Bonneville America Forums Forums Off Topic Discussion Forums Lounge Support for National Health Insurance Plan

I dont mean to sound cold but if your job is making you pay 1200 bucks a month for insurance I would look for a better job. My insurance costs have went up over the years but I live in the same state as you and they dont cost anywhere near that... my son just finished high school and has great insurance at his job... look around it ain"t as bad as they tell you on t.v.... as far as your rights you have the right to pursue happiness but it ain"t a given

And just where do you think the money for your government provided health care is going to come from? I bet your answer will be, "uh, from the government". WRONG ANSWER!!! That money that the government has comes from you, I and your neighbors. Why should I expect my neighbors to pay for my health care? Why should I expect to pay for someone else's health care? Maybe, just maybe more people would be able to afford to get their own insurance if the government didn’t steal so much money our of our paychecks every pay day to begin with.

The debate about government health care has nothing to do with health care, it has everything to do with giving the government more of your money and more power and control over your life!!

Soren

For various personal and medical reasons, I'm self employed. This is the dollar amount THREE insurance companies quoted me for, nearly 5 years ago.

so what have you done in the last 5 years to change this problem ???

I think you're not reading my entire post, or you're missing something. I would expect to pay, and would gladly cough up 10% of my income for health care. And almost everyone else would too if they thought about how much they already pay in "company" benifit plans and riders on car insurance. A persons health is like the lottery. Some, a very few, win big by hardly ever getting sick. Some lose big by getting a disease or serious health problem and lose all they have, (and their families with them) In a wealthy, modern society such as hours, health care shouldn't depend on whether you're lucky enough to have a good job, a good education or good health genes. (I'm not discounting all the people who worked hard to get where they are. I did that too.) I don't believe in a system where the wealthY few have acess to health care. If you work hard, YOU DESERVE more STUFF! But a modern, wealthy nation should have the courage and sympathy to help everybody with something as basic as the RIGHT TO LIVE. To ignore our wealth and prosperity and ignore the sickly poor is a direct line back to to the Middle Ages, where only royalty and the upper crust had good access to help.

With socialist ideas like yours, there is absolutley no motivation or incentive for me or anyone to ever want to work or attempt to improve their lives, after all, what for, the government is going to provide and take care of everything for me. After all, the government knows what I need and should do, and spend my money on.. etc, etc better than I do. But, I guess someone has to pay for everyone else, so I'll go to work tomorrow.

Soren

Well I have never been compared to royalty but I must say I do not fit your description of the lucky ones with access to health care, I have some pretty serious health issues myself and while I am not proud of it I am a old stoner and 9th grade dropout from the 70"s so that shoots the crap out of the education theory...My job sucks but 65 hrs. a week has let me raise 3 kids buy my home and given me the right to pursue happiness... god bless America

One more thing, I really hate this banging on the rich crap... If you took all the money in the U.S and split it evenly with all the people,,, within ten years it would all be back were it was to start

Soren, I am not a socialist. But it is interesting that you and others do not recognize how many "socialistic" programs have made life livable here in this great country. Know anyone who has a "college pell grant'? They're a socialist. Ever used a public library? You're a socialist. Ever been given any help for disaster relief? You're a socialist. Know anybody who has been down on their luck and gotten food stamps? Socialism. Unemployment insurance? Socialism. I could go on for hours. I've worked hard all my life, never collected welfare and make a good life for me and my family, mostly because I am smart and frugal. I live in a new house, which my friend and family envy, because I built it myself. I have numerous antique autos and cars because I bought them as junk and fixed them myself. In short, I have lived the american dream because of hard work, thrift and honesty, and the help of a great family. But I also feel for the people who have not been as fortunate as I am. Sometimes the "little" people get what they deserve because of what they do, sometimes it is because of just plain old dumb luck. I am reminded of a famous senator who ran for president a few years ago, who was educated on the GI bill after his honorable years in the service (another socialistic program). He was integral in squashing the National health care plan then proposed. How very typical of certain politicians. After they climb the ladder given to them by generous American programs, they want to pull the ladder up after them.
IN ClOSING, I wish all of you critics of "socialistic" programs good health. I have enjoyed the debate, but I have probably said enough. I hope that I have made some of you think a little bit. Thanks again for this polite debate and honest, intelligent dicussion!

Pell grants, public libraries, unemployment payments, the GI Bill and disaster relief do not count towards socialism, not in the least little bit. There are times that people need help and I am all for that. When the government takes my money and forces me to use their system that is socialism. I can attempt to pay for college myself (actually I still am), I can but a book at a bookstore or borrow a book from a friend (I dont have to go to the library), I can find another job instead of filing for unemployment (I have never filed for unemployment nor have I ever been out of work for more than two weeks at a time), the GI Bill is a benefit to say thanks to those who served in the military that comes out of an invested fund (it is not completely paid by my fellow tax payers), disaster relief is a one time hand-out for a hand-up (it is not a forced continious system).

Soren

Medicare doesn't have much future the way so many overblown claims and scams are paid without the controls private insurance companies have. I can only imagine the abuse that would occur with a national health care program run by the government.

The roads are owned by the govenment, but who builds them? Should we have govenment owned construction companies? They are also part of the infrastructure envisioned by the founding fathers well over two hundred years ago. A better comparison would be cars and motorcycles. There were some government owned automakers that operated with no competition in East Germany and the Soviet Union. Fiat and Yugo were government owned too. Hey, great stuff.

As for college loans and grants, what do you think has driven the cost of a college education up at several times the cost of living? Colleges always increase their prices when loan limits are increased.

As for healthcare costs as part of the costs of doing business for international business. What is the difference between paying it out in healthcare costs directly and paying it to the government in taxes so they can cover healthcare costs? There are lots of ways to control costs that big unions, and some politicians, fight tooth and nail. Then they whine that costs are too high and we need to have the government run it.

I can tell you first hand Medicare leaves huge gaps in coverage. Welfare access card covers everything with no copays while Wendy who is disabled has copays on almost everything. It gets very expensive when she has to see 5 specialists and she does all the time. There is no dental coverage here either. Medicare does cover dental where it's been mandated but that isn't where we live. Her neds cost money too unlike access. I think thats backwards, most welfare people are capable of working while most disabled are not yet the people capable of working get a free ride. Wendys disability is based on the money she made when working and she worked hard and made decent money. I can also tell you they don't hand disability to you, it's a difficult process and you have to fight for it. The welfare cases should have the copays while the disabled shouldn't. I think in practice national health care is a bad idea. I would love to have coverage and be able to go to any doctor for free but that isn't how it works, nothing is free. On top of that if healthcare seems free you will have hypocoindriacts (sp?) going and tieing up resources that a truly sick person may need. I think the gov't has invaded our private lives too much as it is. Gov't run health care will bring about people who can't get care they need because some stuffed shirt decided it wasn't needed while at the same time someone will be getting care they don't really need. I have already seen it in the Medicare and comp systems. Or by the time help is approved the damage will have been done and care comes too late, seen that one too. Bad idea no matter how you slice it, like I said before it only looks good on paper, just like communisum looks good on paper but no one would want to live that way in practice.

A library is an example of socialism? Man, you have no clue. Most libraries started in the USA where funded by private donors, especially the generosity of Carnegie ( a fun story, is that he funded the libraries in the Quad City area of Iowa/Illinois, except one, and that one was in Rock Island, then home of Weyerhauser, so Carnegie told them they had someone there to fund it, so go there...and they did ). The communities supported, developed, and built upon these resources, it wasnt robbing the public to build them.

As for the college education, ladisney is right on the point, the scam of these loans only encourages the upward trend of costs. In the early 80s, the growth in govt assistance vs the costs was like a rocket, and it hasnt decelerate much since.

Medical care as a "national" program is lunacy. What ever happened to being an American, an individual who fends for himself, cares or his own and his neighbours, and gives to others? Not this crap where the govt robs the citizenry and provides crappy services, what you want is Cuba, go try it there and see how much you like it.

Quote:

---

Define socialist.

---

One of the better statements you have made around here Larry.
I'm sure that you are well aware that there are many different levels of Socialism, and it would be exhaustive to try to list them all.

But, one critical point: Socialism is not Communism. The two terms are not interchangeable as some of the less erudite seem to think. Communism is indeed Socialism taken to an extreme, but Communism has come to mean a totalitarian dictatorship in modern terms.

Socialism refers to social programs either run by or overseen by the State. You would be hard pressed to find any nation that does not have some types of socialist programs in place. A few have been mentioned. Stating that those don't count (and I know it wasn't you who said it) is really an inane argument that barely deserves acknowledgment, except to hold it up for ridicule.

Quite frankly, many programs are better run by the government than profit motivated corporations. Like police departments, fire departments, penitentiaries, military.

What about Government oversight? Let's see; it would appear that the stock markets are holding out quite well with SEC oversight as opposed to say...the mortgage business with minimal interference.
Yep, and those deregulated Airlines are going great guns, aren't they .

I linked in a previous post in this thread to an incident here in Las Vegas in which a highly profitable medical practice has potentially infected over 40,000 patients with hepatitis and/or HIV by disregarding patient safety to save, quite literally, a few pennies.

With 47 million Americans without health coverage, there will be change. Because they can vote. And a lot of us who have excellent coverage will vote with them.

I think it was Thomas Jefferson who said something like "a little revolution is sometimes a good thing".
Well, our Constitution has built into it a provision for revolution. It's called elections.
And while some of the poor can be distracted for a time with fundamentalist rhetoric, when they see their child sick and their hearts are breaking, they stop caring what others do with their genitals, or what kind of guns they can have.
They want to have access to the best medical care there is.

Like I said, it will happen. Get used to it.

I used to be an instructor at the Navy Nuclear Weapons Training Group in San Diego and I spliced the Slim Pickens scene into my airborne weapons drop training films. A very few people thought it was tacky but that was in the days before we allowed one pinhead to set the tone for everyone.

I purposely said Communism because it was the extreme.

Ya SEE?! I was RIGHT AGAIN!!!

Gee, I wonder if there are any openings at Central Casting for an old retired airline employee?

(but first I better check and see what kind of insurance they have available there...I sure hope it's not KAISER!!!)

Well if we are going to nationalize medical care because not everyone gets equal treatment what else should we nationalize? We already have socialized k-12 education, boy that’s been a great success. 25% of Detroit kids graduating and suburban schools bragging about graduating 80%. I can’t think of many private schools with those kind of numbers.

Why should one person eat less well than anyone else? Ruths Chris steakhouse vouchers for everyone. Why should some people have to ride the bus when others drive? Shouldn’t everyone be able to go to the beach? Why should some people live in poor neighborhoods when others live in splendor? Shouldn’t ugly people get free cosmetic surgery so they feel better about themselves and are treated better? Why should stupid lazy people get paid less than hard working intelligent people? After all, it’s not their fault they were made that way. Where do we stop demanding equal outcomes?

Socialism never produces excellence, it just spreads the misery equally. For some that seems to be the point, do away with inequality even if it means dragging everyone down to the lowest level.

Actually, Communism did produce one very good thing, cynical humor.

An American, a Frenchman and a Russian were stranded together on an island. While walking along the beach they found a bottle and uncorked it. A genie came out and offered them three wishes, one for each of them. The American asked to be the richest man in New York. Poof, he was a Wall Street billionaire. The Frenchman asked to be the finest lover in Paris. Poof, he is in Paris surrounded by lovely young women. The Russian sits and thinks and the genie becomes impatient. “Decide” says the genie. Then the Russian says “Back in my village we were all very poor and worked very hard. One of my neighbors saved his money and bought a cow. He bred the cow, sold the calf and the milk and was able to buy nice things the rest of us could not get.” “Well” asked the genie, “what do you want?” “Kill the cow!” said the Russian.

A similar story about the differences between the US and the UK.

A British coal miner is walking down the street with his young son when the mine owner goes by in his Rolls Royce. “Someday we’ll drag that man out of his car and he’ll walk like the rest of us” said the miner.

A West Virginia coal miner is walking down the street with his young son when the mine owner goes by in his Cadillac. “Someday if you work very hard and study in school you’ll be in that Cadillac” said the miner.

Unfortunately I see far many of us becoming like that Russian and the British coal miner.

I believe I was the first to drop the "socialism" bomb in here.....
The problem, as I see it, is that the current system is totally fubar, and National Health Care is not the answer. My reference to the free market system is exactly that - doctors and clinics and hospitals that do their job properly will prosper and the ones that don't - won't.
Some beancounter or beauracrat should not have any say in your health care decisions. That should be entirely between you and your doctor.
Along the same lines, good doctors and hospitals should have some protection from ambulance chasing attorneys and rediculous malpractise suits, while sub-par doctors and hospitals should be shut down as soon as possible.
Health care issues should be regulated at the state level, not the federal, so voters may have a bit more say in how things are done.

There are hundreds of issues related to health care and insurance that are totally out of control, and we're not going to resolve them on here, but putting the federal government in charge of it is not the answer. They seek only to remain in power so their goal is quantity of votes, not quality of health care.

Oh, and thanks, Ben, for moving this rather than nuking it.

It is just as "topical" as the loophole which let's insurance companies deny you coverage if you're injured ridng a motorcycle, a snowmobile, skiing, etc.....

Well said Deon, thats what I was saying above ,about bean counter making the decisions,and it happens already every day but on a smaller scale. If that starts to happen on a national level we are all sunk to be sure, have some clown telling you you don't need that transplant because it's not cost effective and the amount of years you have left are not worth the cost.

I like Jefferson too Bigbill, here are a few of my favorite quotes related to this subject.

A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.

A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor and bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government.

Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.

I own that I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.

My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

Back when the first Clinton administration was looking into universal health care I read an interesting economic report about the current cost of health care. Now remember this was 1992 or 1993. Back then of all the people with health care coverage (private and government) accounted for about 75% to 80% of all US citizens. 25% of those with health care coverage was through the government (Medicare, VA & etc), with the other 75% of health care coverage being privately insured. The dollar amount spent on the 25% from the government was approximately 250% more than what was spent on the 75% with private coverage.

So if you put everyone under government health care plan, expect the cost to go up approximately 300% from current expenditures. Now back in 1993 the report basically said the cost to the average working family would be a tax increase of about $$8,000 to $10,000 per working household.

I also have an Uncle (In-law) from Canada, and whenever he had a medical issue he would come back to Florida and have it taken care of here. He had nothing good to say about the Canadian health plan. But I do have to admit Uncle Herb was not a patient man, and hated to wait for anything.

Tom

Well, I can't do anything lofty or well read or whatever as its already been done. Jefferson is dead, probably poor health care.:) Hamilton would have done Universal Health! Aaron Burr disagreed with Hamilton on many issues . Using Jefferson, a republican, for miles against health care is IMHO a good point. He was a republican. Use Hamilton, he was the Federalist. He believed in a strong (get into everything big brother) central government. Jefferson would roll over in his grave if he could see this and the other things we have done in the interest of people.

Anyhow, I do not owe your medical bill. I checked this morning, your kids are not mine, they are in your house. There, pretty simple isn't it. You are responsible for your medical bill. You are responsible to care for your family. If you are too weak to provide for your family work harder and make better decisions. If you were too poor, why did you have babies? They are not my babies, they are yours.

Sell your motorcycle and pay the doctor. You are too poor to own a bike if you are too poor to pay for coverage. If you do not qualify for coverage, you surely should not have a bike as you should be banking money for medical bills.

You are responsible for your family, not me.

Its a common theme throughout the world. If you sit on your butt long enough, somebody feeling guilty will come give you something. Or, somebody wanting power will promise you something for free. Freedom isn't free. but I am a drug addict but I am an alcoholic but I bought a big house from that mean man who said I can afford a million $ house but my kids can't go to college what with the BMW payments and such.

Well I'm not hear to put my opinion into a thread about American Health Care but I do want to clear up any misconceptions that have surfaced over Canadian Health Care.

First our health care isn't national, our at least isn't run nationally. Our Federal government gives money to our provinces which individually administer their own health care system. For example I live in Ontario and have an OHIP plan (Ontario Health Insurance plan). This is good anywhere in Canada where I am travelling. If I leave my OHIP is still good but they suggest getting a supplementary health insurance plan which I do through CAA (which is the Canadian division of AAA) only because the plan caps the money they will pay out for certain services and those costs aren't regulated outside of Canada.

Second I'd like to make a point of all the drugs are developed in the U.S. and that is where Canadian and Mexican drugs come from. Yeah, no.

The Canadian Drug industry as of 2005 consists of 130 pharmaceutical and 165 biopharmaceutical companies. All of these companies hold patents in the U.S. ranging from high blood pressure medication to the treatment of cancer and HIV. They also produce many of the off the shelf stuff you can buy in the U.S.

Did you know also know that Canada supplies 75% of the U.S. flu vaccinations? Yep, it's true. Canada's flu vaccination facilities are some of the best in the world. We supply many nations around the world. There is an agreement between our government's that in the case of a flu pandemic Canada will support the U.S. without cutting off supplies. Last year alone there was a concern that we wouldn't have enough vaccinations for ourselves because so much of the supply was sent to the States.

Now the rest of this is my opinion, take it for what it is. No government drug plan can work without one thing, raising taxes. That's it. You have to pay for it somehow there is no way around it. Living across the border from Detroit I watch a lot of American television and news. Whenever I see voting taking place for a new tax hike I have to snicker. Another post mentioned Detroit's low level of high school graduates at 24.5% but every time there is a vote on raising taxes for schools it gets voted down. How are school officials supposed to run a system in 2008 with a budget from the 1960's? The blame isn't on officials, it's on the constituents who refuse to pay for the services they want. If you take the amount of money that you are paying into a private health care system and pay that in taxes, what is the difference?

Now the one thing I haven't touched on yet is the availability of medical services. Yes wait times are long in some cases and I would like to see them improve but I also have to say that I believe many Americans are sent for services that they don't require. I can easily see many Doctors sending patients for medical testing which isn't required but the hospital has purchased new equipment and it must be paid for.

Just to end this since it's a lot longer than I ever wanted it to be but I have never seen a bill of any kind for treatment I have received and I like that.

I don't think that access to health care should be a luxury, like fine dining, vacations, and nice cars (or bikes ),it's a necessity of life.

If you don't feel a moral obligation to help those who are sick and unable to see a doctor, look at the economic implications. Productivity is hurt, morale goes to the pit when ones is stressed out over health problems. Poor health probably leads to worse health and apathy.

More later if this keeps going. I have to work.

Thanks John! One for sticking to the point of the discussion, and not tossing around labels like Commie and Socialist, and two, for clarifying the health care situation in Canada. This is particularly valuable, since many discussions in the US about this look to countries like Canada or the UK as models of what is good or bad about the system. No, I don't want to pay higher taxes, BUT, if it is being used for something worthwhile like schools, infrastructure, etc..., then I have no problem with it. And, I have seen places where there are big problems with tax usage (Waterbury, CT, which is 20 miles from me is a very good example, but that is because of a history of chronic political corruptness that everyone complains about but no one changes). People cite getting "nationalized" (or even state administered like in Canada) health care as being as disagreeable as our Motor Vehicle Department, or other such agencies. With ANY system, you are going to have good experiences and you are going to have bad experiences. With our system, there are 2 ways of getting health care. One is to not be able to afford insurance, or the care itself, and use the Hospital Emergency Room for every problem, which drives medical costs through the roof for EVERYONE, especially since an alarming number of these bills end up being written off due to inability to pay (who CAN afford a $125 bag of IV Saline Solution???). Therefore, even though I DO have insurance, more and more of the costs are being pushed back onto the patients through rising costs, increasing deductible levels and so on. The hospitals HAVE to make money to buy equipment, pay doctors, etc... and if they can't get money from the poor who need and use their services, they just raise the fees for those of us who can pay. Oh, and if you are in this first category, you get ONLY the care needed to stabilize the problem or save your life. There is no preventative care, no services such as prenatal care, etc... Therefore, because of lack of preventative medicine, health care costs go up, again!(ask any doctor, nurse, etc..., even health insurance companies preach preventative medicine as a way to lower costs!)
The second way to get health care is to be lucky enough to have a good paying job and pay several hundred dollars a month in premiums to a company. That company is then going to try to shove as much of it's responsibility into your deductible, or into denying claims, as it can, since it's responsibility is profitability first. Anyone who is naiive enough to believe that insurance companies are in the business out of compassion, instead of profit, is purely delusional. After all, profit is the mantra of free market societies. But, even with health insurance, as I have seen recently through a spate of small visits to the doctor for my sons and my wife, the amount left over after the insurance can climb rapidly. SO, I am paying at least 5% of my montly salary to HAVE insurance, and then, if I have a string of small medical issues come up, I am suddenly left with hundreds upon hundreds of dollars (or more if it's more severe) of bills after the insurance "covers" me? And God forbid, if it's something specialized like Autism. This has suddenly become a big topic in America. Well, I have been living with it since my oldest son was born 12 years ago. It is mild, but he does have issues, and ANY kind of therapy that might help him become a more productive person (and less of a burden on society as many special needs kids can become!) is NOT covered by medical insurance, because almost all therapies are listed by medical insurance companies list them as "education services", not medical services. If a person has a traumatic injury, and requires PT and OT, it is covered without question. But if a person is born with a disability which similarly limits him/her, they are not covered. WTF??? That is a big downside to a privatized system. The companies cover what they want, when they want, and there is little that can be done about it. Luckily, some states have programs to help with this kind of stuff, and some like South Carolina are now requiring Medical Insurance to cover this stuff (Ryans Law), but there are a LOT of people in my situation who have NO options or few options. For more severe cases of Autism for example, there are very good proven therapies that turn these kids into functional adults and teens, but require intensive therapy, for 20-40 hours a week sometimes. That can run up into the $50-70,000 range per year! SO, with our system, if you are LUCKY as ******, and are rich, or live in a state with very progressive social programs, you might be able to afford such treatment, but, if you are like many parents who are lower middle class or poor, your kids stay home with you, you lose your jobs or work part time, and BOTH of you become more of a liability on society than if you were covered, and could get treatment. To me, that is the BIG benefit of a nationwide plan. Whether it's a medical issue or something like my sons' condition (althought that is also medical), there is coverage. Yes, you MIGHT have to wait (although how many good stories are there for every horror story you hear?), but chances are, you will get help, and the situation will not deteriorate until you become a major burden on society. In our system, that is true only as long as you can afford it. Otherwise, you don't get help, things get worse, and boom, you're on Meidcare or getting help from hospitals, for which everyone else pays anyhow.

Health care isnt a right. Nor should it be forced upon one person to care for another. To ask the govt to take care of you is to allow the govt to tell you how to live.