.
Second, For profit medicine is available in all countries that support universal healthcare as far as I know. Wealthy Canadians are often cited coming to the US for care.
To use you scenario, even though I disagree with the analogy of US healthcare and a whole burger, people would have the option to "buy" a whole burger if they should so want to spend their own money, however, EVERYONE would have free or very low cost access to half eaten burgers.
Sorry about your uncle. Horror stories can always be found. We never hear about the successes that we do have here in this country. Lowest mortality of cancer, heart disease, and basically all major medical problems are best treated here. Patients fly from all over the world to have their care here. I've been involved in the health care industry for a long time, and I can tell you that mistakes happen in any system. Even under universal health. We are all human, and human will make mistakes. I just know that the government have failed at just about every think they get their hands on.
Where did you get your data of "lowest mortality rates" for anything? In fact the US has some of the HIGHEST mortality rates for EVERYTHING in the industrialized world. The infant mortality rate is estimated to be the 48th lowest in the world, placing it behind EVERY industrialized country outside of Russia, Poland and China, and behind even Cuba.
First of all, many people who "have healthcare", rarely use it because they cannot afford the copays or cost of prescriptions. So simply being "covered" does not mean you are receiving adequate care.
Second, For profit medicine is available in all countries that support universal healthcare as far as I know. Wealthy Canadians are often cited coming to the US for care.
To use you scenario, even though I disagree with the analogy of US healthcare and a whole burger, people would have the option to "buy" a whole burger if they should so want to spend their own money, however, EVERYONE would have free or very low cost access to half eaten burgers.
Medications are expensive. I think some other members here can explain that aspect better than I could.
I'm not sure if providing a basic level of coverage for everyone, then letting the wealth buy better care is morally or ethically feasible.
No doubt the health care system needs repair. We do need to make it more affordable for everyone. I think that we are all upset at the system right now due to the level of unemployment that we are willing to try anything. I happen to believe that emulating other systems from different countries that are worse than ours is not the right answer.
Last edited by HereinDenver; 03-06-2009 at 12:52 PM..
Medications are expensive. I think some other members here can explain that aspect better than I could.
I'm not sure if providing a basic level of coverage for everyone, then letting the wealth buy better care is morally or ethically feasible.
No doubt the health care system needs repair. We do need to make it more affordable for everyone. I think that we are all upset at the system right now due to the level of unemployment that we are willing to try anything. I happen to believe that emulating other systems from different countries that are worse than ours is not the right answer.
I guess wed have to come to a a consensus that those said countries do have a worse system first.
One side effect of President Obama's "conversation" about the future of health care is the paralysis of current health care. I've seen far fewer jobs being offered by local hospitals, and the majority of them are now per diem. The largest hospital system in my area has taken away 3 paid days off from its employees to try to prepare for the 2010 Obama budget cuts in reimbursement.
A friend of mine is an administrator for a HMO that is currently up for sale. All interest from other companies has stopped cold since the rumor of a forum.
Uncertainty is not good for business and not good for creating or maintaining jobs.
Good Lord, he just had the "conversation" yesterday! The hospital system you refer to is using Obama's "plan" (which doesn't yet exist) as an excuse, perhaps for poor business practices, the poor economy, or an interest in maximizing profit!
Where did you get your data of "lowest mortality rates" for anything? In fact the US has some of the HIGHEST mortality rates for EVERYTHING in the industrialized world. The infant mortality rate is estimated to be the 48th lowest in the world, placing it behind EVERY industrialized country outside of Russia, Poland and China, and behind even Cuba.
When you look at the mortality rates, etc., you have to keep in mind that the data is typically skewed. I can't comment on infant mortality since I don't have direct hands on knowledge of the data. But we have to take the prevalence of the disease away from the percent success of the disease. Say heart disease. Yes we have some of the highest prevalence anywhere, and we do try to treat everything. A patient with severe heart disease may be left to die in some small village some where in remote China (this is typical), we'd operate on the same patient. Patient will live longer, but will die of the condition at some point. Of course if you operate on the same severity of patient, you'd have more mortality since no one keeps track of a patient who dies outside a hospital.
We do indeed have the best quality of health care in the world. I have no doubt. It's not available to everyone, and we need to fix that aspect.
When you look at the mortality rates, etc., you have to keep in mind that the data is typically skewed. I can't comment on infant mortality since I don't have direct hands on knowledge of the data.
Huh?
If you don't have "knowledge of the data," on what basis can you claim the data is skewed? Indeed, how can you claim any data is skewed without access to other data. Can you show the methodology that compromises the data into being "skewed?"
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.
