Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-08-2009, 11:32 PM
 
Location: Mpls - south for the winter
140 posts, read 542,610 times
Reputation: 106

Advertisements

I'm a fiscally conservative republican who finally belives it's time for national heathcare care. My health insurance rates have increased 50% in 2 years. Being self-employed, I'm at the mercy of my health insurance provider. My deductible is $2500 and yearly out of pocket $4500. Deductibles so high - I'm afraid to get sick! This is losey insurance for which I pay a huge premium. Recently had an accident and now I spend hours, reading endless paperwork and trying to get my insurance company to pay my bills!

The current system is BROKEN. 40-50 million uninsured (for which we all pay higher premiums). Most advanced country on earth and we are not providing good medical care for our citizens. So much money is wasted on the billing process instead of paying doctors. Insurance company lobbyists are trying to maintain the current system.

Being a fiscal conservative - I despise bigger government - but we need a change - a better system to provide healthcare in this country!

Anyone else think it's time for a change?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-08-2009, 11:37 PM
 
7,359 posts, read 10,279,481 times
Reputation: 1893
Yes. And EXACTLY for the reasons you listed. I think that--as Wall Street has now definitively proven--business cannot be trusted to do the right thing. My health care is paid for by my spouse, who has to pay only 20% of our coverage (so far). It breaks my heart when I hear stories like yours. It's outrageous that insurance companies are profiting off the illness of others. Nothing less than blood money. And then, when people have to sell everything they have--including their home--before they become eligible for full coverage in their senior years--nothing less than obscene.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2009, 11:39 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,274,487 times
Reputation: 4269
Let me say that I fear you may be ready to switch back inside 5 years when we are in the earliest stages of socialized healthcare. I could be wrong about that but an Aussie friend of mine tells me that you sure don't want that if you can avoid it. Australia did it later than the UK so he is really feeling the pain of having to pay so much out of pocket for expensive procedures for his wife that he can't get through the normal system without waiting longer than they want to wait.

It all sounds so very good but for some reason lots of Canadians come to the US for many surgical procedures. Why would that be since they have socialized medicine?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2009, 11:41 PM
 
Location: Iowa, Heartland of Murica
3,425 posts, read 6,310,013 times
Reputation: 3446
The current system is BROKEN, however European style healthcare is NOT the solution. There are several Capitalism friendly solutions which do not involve some Nanny state bureaucracy being in charge of health care. Free market Economics offers many solutions to this problem.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2009, 11:48 PM
 
7,359 posts, read 10,279,481 times
Reputation: 1893
Obama has no interest in seeing European style healthcare here. He wants universal access to health care for all Americans, NOT nationalized health care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2009, 11:49 PM
 
Location: Mpls - south for the winter
140 posts, read 542,610 times
Reputation: 106
I keep hearing about long waits in Canada - why do so many Canadians, who live in Arizona return to Canada for free medical care?

Recently spent 5 hours WAITING in a Minneapolis emergency room. The doctor finally saw me - only after I threatened to go to another hospital!

So many people were in the emergency room with flu systems - most without insurance and this was their only recourse for health care!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2009, 12:03 AM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,274,487 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovingForward View Post
Obama has no interest in seeing European style healthcare here. He wants universal access to health care for all Americans, NOT nationalized health care.
Of course, he won't attempt it all at once but those first baby steps become larger and larger as time goes along. After it happens it may be too late to change back and we go along faster and faster.

Who pays for that universal healthcare anyway? Could it be the taxpayers? Can you imagine how much taxes will have to go up to provide what he is offering? Will any people be stupid enough to pay taxes to help those who don't have healthcare for very long. Obama says if you like your healthcare so well then keep it. Pay taxes for the others and pay for health insurance. Only a fool is taken in by what he is saying there. Well many who don't have health care may be taken in but some have it and surely aren't stupid enough to jump in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2009, 12:06 AM
 
Location: New York, New York
4,906 posts, read 6,848,248 times
Reputation: 1033
My sisters family had to cancel theirs. My brother inlaw is diabetic and they have three kids and were paying more than 800 dollars a month. They both work two jobs and still couldn't afford to keep it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2009, 12:20 AM
 
31,387 posts, read 37,054,795 times
Reputation: 15038
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy View Post
Of course, he won't attempt it all at once but those first baby steps become larger and larger as time goes along.
Oh, puleeze that was the big bone of contention between Obama, Hillary and Edwards all who wanted to establish a far more "leftist" version of healthcare reform than Obama. Both Clinton and Edwards were extremely vocal in attacking Obama's lack of mandates requiring participation in a national healthcare scheme which ultimately would have been closer to a single payer system. But having said that, neither Edwards or Clinton EVER advocated the nationalization of healthcare, healthcare providers, or hospitals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2009, 12:28 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,822,592 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovingForward View Post
Obama has no interest in seeing European style healthcare here. He wants universal access to health care for all Americans, NOT nationalized health care.
We could use Nationalized Healthcare system in which the middle men are replaced by an expanded and reformed medicare. In other words, our taxes pay the premium and a single payer is responsible for handling the payments to the doctors and hospitals.

This plan is favored by most doctors (based on a survey, 59% support it, only 32% oppose it), and American Medical Association, to avoid red tape infested system that exists today, which is not only expensive but also abuses people. This would also guarantee healthcare coverage to all Americans. It is a winning situation for all but the middle men and people who would fight till the end for them, the latter primarily those bought over by the big corporations (a lot of politicians) and self-defeaters who take talking points from the politicians/media and dance around as puppets, repeating the rhetoric, in the hands of these crooks.

A plan like this would also benefit small businesses that can't afford to pay big bucks for their employees and often lose the battle to corporations. It is the way to be fiscally responsible while accomplishing welfare and good will of the people for which the government stands, not to the corporations, and help businesses be more competitive in a global free market system. Our founding fathers would be proud.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top