the idea that we can't afford health care is a myth.
the US defense budget is $1 trillion, annually. that's average. When you add wars and things like that into it, its much higher. You think we needed to drop 50 apaches gunships off at Columbia's door? Or give Turkey that $2 billion in military aid? They are so intent on keeping others down they are forgetting to take care of us at home. If they can spend 1 trillion on defense, when as it stands no country on earth can stand up to us a militarily force, then they can afford health care. its that simple.
thats not average. thats with 2 wars being fought. while I certainly agree we need to end wars and cut defense spending drastically, it pales in comparison to cost of heathcare. even though we need to cut spending, we aren't going to eliminate the military to pay for healthcare. and even if we did, it would be anywhere near enough.
yup, its just so simple.
actually its standard, its about a trillion a year, wars or no. and it doesn't include about $30 billion in nuke upkeep
(increase from '08)
Operations and maintenance $179.8 Bil. +9.5%
Military Personnel $125.2 Bil. +7.5%
Procurement $104.2 Bil. +5.3%
Research $79.6 Bil. +4.1%
Military Construction $21.2 Bil. +19.1%
Family Housing $3.2 Bil. +10.3%
Resolving and Mngment Funds $2.2 Bil. -18.5%
Total Base Spending * $515.4 Bil. +5.7%
*700+ military bases around the world, empires cost money.
Iraq AND Afghanistan wars were supplemented, not included in the numbers above.
(that was all from wiki)
and there are other ways to get money.
Reagan shifted $1 trillion during his presidency from social spending to the private sector, called neo-liberalism. end those policies.
and why do meds cost 50% less in Canada? Or 90% less in Cuba?
lets do what they do.
The system, as it is, is designed to take money from our bank accounts and deposit it into theirs. They make billions, when, ideally , NO PROFIT should be made on making people well, on saving lives.
jlew your numbers include paying the insurance companies, paying the pharmaceutical companies, co-paying, and of that. which are just ways to get to our bank accounts. we need to scrap the entire system.
you can't be saying we can't improve on this system.
This issue is like abortion. Your best solution is to not get pregnant.
You're better off spending your time researching and finding ways to stay healthy, rather than repair or over-throw this fucked up system. Keep some nuts squirreled away if you ever need 'em, or get a job that pays insurance. Like anything else, you won't be able to depend on anyone but yourself-- universal health care or not.
Either that or: criminalize medical insurance, lawyers, legalize pot and hemp, and let the market do the rest
No, I will not explain that last statement at all. Use your imagination
you can't be saying we can't improve on this system.
I absolutely believe the system can be improved. I just dont think government run Universal healthcare system is the answer.
as for the rest of your post. I suppose some MAJOR shifting around of our budget and heathcare system could make UHC affordable. but even in the best of days, that would be too difficult. and now, given a massive economic crisis and 2 wars still being fought. its just makes it more difficult to even being to make your suggestion a reality.
This issue is like abortion. Your best solution is to not get pregnant.
You're better off spending your time researching and finding ways to stay healthy, rather than repair or over-throw this fucked up system. Keep some nuts squirreled away if you ever need 'em, or get a job that pays insurance. Like anything else, you won't be able to depend on anyone but yourself-- universal health care or not.
Either that or: criminalize medical insurance, lawyers, legalize pot and hemp, and let the market do the rest
No, I will not explain that last statement at all. Use your imagination
I agree (with some). I would support huge increases in government spending in promoting healthy lifestyle or preventing bad ones....however you want to slice it. such as health food subsidies, good eating education in schools, etc, etc. America has grown too lazy and too fat. we need to change that from within.
the idea that we can't afford health care is a myth.
the US defense budget is $1 trillion, annually. that's average. When you add wars and things like that into it, its much higher. You think we needed to drop 50 apaches gunships off at Columbia's door? Or give Turkey that $2 billion in military aid? They are so intent on keeping others down they are forgetting to take care of us at home. If they can spend 1 trillion on defense, when as it stands no country on earth can stand up to us a militarily force, then they can afford health care. its that simple.
thats not average. thats with 2 wars being fought. while I certainly agree we need to end wars and cut defense spending drastically, it pales in comparison to cost of heathcare. even though we need to cut spending, we aren't going to eliminate the military to pay for healthcare. and even if we did, it would be anywhere near enough.
yup, its just so simple.
actually its standard, its about a trillion a year, wars or no. and it doesn't include about $30 billion in nuke upkeep
(increase from '08)
Operations and maintenance $179.8 Bil. +9.5%
Military Personnel $125.2 Bil. +7.5%
Procurement $104.2 Bil. +5.3%
Research $79.6 Bil. +4.1%
Military Construction $21.2 Bil. +19.1%
Family Housing $3.2 Bil. +10.3%
Resolving and Mngment Funds $2.2 Bil. -18.5%
Total Base Spending * $515.4 Bil. +5.7%
*700+ military bases around the world, empires cost money.
Iraq AND Afghanistan wars were supplemented, not included in the numbers above.
(that was all from wiki)
and there are other ways to get money.
Reagan shifted $1 trillion during his presidency from social spending to the private sector, called neo-liberalism. end those policies.
and why do meds cost 50% less in Canada? Or 90% less in Cuba?
lets do what they do.
The system, as it is, is designed to take money from our bank accounts and deposit it into theirs. They make billions, when, ideally , NO PROFIT should be made on making people well, on saving lives.
jlew your numbers include paying the insurance companies, paying the pharmaceutical companies, co-paying, and of that. which are just ways to get to our bank accounts. we need to scrap the entire system.
you can't be saying we can't improve on this system.
EXACTLY.
and vinny, you make an excellent point....one i've made myself a few times in this thread. preventative measures are simply one of the best ways to preserve your health AND keep healthcare costs down. where we disagree is that you think one simply 'needs to get themselves a job with health coverage'...which simply is not possible for EVERYone to do b/c yea, not EVERY employer offers health coverage...so simply do the math there. point is, overhauling/remaking our current system, getting rid of all the private for PROFIT part of the equation....we CAN afford it, we NEED to afford it, for the overall good of all citizens. no one is saying you are not in charge of your own health, but you bet.....everyone needs access to service, most especially preventative measures....it's win-win for everyone.
btw - another big part of the equation outside of REMOVING the FOR PROFIT portion of healthcare, which would save probably billions in not more....is this:
my current contribition towards my healthplan = new healthcare tax
my employer's current contribution towards my healthcare = new helathcare tax
current employer's who do not offer any healthcare coverage = new healthcare tax
those without any coverage but employed = new healthcare tax
see?
many, many more contribute towards healthcare costs for ALL.....so not "free"...but sure, free for some. but the VASt majority will pay into the system, perhaps even LESs than what we pay in now b/c more streamlined, no private insurance BS, no profit.....that we could afford to offer healthcare to those who truly need it but can't afford it on their own. it is NOT a definite that we actually will pay more, at all...just WHO we pay will change. no more insurance company, and all towards healthcare services.
I agree (with some). I would support huge increases in government spending in promoting healthy lifestyle or preventing bad ones....however you want to slice it. such as health food subsidies, good eating education in schools, etc, etc. America has grown too lazy and too fat. we need to change that from within.
Yes, except I was thinking more along the lines of the "wake the fuck up and pull your head out of your fat ass program" instead of spending more money on education
btw - another big part of the equation outside of REMOVING the FOR PROFIT portion of healthcare, which would save probably billions in not more....is this:
profit drives innovation. I do not want that taken out of the healthcare system
my current contribition towards my healthplan = new healthcare tax
my employer's current contribution towards my healthcare = new helathcare tax
current employer's who do not offer any healthcare coverage = new healthcare tax
those without any coverage but employed = new healthcare tax
this is the EXACT opposite of what I'd like to see in America. higher taxes for all to support a system controlled by one incompetent entity.
see?
many, many more contribute towards healthcare costs for ALL.....so not "free"...but sure, free for some. but the VASt majority will pay into the system, perhaps even LESs than what we pay in now b/c more streamlined, no private insurance BS, no profit.....that we could afford to offer healthcare to those who truly need it but can't afford it on their own. it is NOT a definite that we actually will pay more, at all...just WHO we pay will change. no more insurance company, and all towards healthcare services.
ah if it were only this easy. FORCING companies to pay health coverage via tax would drive many of them out of business.
The saddest part of all of this: There has probably been better discussion about this on the Moving Train in the past few days than there has been in Washington in 10 years.
btw - another big part of the equation outside of REMOVING the FOR PROFIT portion of healthcare, which would save probably billions in not more....is this:
profit drives innovation. I do not want that taken out of the healthcare system
my current contribition towards my healthplan = new healthcare tax
my employer's current contribution towards my healthcare = new helathcare tax
current employer's who do not offer any healthcare coverage = new healthcare tax
those without any coverage but employed = new healthcare tax
this is the EXACT opposite of what I'd like to see in America. higher taxes for all to support a system controlled by one incompetent entity.
see?
many, many more contribute towards healthcare costs for ALL.....so not "free"...but sure, free for some. but the VASt majority will pay into the system, perhaps even LESs than what we pay in now b/c more streamlined, no private insurance BS, no profit.....that we could afford to offer healthcare to those who truly need it but can't afford it on their own. it is NOT a definite that we actually will pay more, at all...just WHO we pay will change. no more insurance company, and all towards healthcare services.
ah if it were only this easy. FORCING companies to pay health coverage via tax would drive many of them out of business.
if that were 100% true, why does the government fund so much medical research? it's NOT all about profits to be innovative.
again, it may be higher taxes...but it is NOT more out of pocket expense, it may well could be less. but the idea needs to be researched. as to the 'incompetent entity'........government sure as shit runs a LOT of things, and while i am not saying they deserve gold stars for all they do :P.....it's not all inept, and nor does it HAVE to be, either. change is possible.
again - not saying it is 'that easy'....b/c obviously i am oversimplifying simply to show it is doable. as to forcing companies to pay taxes towards healthcare....again, if they are trading their current contributions instead to taxes, same difference no? as to some smaller companies.....perhaps it would be too big of a burden, but of course...i am making a broad outline here. obviously, like anything else...there would have to be limits and exceptions, etc....but yes.......overall, they are making their $$$ off of americans, so sure, they should contribute to the health of americans. again, while i am not 100% sure, i do imagine foreign companies contribute tax towards UHC, and again, they manage to stay profitable.
we need to follow a new model...CREATE a new model. it IS possible. that's all i am saying.......
vinny, vinny, vinny....cmon now......as ed would say: hope. hope is the underdog!
work with me here, try and imagine things differently....and positive. again, it is possible.......
my current contribition towards my healthplan = new healthcare tax
my employer's current contribution towards my healthcare = new helathcare tax
current employer's who do not offer any healthcare coverage = new healthcare tax
those without any coverage but employed = new healthcare tax
this is the EXACT opposite of what I'd like to see in America. higher taxes for all to support a system controlled by one incompetent entity.
I don't think you're reading the suggestion right. The point is, we ALREADY pay money for our health insurance, as do our employers. So most people won't see any loss. The difference is that the money employers and employees currently pay into insurance programs goes into the national health care program. Also, medicare and medicaid would be gone. No need to fund them separately. They both would be rolled into the new plan, so the taxes we pay now into those programs (as seen on your tax statement) would go to the national health care plan instead. No new taxes. Just redirecting money we already pay into this new program while phasing out old ones.
btw - another big part of the equation outside of REMOVING the FOR PROFIT portion of healthcare, which would save probably billions in not more....is this:
profit drives innovation. I do not want that taken out of the healthcare system
my current contribition towards my healthplan = new healthcare tax
my employer's current contribution towards my healthcare = new helathcare tax
current employer's who do not offer any healthcare coverage = new healthcare tax
those without any coverage but employed = new healthcare tax
this is the EXACT opposite of what I'd like to see in America. higher taxes for all to support a system controlled by one incompetent entity.
see?
many, many more contribute towards healthcare costs for ALL.....so not "free"...but sure, free for some. but the VASt majority will pay into the system, perhaps even LESs than what we pay in now b/c more streamlined, no private insurance BS, no profit.....that we could afford to offer healthcare to those who truly need it but can't afford it on their own. it is NOT a definite that we actually will pay more, at all...just WHO we pay will change. no more insurance company, and all towards healthcare services.
ah if it were only this easy. FORCING companies to pay health coverage via tax would drive many of them out of business.
if that were 100% true, why does the government fund so much medical research? it's NOT all about profits to be innovative.
again, it may be higher taxes...but it is NOT more out of pocket expense, it may well could be less. but the idea needs to be researched. as to the 'incompetent entity'........government sure as shit runs a LOT of things, and while i am not saying they deserve gold stars for all they do :P.....it's not all inept, and nor does it HAVE to be, either. change is possible.
again - not saying it is 'that easy'....b/c obviously i am oversimplifying simply to show it is doable. as to forcing companies to pay taxes towards healthcare....again, if they are trading their current contributions instead to taxes, same difference no? as to some smaller companies.....perhaps it would be too big of a burden, but of course...i am making a broad outline here. obviously, like anything else...there would have to be limits and exceptions, etc....but yes.......overall, they are making their $$$ off of americans, so sure, they should contribute to the health of americans. again, while i am not 100% sure, i do imagine foreign companies contribute tax towards UHC, and again, they manage to stay profitable.
we need to follow a new model...CREATE a new model. it IS possible. that's all i am saying.......
vinny, vinny, vinny....cmon now......as ed would say: hope. hope is the underdog!
work with me here, try and imagine things differently....and positive. again, it is possible.......
I feel ya! I'm all about hope! I'm Catholic, I like Ron Paul, and I'm practically a one man in a handful-sized army against the Fed! I got hope down pretty well
my private insurance company gives me more then enough choices.
Many people don't share your feelings about this. Additionally, continuity of care is interrupted when people are repeatedly forced to change doctors due to changes of employment or employers who change insurance companies - usually without giving any choice to the employees. This lack of continuity just ends up making healthcare more expensive.
profit drives innovation. I do not want that taken out of the healthcare system
innovation may not be a good thing.
a company might find a cure for a mental illness....take the magic pill and you're all better.
an innovative capitalist might realize that after the guy takes the magic pill, he stops giving the company his money.
with profit motivating companies, its not in their best interest to cure patients. its in their best interest to deal with the symptoms, to mask them, to never really treat the actual illness.
a guy that has to buy pills for the rest of his life to deal with symptoms is the perfect scenario for these pharmaceutical companies.
mask the symptoms, but never deal with the disease.
that's what a profit motivated health care system encourages.
my current contribition towards my healthplan = new healthcare tax
my employer's current contribution towards my healthcare = new helathcare tax
current employer's who do not offer any healthcare coverage = new healthcare tax
those without any coverage but employed = new healthcare tax
I think the beauty of the universal system we have in Canada is that it means I won't delay getting something looked at by a doctor because of financial reasons. I mean right now say I have a bad cough that won't go away after a few weeks. Since I have universal health care I can make an appointment with my doctor, or go to a clinic to get it looked at without worrying if I can afford to pay. If it is nothing then great, but if it is something serious they can catch it early when treatment is easy and cheap (meaning it doens't cost them much time to say write a prescription and I don't lose work time). Now if I had a cough for two weeks and going to the doctor meant either paying some kind of deductable or paying the whole cost myself I, like a lot of people, would probably put it off. And if it was something serious putting it off could mean more difficult treatment once I do seek medical attention, possible time spent in a hospital (which means more time and expense paying doctors and other professionals) and more lost work time for me.
and why do meds cost 50% less in Canada? Or 90% less in Cuba?
A big reason drugs are cheaper in Canada is because they are not allowed to run on TV those damn annoying prescription drug ads that look like they cost a fortune to produce but don't actually tell you what the drug is for.
a company might find a cure for a mental illness....take the magic pill and you're all better.
an innovative capitalist might realize that after the guy takes the magic pill, he stops giving the company his money.
with profit motivating companies, its not in their best interest to cure patients. its in their best interest to deal with the symptoms, to mask them, to never really treat the actual illness.
a guy that has to buy pills for the rest of his life to deal with symptoms is the perfect scenario for these pharmaceutical companies.
mask the symptoms, but never deal with the disease.
that's what a profit motivated health care system encourages.
I know its not the best source to reference but I remember Jay Leno saying that he had a friend who was in a motorcycle accident and broke his leg. He had the leg set and was in hospital overnight and released the next day. The bill for this $24,000!!! That utterly ridiculess. There's profit and there's blatant rips offs like this. While your paying this much for a simple op and a night in hospital there will never be UHC in the USA. Where is the majority or this money going?
I've heard the "it works in other countries" line, too. And maybe it does.
However, I was recently on a flight home from New York, seated next to a guy from England. We get to talking, as often happens on cross-country flights, and he told me he was on his way to the States for knee replacement surgery.
He wasn't going to get it back home, because there was a three-year waiting list. His doctor told him he needed the operation. If he didn't get it, the pain would quickly move from "uncomfortable" to "unbearable" to "excruciating."
But to get it from the government, he'd have to wait three years.
He said screw it. He'd pay for it himself and get it now. In the United States.
I know this is just one man's story. Maybe government-run health care works for some people. But I look around at everything else the government gets its fingers in. Without fail, everything they touch turns to shit.
I'm fine with the health plan I have now. I don't need or want the government's.
when the system that rules the world is based on profit then its the people who lose. be it education or health or whatever you want to fill the blank with.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
my current contribition towards my healthplan = new healthcare tax
my employer's current contribution towards my healthcare = new helathcare tax
current employer's who do not offer any healthcare coverage = new healthcare tax
those without any coverage but employed = new healthcare tax
this is the EXACT opposite of what I'd like to see in America. higher taxes for all to support a system controlled by one incompetent entity.
I don't think you're reading the suggestion right. The point is, we ALREADY pay money for our health insurance, as do our employers. So most people won't see any loss. The difference is that the money employers and employees currently pay into insurance programs goes into the national health care program. Also, medicare and medicaid would be gone. No need to fund them separately. They both would be rolled into the new plan, so the taxes we pay now into those programs (as seen on your tax statement) would go to the national health care plan instead. No new taxes. Just redirecting money we already pay into this new program while phasing out old ones.
maybe I'm not. but heres the difference. me and my employers pay our health insurance voluntarily. there was a stretch of my life where I had none. I knocked on wood that I didnt need to go to the Dr. was that smart? no. but it was my choice. and also, no one requires my employer to subsidized 80% of my insurance. they do it mostly to stay competitive for good workers.
what do you think will happen with the government starts forcing itself on everyone and every business to come up with its share of healthcare tax? fuck that.
you people ( ) seem to think we are just going to easily shift around Trillions of dollars and let our government completely control our healthcare system and maintain top quality of care. we are agree to disagree. I just dont think its that easy or the right thing to do.
I do however think things can be improved. they always can. respect.
maybe I'm not. but heres the difference. me and my employers pay our health insurance voluntarily. there was a stretch of my life where I had none. I knocked on wood that I didnt need to go to the Dr. was that smart? no. but it was my choice. and also, no one requires my employer to subsidized 80% of my insurance. they do it mostly to stay competitive for good workers.
what do you think will happen with the government starts forcing itself on everyone and every business to come up with its share of healthcare tax? fuck that.
you people ( ) seem to think we are just going to easily shift around Trillions of dollars and let our government completely control our healthcare system and maintain top quality of care. we are agree to disagree. I just dont think its that easy or the right thing to do.
I do however think things can be improved. they always can.
hmmm... this makes me ponder what exactly you think your government is responsible for.
for me government means providing for those who cant. and to me thats the majority.
i have never been insured in my life. but then again i dont get sick (touch wood). but dont get me wrong i have had need for the public health system. usually when ive given birth. i walked out of my local hospital with a healthy child(on 4 occasions). and no bills. and for that i am thankful. there have been other times. and those other times have included the health of my son(which is ongoing). i accept the system isnt perfect. but i dont jump up and down and scream about its inadequacies. i accept them and know that what has to be done cant be done when I want it to be done, but when the system allows it. maybe as an australian i have a different mindset. it never ceases to amaze me that americans who supposedly have a government for the people and of the people, they are hesitant to embrace it or even allow it work for them. as i said before, what is it you think your government should be responsible for??? surely it must be more than 'national' security and collecting taxes.
Post edited by catefrances on
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
maybe I'm not. but heres the difference. me and my employers pay our health insurance voluntarily. there was a stretch of my life where I had none. I knocked on wood that I didnt need to go to the Dr. was that smart? no. but it was my choice. and also, no one requires my employer to subsidized 80% of my insurance. they do it mostly to stay competitive for good workers.
So in that case, when you had no insurance what would have happened if you were in a serious accident where you were taken to a hospital, had surgery and spend considerable time in an ICU before dying. With no insurance it would basically be up to the hospital to pick up the tab for potentially millions of dollars of medical care, in a system you weren't even helping to pay for. Considering hospitals can't turn away people how is that a fair system? You say it is your choice but you are basically counting on other people to give you a free ride if something catastrophic happens.
maybe I'm not. but heres the difference. me and my employers pay our health insurance voluntarily. there was a stretch of my life where I had none. I knocked on wood that I didnt need to go to the Dr. was that smart? no. but it was my choice. and also, no one requires my employer to subsidized 80% of my insurance. they do it mostly to stay competitive for good workers.
what do you think will happen with the government starts forcing itself on everyone and every business to come up with its share of healthcare tax? fuck that.
you people ( ) seem to think we are just going to easily shift around Trillions of dollars and let our government completely control our healthcare system and maintain top quality of care. we are agree to disagree. I just dont think its that easy or the right thing to do.
I do however think things can be improved. they always can.
hmmm... this makes me ponder what exactly you think your government is responsible for.
to protect us for foreign threats, write and enforce laws, and provide services
i have never been insured in my life. but then again i dont get sick (touch wood). but dont get me wrong i have had need for the public health system. usually when ive given birth. i walked out of my local hospital with a healthy child(on 4 occasions). and no bills. and for that i am thankful. there have been other times.
why have you never had insurance? are you physically able to work? why should I be forced to subsize your hospital bills? (although I would support subsidized child birth costs, granted the best care stays available)
and those other times have included the health of my son(which is ongoing).
this I would support. I believe we should have a similar system to Medicare but for children. I believe all children should qualify, at the very least, for assistance to healthcare costs.
i accept the system isnt perfect. but i dont jump up and down and scream about its inadequacies. i accept them and know that what has to be done cant be done when I want it to be done, but when the system allows it. maybe as an australian i have a different mindset. it never ceases to amaze me that americans who supposedly have a government for the people and of the people, they are hesitant to embrace it or even allow it work for them. as i said before, what is it you think your government should be responsible for??? surely it must be more than 'national' security and collecting taxes.
no, thats about it. your country has about 21 million people, thats about half the size of California. America is LARGE. its not as easy to provide care for 300 million people, and do it with high quality that we have come to demand and expect.
maybe I'm not. but heres the difference. me and my employers pay our health insurance voluntarily. there was a stretch of my life where I had none. I knocked on wood that I didnt need to go to the Dr. was that smart? no. but it was my choice. and also, no one requires my employer to subsidized 80% of my insurance. they do it mostly to stay competitive for good workers.
So in that case, when you had no insurance what would have happened if you were in a serious accident where you were taken to a hospital, had surgery and spend considerable time in an ICU before dying. With no insurance it would basically be up to the hospital to pick up the tab for potentially millions of dollars of medical care, in a system you weren't even helping to pay for. Considering hospitals can't turn away people how is that a fair system? You say it is your choice but you are basically counting on other people to give you a free ride if something catastrophic happens.
bullshit. I would have been stuck with those bills.
maybe I'm not. but heres the difference. me and my employers pay our health insurance voluntarily. there was a stretch of my life where I had none. I knocked on wood that I didnt need to go to the Dr. was that smart? no. but it was my choice. and also, no one requires my employer to subsidized 80% of my insurance. they do it mostly to stay competitive for good workers.
So in that case, when you had no insurance what would have happened if you were in a serious accident where you were taken to a hospital, had surgery and spend considerable time in an ICU before dying. With no insurance it would basically be up to the hospital to pick up the tab for potentially millions of dollars of medical care, in a system you weren't even helping to pay for. Considering hospitals can't turn away people how is that a fair system? You say it is your choice but you are basically counting on other people to give you a free ride if something catastrophic happens.
bullshit. I would have been stuck with those bills.
How exactly does a person pay bills when they are dead?
How exactly does a person pay bills when they are dead?
o sorry I missed that. well in the case of dying, yes I suppose they would be stuck with the bill. although I wouldnt be surprised if the hospital had lawyers go after my estate.
but had I had surgery and spend considerable time in an ICU and lived.... I would get the bill. not everyone who goes to the hospital dies ya know.
this is America we are talking about the MAJORITY are doing just fine.
What a great attitude to have. Why not just say 'Fuck the poor'?
what the fuck does this have to do with anything? I'm simply making the point the the majority of people can provide for themselves. cate suggested the MAJORITY can not.
again and again with this baseless argument. "well England did it" "well Cuba does it" turn the page in the playbook. England, like most countries and a small % the size of America
Congressional leaders who have spent decades promoting a government-run health care system for the United States are abuzz about Michael Moore's new film, "Sicko," hoping it will sway a new generation of voters to support their agenda.
But heaven forbid that Congress would wind up making policy based upon propaganda -- because that is exactly what would happen if anyone were to base any health reform proposals on Moore's film, says Grace-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute.
* For example, Moore ignores the limits, restrictions on access, and rationing of care in single-payer health care systems in Canada, the United Kingdom and elsewhere.
* In Canada, more than 800,000 people are on waiting lists for surgery and other medical treatment, with some forced to wait months or even years for the care they need.
One of Moore's core arguments is that profit in the health sector is evil and that we should rid our health care system of private "for-profit" physician practices, hospitals and suppliers. He and other single-payer advocates are convinced that a generous and benevolent government would put doctors and hospitals back in charge of decisions. But this isn't the case, says Turner:
* In our own government-run health care systems -- Medicare, Medicaid and the Department of Veteran Affairs - government micromanagement and price controls are the norm.
* Government makes decisions about what will be covered, under what circumstances and for whom, and how much doctors and hospitals will be paid for their services.
* And government seldom gets it right -- overpaying for some and underpaying for others, but also inducing over-consumption of health care.
Source: Grace-Marie Turner, "Marie Turner: `Sicko' serves up health care lies," Pasadena Star News, July 4, 2007.
i have never been insured in my life. but then again i dont get sick (touch wood). but dont get me wrong i have had need for the public health system. usually when ive given birth. i walked out of my local hospital with a healthy child(on 4 occasions). and no bills. and for that i am thankful. there have been other times.
why have you never had insurance? are you physically able to work? why should I be forced to subsize your hospital bills? (although I would support subsidized child birth costs, granted the best care stays available)
nope. never. we all pay taxes. why should we be forced to pay more for servies that should be available to evry single person within the country. why should the health system be made available on the proviso that it make a profit??
and those other times have included the health of my son(which is ongoing).
this I would support. I believe we should have a similar system to Medicare but for children. I believe all children should qualify, at the very least, for assistance to healthcare costs.
i accept the system isnt perfect. but i dont jump up and down and scream about its inadequacies. i accept them and know that what has to be done cant be done when I want it to be done, but when the system allows it. maybe as an australian i have a different mindset. it never ceases to amaze me that americans who supposedly have a government for the people and of the people, they are hesitant to embrace it or even allow it work for them. as i said before, what is it you think your government should be responsible for??? surely it must be more than 'national' security and collecting taxes.
no, thats about it. your country has about 21 million people, thats about half the size of California. America is LARGE. its not as easy to provide care for 300 million people, and do it with high quality that we have come to demand and expect.
yep i know how many poeple my country has. and i know how many people your country has. imo it is that easy.its all about management. your country and mine waste so much money on security(and other bullshit) and yet when it comes to their people, they couldnt be bothered. why is that???
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
this is America we are talking about the MAJORITY are doing just fine.
The Dead Kennedy's - Kill The Poor
Efficiency and progress is ours once more
Now that we have the Neutron bomb
It's nice and quick and clean and gets things done
Away with excess enemy
But no less value to property
No sense in war but perfect sense at home:
The sun beams down on a brand new day
No more welfare tax to pay
Unsightly slums gone up in flashing light
Jobless millions whisked away
At last we have more room to play
All systems go to kill the poor tonight
Gonna
Kill kill kill kill Kill the poor:Tonight
Behold the sparkle of champagne
The crime rate's gone
Feel free again
O' life's a dream with you, Miss Lily White
Jane Fonda on the screen today
Convinced the liberals it's okay
So let's get dressed and dance away the night
While they:
Kill kill kill kill Kill the poor:Tonight
Comments
actually its standard, its about a trillion a year, wars or no. and it doesn't include about $30 billion in nuke upkeep
(increase from '08)
Operations and maintenance $179.8 Bil. +9.5%
Military Personnel $125.2 Bil. +7.5%
Procurement $104.2 Bil. +5.3%
Research $79.6 Bil. +4.1%
Military Construction $21.2 Bil. +19.1%
Family Housing $3.2 Bil. +10.3%
Resolving and Mngment Funds $2.2 Bil. -18.5%
Total Base Spending * $515.4 Bil. +5.7%
*700+ military bases around the world, empires cost money.
Iraq AND Afghanistan wars were supplemented, not included in the numbers above.
(that was all from wiki)
and there are other ways to get money.
Reagan shifted $1 trillion during his presidency from social spending to the private sector, called neo-liberalism. end those policies.
and why do meds cost 50% less in Canada? Or 90% less in Cuba?
lets do what they do.
The system, as it is, is designed to take money from our bank accounts and deposit it into theirs. They make billions, when, ideally , NO PROFIT should be made on making people well, on saving lives.
jlew your numbers include paying the insurance companies, paying the pharmaceutical companies, co-paying, and of that. which are just ways to get to our bank accounts. we need to scrap the entire system.
you can't be saying we can't improve on this system.
You're better off spending your time researching and finding ways to stay healthy, rather than repair or over-throw this fucked up system. Keep some nuts squirreled away if you ever need 'em, or get a job that pays insurance. Like anything else, you won't be able to depend on anyone but yourself-- universal health care or not.
Either that or: criminalize medical insurance, lawyers, legalize pot and hemp, and let the market do the rest
No, I will not explain that last statement at all. Use your imagination
I absolutely believe the system can be improved. I just dont think government run Universal healthcare system is the answer.
as for the rest of your post. I suppose some MAJOR shifting around of our budget and heathcare system could make UHC affordable. but even in the best of days, that would be too difficult. and now, given a massive economic crisis and 2 wars still being fought. its just makes it more difficult to even being to make your suggestion a reality.
I agree (with some). I would support huge increases in government spending in promoting healthy lifestyle or preventing bad ones....however you want to slice it. such as health food subsidies, good eating education in schools, etc, etc. America has grown too lazy and too fat. we need to change that from within.
EXACTLY.
and vinny, you make an excellent point....one i've made myself a few times in this thread.
btw - another big part of the equation outside of REMOVING the FOR PROFIT portion of healthcare, which would save probably billions in not more....is this:
my current contribition towards my healthplan = new healthcare tax
my employer's current contribution towards my healthcare = new helathcare tax
current employer's who do not offer any healthcare coverage = new healthcare tax
those without any coverage but employed = new healthcare tax
see?
many, many more contribute towards healthcare costs for ALL.....so not "free"...but sure, free for some. but the VASt majority will pay into the system, perhaps even LESs than what we pay in now b/c more streamlined, no private insurance BS, no profit.....that we could afford to offer healthcare to those who truly need it but can't afford it on their own. it is NOT a definite that we actually will pay more, at all...just WHO we pay will change. no more insurance company, and all towards healthcare services.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
Yes, except I was thinking more along the lines of the "wake the fuck up and pull your head out of your fat ass program" instead of spending more money on education
profit drives innovation. I do not want that taken out of the healthcare system
this is the EXACT opposite of what I'd like to see in America. higher taxes for all to support a system controlled by one incompetent entity.
ah if it were only this easy. FORCING companies to pay health coverage via tax would drive many of them out of business.
if that were 100% true, why does the government fund so much medical research? it's NOT all about profits to be innovative.
again, it may be higher taxes...but it is NOT more out of pocket expense, it may well could be less. but the idea needs to be researched. as to the 'incompetent entity'........government sure as shit runs a LOT of things, and while i am not saying they deserve gold stars for all they do :P.....it's not all inept, and nor does it HAVE to be, either. change is possible.
again - not saying it is 'that easy'....b/c obviously i am oversimplifying simply to show it is doable. as to forcing companies to pay taxes towards healthcare....again, if they are trading their current contributions instead to taxes, same difference no? as to some smaller companies.....perhaps it would be too big of a burden, but of course...i am making a broad outline here. obviously, like anything else...there would have to be limits and exceptions, etc....but yes.......overall, they are making their $$$ off of americans, so sure, they should contribute to the health of americans. again, while i am not 100% sure, i do imagine foreign companies contribute tax towards UHC, and again, they manage to stay profitable.
we need to follow a new model...CREATE a new model. it IS possible. that's all i am saying.......
vinny, vinny, vinny....cmon now......as ed would say: hope. hope is the underdog!
work with me here, try and imagine things differently....and positive. again, it is possible.......
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
I don't think you're reading the suggestion right. The point is, we ALREADY pay money for our health insurance, as do our employers. So most people won't see any loss. The difference is that the money employers and employees currently pay into insurance programs goes into the national health care program. Also, medicare and medicaid would be gone. No need to fund them separately. They both would be rolled into the new plan, so the taxes we pay now into those programs (as seen on your tax statement) would go to the national health care plan instead. No new taxes. Just redirecting money we already pay into this new program while phasing out old ones.
I feel ya! I'm all about hope! I'm Catholic, I like Ron Paul, and I'm practically a one man in a handful-sized army against the Fed! I got hope down pretty well
a company might find a cure for a mental illness....take the magic pill and you're all better.
an innovative capitalist might realize that after the guy takes the magic pill, he stops giving the company his money.
with profit motivating companies, its not in their best interest to cure patients. its in their best interest to deal with the symptoms, to mask them, to never really treat the actual illness.
a guy that has to buy pills for the rest of his life to deal with symptoms is the perfect scenario for these pharmaceutical companies.
mask the symptoms, but never deal with the disease.
that's what a profit motivated health care system encourages.
I think the beauty of the universal system we have in Canada is that it means I won't delay getting something looked at by a doctor because of financial reasons. I mean right now say I have a bad cough that won't go away after a few weeks. Since I have universal health care I can make an appointment with my doctor, or go to a clinic to get it looked at without worrying if I can afford to pay. If it is nothing then great, but if it is something serious they can catch it early when treatment is easy and cheap (meaning it doens't cost them much time to say write a prescription and I don't lose work time). Now if I had a cough for two weeks and going to the doctor meant either paying some kind of deductable or paying the whole cost myself I, like a lot of people, would probably put it off. And if it was something serious putting it off could mean more difficult treatment once I do seek medical attention, possible time spent in a hospital (which means more time and expense paying doctors and other professionals) and more lost work time for me.
A big reason drugs are cheaper in Canada is because they are not allowed to run on TV those damn annoying prescription drug ads that look like they cost a fortune to produce but don't actually tell you what the drug is for.
I know its not the best source to reference but I remember Jay Leno saying that he had a friend who was in a motorcycle accident and broke his leg. He had the leg set and was in hospital overnight and released the next day. The bill for this $24,000!!! That utterly ridiculess. There's profit and there's blatant rips offs like this. While your paying this much for a simple op and a night in hospital there will never be UHC in the USA. Where is the majority or this money going?
when the system that rules the world is based on profit then its the people who lose. be it education or health or whatever you want to fill the blank with.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
maybe I'm not. but heres the difference. me and my employers pay our health insurance voluntarily. there was a stretch of my life where I had none. I knocked on wood that I didnt need to go to the Dr. was that smart? no. but it was my choice. and also, no one requires my employer to subsidized 80% of my insurance. they do it mostly to stay competitive for good workers.
what do you think will happen with the government starts forcing itself on everyone and every business to come up with its share of healthcare tax? fuck that.
you people (
I do however think things can be improved. they always can. respect.
hmmm... this makes me ponder what exactly you think your government is responsible for.
for me government means providing for those who cant. and to me thats the majority.
i have never been insured in my life. but then again i dont get sick (touch wood). but dont get me wrong i have had need for the public health system. usually when ive given birth. i walked out of my local hospital with a healthy child(on 4 occasions). and no bills. and for that i am thankful. there have been other times. and those other times have included the health of my son(which is ongoing). i accept the system isnt perfect. but i dont jump up and down and scream about its inadequacies. i accept them and know that what has to be done cant be done when I want it to be done, but when the system allows it. maybe as an australian i have a different mindset. it never ceases to amaze me that americans who supposedly have a government for the people and of the people, they are hesitant to embrace it or even allow it work for them. as i said before, what is it you think your government should be responsible for??? surely it must be more than 'national' security and collecting taxes.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
So in that case, when you had no insurance what would have happened if you were in a serious accident where you were taken to a hospital, had surgery and spend considerable time in an ICU before dying. With no insurance it would basically be up to the hospital to pick up the tab for potentially millions of dollars of medical care, in a system you weren't even helping to pay for. Considering hospitals can't turn away people how is that a fair system? You say it is your choice but you are basically counting on other people to give you a free ride if something catastrophic happens.
to protect us for foreign threats, write and enforce laws, and provide services
I strongly disagree. this is America we are talking about the MAJORITY are doing just fine.
why have you never had insurance? are you physically able to work? why should I be forced to subsize your hospital bills? (although I would support subsidized child birth costs, granted the best care stays available)
this I would support. I believe we should have a similar system to Medicare but for children. I believe all children should qualify, at the very least, for assistance to healthcare costs.
no, thats about it. your country has about 21 million people, thats about half the size of California. America is LARGE. its not as easy to provide care for 300 million people, and do it with high quality that we have come to demand and expect.
bullshit. I would have been stuck with those bills.
How exactly does a person pay bills when they are dead?
What a great attitude to have. Why not just say 'Fuck the poor'?
We've managed it in England for 60 years.
o sorry I missed that. well in the case of dying, yes I suppose they would be stuck with the bill. although I wouldnt be surprised if the hospital had lawyers go after my estate.
but had I had surgery and spend considerable time in an ICU and lived.... I would get the bill. not everyone who goes to the hospital dies ya know.
Brilliant documentary by American Conservatism's favourite whipping boy.
what the fuck does this have to do with anything? I'm simply making the point the the majority of people can provide for themselves. cate suggested the MAJORITY can not.
thanks for stopping by.
again and again with this baseless argument. "well England did it" "well Cuba does it" turn the page in the playbook. England, like most countries and a small % the size of America
very bias and misleading documentary by a very dishonest person. he is the whipping boy of every side here in America.
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=14730
"SICKO" SERVES UP HEALTH CARE LIES
Congressional leaders who have spent decades promoting a government-run health care system for the United States are abuzz about Michael Moore's new film, "Sicko," hoping it will sway a new generation of voters to support their agenda.
But heaven forbid that Congress would wind up making policy based upon propaganda -- because that is exactly what would happen if anyone were to base any health reform proposals on Moore's film, says Grace-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute.
* For example, Moore ignores the limits, restrictions on access, and rationing of care in single-payer health care systems in Canada, the United Kingdom and elsewhere.
* In Canada, more than 800,000 people are on waiting lists for surgery and other medical treatment, with some forced to wait months or even years for the care they need.
One of Moore's core arguments is that profit in the health sector is evil and that we should rid our health care system of private "for-profit" physician practices, hospitals and suppliers. He and other single-payer advocates are convinced that a generous and benevolent government would put doctors and hospitals back in charge of decisions. But this isn't the case, says Turner:
* In our own government-run health care systems -- Medicare, Medicaid and the Department of Veteran Affairs - government micromanagement and price controls are the norm.
* Government makes decisions about what will be covered, under what circumstances and for whom, and how much doctors and hospitals will be paid for their services.
* And government seldom gets it right -- overpaying for some and underpaying for others, but also inducing over-consumption of health care.
Source: Grace-Marie Turner, "Marie Turner: `Sicko' serves up health care lies," Pasadena Star News, July 4, 2007.
for me.. health care is a service. is it not??
do you know that for sure or are you just speculating cause YOU are doing ok??
nope. never. we all pay taxes. why should we be forced to pay more for servies that should be available to evry single person within the country. why should the health system be made available on the proviso that it make a profit??
this I would support. I believe we should have a similar system to Medicare but for children. I believe all children should qualify, at the very least, for assistance to healthcare costs.
yep i know how many poeple my country has. and i know how many people your country has. imo it is that easy.its all about management. your country and mine waste so much money on security(and other bullshit) and yet when it comes to their people, they couldnt be bothered. why is that???
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
The Dead Kennedy's - Kill The Poor
Efficiency and progress is ours once more
Now that we have the Neutron bomb
It's nice and quick and clean and gets things done
Away with excess enemy
But no less value to property
No sense in war but perfect sense at home:
The sun beams down on a brand new day
No more welfare tax to pay
Unsightly slums gone up in flashing light
Jobless millions whisked away
At last we have more room to play
All systems go to kill the poor tonight
Gonna
Kill kill kill kill Kill the poor:Tonight
Behold the sparkle of champagne
The crime rate's gone
Feel free again
O' life's a dream with you, Miss Lily White
Jane Fonda on the screen today
Convinced the liberals it's okay
So let's get dressed and dance away the night
While they:
Kill kill kill kill Kill the poor:Tonight