Notices
Results 1 to 35 of 35

Thread: Obama's Healthcare System

  1. #1 Obama's Healthcare System 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    5
    Its not good


    TDG
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    It's only bad if you blindly listen to pundits. It's bad for some health insurance companies. It can be made not to look good if you don't know anything about the health care system, so I'm sure those particular health insurance companies that will suffer are spending all the money they can to stop it.

    As a country, of course, we won't be any worse off. Insurance companies spend a lot of money trying to tailor their rates to specific demographics, but the tailoring does nothing to lower the overall cost of health care. The fact they're spending money on it actually drives the price up. HB 3200 will be a step in the direction of diminishing this practice. ... if it doesn't get shot down.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Professor Wild Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,140
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    It's only bad if you blindly listen to pundits. It's bad for some health insurance companies. It can be made not to look good if you don't know anything about the health care system, so I'm sure those particular health insurance companies that will suffer are spending all the money they can to stop it.

    As a country, of course, we won't be any worse off. Insurance companies spend a lot of money trying to tailor their rates to specific demographics, but the tailoring does nothing to lower the overall cost of health care. The fact they're spending money on it actually drives the price up. HB 3200 will be a step in the direction of diminishing this practice. ... if it doesn't get shot down.
    Wow...

    You should read and understand HB 3200. It's nothing but free access for the government to rule our health care.

    It will cost us more, and destroy the free market health care.

    They say that we get to keep our insurance. What they don't say is that they will regulate it out of existence. We have free choice up to 3 years into the law. After that, we can remain "grandfathered in" our existing policy. If for any reason, we lose that policy after that 3 year mark, then we can only get a government approved plan. Employers cannot give new employees the same plan, and will have to pay more to offer any health care. Eventually, employers will drop employee coverage. When you read what approved plans consist of, you see that they will be far more expensive. What will happen, is this will drive all common people to the single payer government plan. Only the very rich will be able to afford private insurance. Everyone else will end up at the mercy of the government.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    If you're just mad that the government is regulating something, then you're probably also mad that they regulate power companies, and other utilities.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    It's only bad if you blindly listen to pundits. It's bad for some health insurance companies. It can be made not to look good if you don't know anything about the health care system, so I'm sure those particular health insurance companies that will suffer are spending all the money they can to stop it.

    As a country, of course, we won't be any worse off. Insurance companies spend a lot of money trying to tailor their rates to specific demographics, but the tailoring does nothing to lower the overall cost of health care. The fact they're spending money on it actually drives the price up. HB 3200 will be a step in the direction of diminishing this practice. ... if it doesn't get shot down.
    Wow...

    You should read and understand HB 3200. It's nothing but free access for the government to rule our health care.

    It will cost us more, and destroy the free market health care.
    You're only looking at one portion of this. If the reason it "costs more" is that people get too much coverage, then it's not really "costing more". Most healthcare proceedures still happen whether they're covered or not. The difference is that, if everyone is covered, then they happen on the books instead of off the books.

    The free market hospital system will be untouched, other than that they won't have to deal with as many unpaid medical bills. The free market health insurance system will be crushed, and, good riddance. You have to learn not to group these two industries together in your mind, because they don't belong under the same umbrella. They're two separate issues.


    They say that we get to keep our insurance. What they don't say is that they will regulate it out of existence. We have free choice up to 3 years into the law. After that, we can remain "grandfathered in" our existing policy. If for any reason, we lose that policy after that 3 year mark, then we can only get a government approved plan. Employers cannot give new employees the same plan, and will have to pay more to offer any health care. Eventually, employers will drop employee coverage. When you read what approved plans consist of, you see that they will be far more expensive. What will happen, is this will drive all common people to the single payer government plan. Only the very rich will be able to afford private insurance. Everyone else will end up at the mercy of the government.
    What I'm trying to explain is that free market competition between insurance companies actually diminishes their efficiency, because they compete the wrong way. Insurance companies do not focus primarily on streamlining their process or making it more efficient. Their primary form of competition is based on just setting their rates differently, or adjusting their coverage set. It's not tremendously beneficial, but they spend a lot of money doing it, money the end consumer ultimately has to pay.

    The problem with Canadian healthcare is that their government runs the hospitals, and hospitals need private market competition in order to run efficiently. Insurance companies, on the other hand, only suffer from it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Professor Wild Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,140
    kojax, HB 3200 is not a step in the right direction. Maybe you can find things it will improve, but overall, it is a complete disaster.

    Have you read it?

    I have read a good share of it, but not all.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Why don't you explain to me which parts you're specifically having a problem with, because I might be misunderstanding you. And don't give me that "government controlling stuff is automatically bad." line. Government controls utilities and it's actually beneficial. It all just depends on what *kind* of control.

    It would probably be beneficial to everyone to know the specifics of what's bothering you, so they can be more educated about the issue.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
    Everyone else will end up at the mercy of the government.
    Hahaha. And you think it's any better being at the mercy of your insurance company? At least your government doesn't have an explicit mission to make a profit by any means possible.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    286
    what is it?

    is that he one obama and congress get free health care or have enuf money for the cadillac plan?

    its works well for them
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Veracity Vigilante inow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    If you don't understand what's going on, the president clarified it in his weekly address this morning. The benefit is that it's in video format so even illiterate asshats can follow along with the key points.


    http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/...-benefits-2010
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    172
    Quote Originally Posted by inow
    If you don't understand what's going on, the president clarified it in his weekly address this morning. The benefit is that it's in video format so even illiterate asshats can follow along with the key points.


    http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/...-benefits-2010
    Reading the crude yet inarticulate words of inow and then listening to the sophomoric cliches of Obama I fear for the Republic.

    Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of our country.

    Now.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Veracity Vigilante inow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    What you consider to be aiding your country, others may interpret as harm. Would you care to be more specific, or are you content to speak in generalities so no progress can be made?

    I am a good man. I stand up for my principles, and I want nothing more than to help my fellow human beings and those who reside in my country.

    However, I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that what I consider to be "helpful" is different than what you consider to be "helpful," so how about instead of calling me crude and the president sophomoric you lead by example and begin to speak with specifics about what you would like "good men" to do to "come to the aid of our country."


    Any fool can incite others, but a real man will lead them with his vision and ability to share it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Hahaha. And you think it's any better being at the mercy of your insurance company? At least your government doesn't have an explicit mission to make a profit by any means possible.
    SR; There are 1300-1600 different Insurance Companies, ONE Federal Government. I'd much rather have a choice from 1600 sources driven by consumers, than that one driven by people wishing to get elected. Think about it....

    tdg; Welcome to the forum. Could you elaborate on your thread, it's a hot issue and I'd like your opinion. Don't worry about being criticized, there may be some that will agree, like me on Obamacare!!!


    Reading the crude yet inarticulate words of inow and then listening to the sophomoric cliches of Obama I fear for the Republic.

    Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of our country.
    milum; 'inow' has a good many ideology problems, but inarticulate, he is not.

    I particularly agree with your fear for the republic, the loss of personal rights, choice not only by and of the people, but the loss of rights guaranteed to States, which is all that sets the US out ahead of the rest of the world. IMO, we're already being governed by Congressional Dictate and on it's current course, the US Constitution will be soon voided.

    I am a good man. I stand up for my principles, and I want nothing more than to help my fellow human beings and those who reside in my country.
    inow; Has it occurred to you, that there are several Countries, that already hold to your principles. Are you suggesting those who see and believe the 'Traditional American' philosophy from a different angle, are somehow not American? In short you and those with similar viewpoints are trying to force those viewpoints on the rest of society, unfortunately with some success.

    Most of those your wishing to "help", are perfectly capable of helping themselves....let them.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Pueblo, CO
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
    You should read and understand HB 3200. It's nothing but free access for the government to rule our health care.

    It will cost us more, and destroy the free market health care.

    They say that we get to keep our insurance. What they don't say is that they will regulate it out of existence. We have free choice up to 3 years into the law. After that, we can remain "grandfathered in" our existing policy. If for any reason, we lose that policy after that 3 year mark, then we can only get a government approved plan. Employers cannot give new employees the same plan, and will have to pay more to offer any health care. Eventually, employers will drop employee coverage. When you read what approved plans consist of, you see that they will be far more expensive. What will happen, is this will drive all common people to the single payer government plan. Only the very rich will be able to afford private insurance. Everyone else will end up at the mercy of the government.
    I totally agree with what Wild Cobra said up top. The healthcare plan is likely to put most or all of our private insurance companies out of business. I read an estimate that it will bankrupt 20% of the U.S. hospitals and medical facilities as well. The healthcare bill will force insurance companies to insure people they would not normally. Hospitals then will not get paid when those companies go under. They won't be able to stay in the black, and so they'll close down. You see, free market has its advantages!

    Also, the healthcare plan will not be free. This is an issue for me because I will graduate college in a year and my parents' insurance will no longer cover me. The government will then force me to pay the premiums for the new healthcare plan--or I can opt out for $750 per year. The reason people go without insurance is that they can't afford premiums. Now, if they can't afford it, they will be charged $750 as a penalty for their poverty. That makes great sense, doesn't it? :x
    I am a student, editor and tutor, and leader of the creative writing club at Hastings College. My major combines studies in political science, international studies, and communication studies. Visit my blog, www.staceyboyce.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    172
    Jackson22 said: "milum; 'inow' has a good many ideology problems, but inarticulate, he is not."
    Now Jackson, semantical articulation reguires congruity of meaning and words.
    So tell me, Jackson, what is congruent about a sentence that reads...

    "If you don't understand what's going on, the president clarified it in his weekly address this morning. The benefit is that it's in video format so even illiterate asshats can follow along with the key points."
    You see, Jackson, I like "inow", but "asshats" like me-- whatever an 'asshat" might be - do not like to be told that whatever Obama might say, is what is.

    Asshats, you see, Jackson33, think that Obama is a joke. A deadly joke to be sure, but a joke nonetheless. And we are sad for our country.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Veracity Vigilante inow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    Quote Originally Posted by jackson33
    Quote Originally Posted by iNow
    I am a good man. I stand up for my principles, and I want nothing more than to help my fellow human beings and those who reside in my country.
    inow; Has it occurred to you, that there are several Countries, that already hold to your principles. Are you suggesting those who see and believe the 'Traditional American' philosophy from a different angle, are somehow not American?
    No.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Veracity Vigilante inow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    Quote Originally Posted by milum
    You see, Jackson, I like "inow", but "asshats" like me-- whatever an 'asshat" might be - do not like to be told that whatever Obama might say, is what is.

    Asshats, you see, Jackson33, think that Obama is a joke. A deadly joke to be sure, but a joke nonetheless. And we are sad for our country.
    The question which has been put to you still awaits response.


    What did you mean? How do you propose "good men" come to the aid of our country? What precisely should they do, and why?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    172
    Quote Originally Posted by inow
    Quote Originally Posted by milum
    You see, Jackson, I like "inow", but "asshats" like me-- whatever an 'asshat" might be - do not like to be told that whatever Obama might say, is what is.

    Asshats, you see, Jackson33, think that Obama is a joke. A deadly joke to be sure, but a joke nonetheless. And we are sad for our country.
    The question which has been put to you still awaits response.


    What did you mean? How do you propose "good men" come to the aid of our country? What precisely should they do, and why?
    Now, now, inow; are you baiting me? Really now , inow. there are no snuff-dipping. gun-toting, redneck lunatics hiding in your bushes.
    Don't be frightened. "Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country?" was once hyped to be the most often typed sentence in the English language. Rote repetition of the phrase was an obliglatory tool when learning to type. Over and over, ad nauseam, it was typed.

    Ah inow! If only your socialist paradise were here enow!

    Now here's a question for you...

    You say you are a good man. Does a good man do nothing when a self-declared Robin Hood steals all his food?

    Share yout answer with your family.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Veracity Vigilante inow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    Quote Originally Posted by milum
    Quote Originally Posted by inow
    What did you mean? How do you propose "good men" come to the aid of our country? What precisely should they do, and why?
    Now, now, inow; are you baiting me? Really now , inow. there are no snuff-dipping. gun-toting, redneck lunatics hiding in your bushes.
    Don't be frightened. "Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country?" was once hyped to be the most often typed sentence in the English language. Rote repetition of the phrase was an obliglatory tool when learning to type. Over and over, ad nauseam, it was typed.

    Ah inow! If only your socialist paradise were here enow!
    And now, after three requests, you have still failed to articulate your position in a clear way... seemingly content to continue throwing feces and empty labels you deem derogatory, all the while inciting others based on your own ill-formed and misrepresentative opinions.

    I'd like to thank you for providing direct evidence of my suggestion above that you (and those thinking like you) can summarily be dismissed as asshats.


    I am genuinely curious though, and hope that you have enough integrity to address the question which has been put to you so we may get past this ridiculous tangential jaunt and have a reasonable dialog with one another. In context of the healthcare bill, what precisely are you suggesting that "good men" do to "come to the aid of their country," milum?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    The current Health Bill, will be judged in the few days, by one State and their people. The Coakley/Brown Massachusetts race to replace Kennedy on 1/19/2010. Most polls, continue to show Martha Coakley (D), up 10 to 15 percentage points over Scott Brown (R), but there are many and well scattered to result estimates, a couple predicting a Brown win. Both camps are lined up to send in their top names and Sarah Palin, will weight in tonight on the FNC, 'Bill O'Rielly' show, where she is now, a paid contributor.

    For a break down on polling the issues;

    http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/p...A_45398436.pdf

    Brown leads 63-31 with independents and is winning 17% of the Democratic vote while Coakley receives only 6% support from GOP voters. Both candidates are relatively popular, with 57% viewing Brown favorably to only 25% unfavorable and 50% with a positive opinion of Coakley to 42% negative.

    If Brown, some how upsets Coakley or comes with in 5 points, I believe some of those "good men" and women will have stepped up. What's going to be telling to me are the 'Independed voters' which are leaning extremely heavy toward Brown, today and could cause an upset victory for Brown.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    172
    Solid, Jackson! (That's bop talk, iNow)

    One in a thousand. (these are the long odds that iNow really wants to know what I mean when I say NOW IS THE TIME FOR ALL GOOD MEN TO COME TO THE AID OF THEIR COUNTRY)
    But what the hell I'll answer him just for kicks...

    Look, iNow! See the people in Massachusetts? See them scurry. See then run? Go watch them overfill the polling places come Tuesday. See, iNow? That is how all good men come to the aid of their country and throw bad men out.
    O happy day. :-D
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Veracity Vigilante inow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    And how might I do that myself... you know... not being a resident of Massachusetts able to vote in the election to fill the seat of the recently deceased Ted Kennedy?


    My sense from you... if I read between the lines... is that you think the only way to be a good man and come to the aid of our country is to prevent our fellow citizens from having access to healthcare unless they are wealthy enough to afford it. Is that accurate?

    Let people get and stay sick unless they are of well enough position to afford healthcare. That's how "good men" should "come to the aid of their country," right, milum?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by inow
    prevent our fellow citizens from having access to healthcare unless they are wealthy enough to afford it. Is that accurate?
    Maybe you also think everybody should have "access to" (translate as "free") food, housing, clothes, etc. ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Veracity Vigilante inow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    Harold - Ever heard of food stamps, and soup kitchens, and other assistance for our fellow humans who may not be as fortunate as us?

    Yes... I happen to think that those are good things, and happen to think that bad times often befall innocent, intelligent, and industrious people... and that everyone should "have access to" those things (food, shelters, and basic human kindness and dignity) if they are in need.

    Either way, no matter how you might feel on the topic of healthcare, your slippery slope argument is really rather useless and unproductive. I asked Milum a question. He keeps talking about "good men" and "doing right by their country," and I must concede that I struggle a bit to understand anyone who thinks that they are being a good man by actively campaigning against an attempt to care for people who are unfortunate... who actively speak out against people who are simply trying to ensure a basic minimum level of healthcare is available for their fellow man.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    Quote Originally Posted by inow
    prevent our fellow citizens from having access to healthcare unless they are wealthy enough to afford it. Is that accurate?
    Maybe you also think everybody should have "access to" (translate as "free") food, housing, clothes, etc. ?
    Yes.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    172
    Quote Originally Posted by Bunbury
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    Quote Originally Posted by inow
    prevent our fellow citizens from having access to healthcare unless they are wealthy enough to afford it. Is that accurate?
    Maybe you also think everybody should have "access to" (translate as "free") food, housing, clothes, etc. ?
    Yes.
    Now Bunbury. Who do you know that died in the US of starvation?
    I know of one. Some lady in Florida was judged to be dead and the court cut off her food supply, and she died a few days later. Really, Bunbury, you have to go to Africa or to Haiti if you want to see some real folks starving.

    Clothes? Naked people in America? Gee whiz I pay good money to see people naked.

    Housing? Now that's a tough one. Even in America you have to obey the rules to get free public housing. You know, like staying sober, forgoing dangerous drugs, and not killing your neighbor.

    But wait! In America even if you kill your neighbor you get free housing, free food, and free medical care in jail.

    All you don't get is freedom...no big deal, huh?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Veracity Vigilante inow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    ^^ Hence my asshat comment.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,847
    What will happen, is this will drive all common people to the single payer government plan.
    - - - -
    The healthcare bill will force insurance companies to insure people they would not normally.
    - - - - - -
    The healthcare plan is likely to put most or all of our private insurance companies out of business.
    - - - -
    The government will then force me to pay the premiums for the new healthcare plan--or I can opt out for $750 per year.
    So what looks like the shape of things to come:

    There is no government single payer plan, unless you are old or in Congress. The health care bill coercively recruits a large new flock of consumers for insurance company product, but does not coerce the companies into insuring them - they can set premiums wherever they need to be. The anti-trust exemptions for medical insurance companies stand, and there is a move to expand their reach into multiple states - to allow multi-state monopoly or cartel based on one state license. The government programs are not allowed to use market leverage on drug prices or anything else, and international drug imports are still restricted. No efficiency in paperwork, competition reduction, or other major cost saving seems available. As is true now, millions of Americans will be denied medical care due to lack of money, including many (possibly a majority) who have private insurance - the minimum insurance standard is not pegged as high as European normal.

    A welfare bill for insurance companies, apparently, in these hard times of inadequate profits.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    172
    Quote Originally Posted by inow
    ^^ Hence my asshat comment.
    No, inow, your "asshat" comment has no hence. Your "asshat" comment is only a child's playground slur to denigrate somebody he can't best intellectually.

    Now, inow, say something, go ahead, say something stimulating about Obama's healthcare.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Veracity Vigilante inow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    Quote Originally Posted by milum
    Now, inow, say something, go ahead, say something stimulating about Obama's healthcare.
    I don't know if you'll find it stimulating, but it's accurate, so I'll go with that.

    Insurance companies will no longer be able to deny coverage on the basis of a preexisting condition. They will no longer be able to drop coverage when people get sick and need it most. There will be limits on out of pocket expenses a person can pay, and people will be able to appeal unfair decisions by insurance companies to an independent party.

    Workers won’t have to worry about losing coverage if they lose or change jobs. Premiums will go down for a huge percentage of people. Businesses will save money since the cost growths have been slowed. Medicare will be strengthened and will last longer under this bill. The bill will make coverage affordable for over 30 million Americans who do not have it. It is paid for and reduces wastes and inefficiencies in the system.

    The bill will help reduce our deficit by as much $282 billion in the next decade and as much as $1.3 trillion in the decade after that. It will also help to ensure that Americans no longer have to go without a checkup or prescriptions when they need them... things countless people have been skipping because they can’t afford them... even people with existing coverage. People... even those with existing coverage... will no longer have to worry about going bankrupt after a single illness which is no fault of their own. 50% of all bankruptcies in our country are the result of medical costs. Of those 50%, 70% had existing coverage. That's right. Seven out of every ten people who have gone bankrupt as a result of medical costs HAD existing coverage. That will stop.


    This will help people, and help reduce costs. It would be even better if we weren't forced to cater to such ignorant people all of the time and we just moved forward with a single payer system like all of the other advanced countries have proven works rather well and minimizes individual costs for maximal services.


    Now, would you care to address my question about why you think that being a "good man" includes actively campaigning against an attempt to care for people who are in need and actively speaking out against people who are simply trying to ensure a basic minimum level of healthcare is available for their fellow humans?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Junior Steiner101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    251
    For what its worth, i live in the UK and we have had a free health care system in the for a long time. I have had people in my family and friends who have had to use it heavily and if it was not for free healthcare their lives would have been long gone by now purely for financial reasons. I dont think that is right in a modern society. My mother was also a nurse working for them for 26 years.

    The NHS has been given bad press by the republicans in the states, fair enough running a system like this has its negative side in terms of tax, but overall it benefits the society as a whole and is important for bridging the massive gap between privelidges for rich and poor.

    It all comes down to wether you beleive the government have an obligation to care for its citizens, or whether it is the citizens own duty.

    People in the UK find the americans apprehension for free health care quite strange. Is it rich people putting their weight against healthcare being available to all (they could just get private treatment no?) or do you just believe peopel who cant pay tax shouldnt be able to use it?
    'Aint no thing like a chicken wing'
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    Quote Originally Posted by harvestein
    For what its worth, i live in the UK and we have had a free health care system in the for a long time. I have had people in my family and friends who have had to use it heavily and if it was not for free healthcare their lives would have been long gone by now purely for financial reasons. I dont think that is right in a modern society. My mother was also a nurse working for them for 26 years.
    I grew up there and I agree with your assessment.

    The NHS has been given bad press by the republicans in the states, fair enough running a system like this has its negative side in terms of tax, but overall it benefits the society as a whole and is important for bridging the massive gap between privelidges for rich and poor.
    Well, it’s not just a “rich and poor” thing. The moderately well off, the comfortable middle class and some who are just barely making it can soon join the ranks of the poor if they get seriously ill.

    It all comes down to wether you beleive the government have an obligation to care for its citizens, or whether it is the citizens own duty.
    I don’t see it as quite so black and white. The government doesn’t have an obligation to care directly for the citizens, but most of us (as demonstrated by the last general election) see it as a moral prerogative to make it possible for all citizens to have access to health care. Others see it as purely the role of the market to provide health care if it can make a profit doing so, and their moral perspective places a higher value on “freedom” than on obligations to fellow citizens. This is where the great divide of opinion lies.

    People in the UK find the americans apprehension for free health care quite strange. Is it rich people putting their weight against healthcare being available to all (they could just get private treatment no?) or do you just believe peopel who cant pay tax shouldnt be able to use it?
    We elected a president who campaigned on health care, so it seems as if “we” do not believe that. However insurance company propaganda has been very clever and some people have been swayed to think they will lose something valuable, although I don’t believe many of those people could articulate exactly what they are in danger of losing.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Forum Junior Steiner101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    251
    What is it that the insurance companys are claiming will happen?

    What i find about politics is that the losing side often try to complicate the argument by trying to drag the public into every detail making the whole thing look complex and unworkable, scaring them off and obscuring how much better the end result will be.
    'Aint no thing like a chicken wing'
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    Quote Originally Posted by harvestein
    What is it that the insurance companys are claiming will happen?
    Three items come immediately to mind that they have used in TV ads and/or talking points given to their congressional clients are:

    1. Health care reform means we will get a Canadian style system with long waiting lists for urgent treatment.
    2. The government will tell you which doctor you have to use.
    3. Millions of people with company health plans that they like will lose them.

    None of these is true. Where I come form this is called lying.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Junior Steiner101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    251
    I have just read the democrats just lost a seat so that now the bill is unlikely to pass.

    With things the way they are in congress i dont see how obama can get anything done. Politics in the UK is quite adversarial but not as much as the American system. Seems more like a popularity contest sometimes.
    'Aint no thing like a chicken wing'
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    Quote Originally Posted by harvestein
    I have just read the democrats just lost a seat so that now the bill is unlikely to pass.

    With things the way they are in congress i dont see how obama can get anything done. Politics in the UK is quite adversarial but not as much as the American system. Seems more like a popularity contest sometimes.
    The filibuster is a ridiculous thing. Both sides use it. The British version at least requires the talk to be on topic. Here they can talk about Grannie's recipe for chicken and dumplings or the price of shoes in Ecuador.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •