Socialized Healthcare?

12357…18

Comments

  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    mammasan wrote:
    I can not understand for the life of me why some people would want our incredibly inept and mismanaged government to handle something as important as healthcare. These are the same people who brought us the Medicare prescription drug plan. Why on God's green earth would you want them to be responsible for providing your medical needs.

    As I stated in an earlier post, I would love nothing more than to see every man, woman and child have healthcare coverage in this country but I sure as hell do not want our government anywhere near it.

    It makes me laugh because some of you sit on this message board and say every day how much control our government has over us. Or how much they have trampled over our liberties, but in the next breath you want to hand even more control and authority over to them.
    A country is democratic to the extent its people have meaningful participation in the decision making process.
  • baraka
    baraka Posts: 1,268
    I stated this earlier, but it seems that market forces are dismally incapable of fixing our medical system as it exists now. Trust me, I am aware of some of the pitfalls of gov't managed health care, I work for the VA. What would be your solution? Also, a NHC system would probably be 'modeled' from the VA system, not Medicare or Medicaid.

    I also said this earlier, there is really no such thing as a Universal Health care system that does not involve a private paying sector where if you have the money, you can purchase the type of health care you want. I used Britain as an example. The private sector employs a bulk of the health care workers there under their current NHC system
    The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance,
    but the illusion of knowledge.
    ~Daniel Boorstin

    Only a life lived for others is worth living.
    ~Albert Einstein
  • JOEJOEJOE
    JOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,822
    mammasan wrote:
    I can not understand for the life of me why some people would want our incredibly inept and mismanaged government to handle something as important as healthcare. These are the same people who brought us the Medicare prescription drug plan. Why on God's green earth would you want them to be responsible for providing your medical needs.

    As I stated in an earlier post, I would love nothing more than to see every man, woman and child have healthcare coverage in this country but I sure as hell do not want our government anywhere near it.

    It makes me laugh because some of you sit on this message board and say every day how much control our government has over us. Or how much they have trampled over our liberties, but in the next breath you want to hand even more control and authority over to them.

    No matter what the U.S. govt tries to do, it is always inefficient. I could never imagine a program where you just show up and get healthcare.

    I would be scared to see how low of a percentage of money allocated to certain programs actually gets spent on the program, as opposed to the money that gets spent on the administration of the program.
  • RockinInCanada
    RockinInCanada Posts: 2,016
    JOEJOEJOE wrote:
    No matter what the U.S. govt tries to do, it is always inefficient. I could never imagine a program where you just show up and get healthcare.

    I would be scared to see how low of a percentage of money allocated to certain programs actually gets spent on the program, as opposed to the money that gets spent on the administration of the program.

    Funny this is I do it at least twice a year....however I have no idea the intention of your post...sarcastic, mocking current officials, etc.
  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    JOEJOEJOE wrote:
    No matter what the U.S. govt tries to do, it is always inefficient. I could never imagine a program where you just show up and get healthcare.

    I would be scared to see how low of a percentage of money allocated to certain programs actually gets spent on the program, as opposed to the money that gets spent on the administration of the program.
    Why shouldn't you be able to "show up" and get health care? This about human life. We have the resouces to do this.
  • JOEJOEJOE
    JOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,822
    Rockin'InCanada wrote:
    Funny this is I do it at least twice a year....however I have no idea the intention of your post...sarcastic, mocking current officials, etc.

    I am pointing out the our govt is inefficient, so sustaining a proper level of healthcare for everyone would be very costly.
  • RockinInCanada
    RockinInCanada Posts: 2,016
    JOEJOEJOE wrote:
    I am pointing out the our govt is inefficient, so sustaining a proper level of healthcare for everyone would be very costly.

    Okay.
  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    JOEJOEJOE wrote:
    I am pointing out the our govt is inefficient, so sustaining a proper level of healthcare for everyone would be very costly.
    Costly? We have the resources in this great country to provide for every man, woman and child. To not use them to save lives is criminal.
  • JOEJOEJOE
    JOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,822
    Commy wrote:
    Why shouldn't you be able to "show up" and get health care? This about human life. We have the resouces to do this.

    I agree that it is about human life, and everyone deserves good care, but think of how unorganized it seems anytime you go to a government office? Have you every sought care at a county hospital? Its a madhouse.

    We need to overhaul our govt before we undertake such a huge program.
  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    sweet adeline wrote:
    if the people are in turn contributing back to society, then yes.

    edit: and contributing doesn't necessarily mean as a member of the workforce and paying taxes (although that is one way). there is a utility factor in volunteering, helping those less fortunate, etc.
    So there is a catch to life. given the current societal structure. That's criminal.
  • JOEJOEJOE
    JOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,822
    Commy wrote:
    Costly? We have the resources in this great country to provide for every man, woman and child. To not use them to save lives is criminal.

    Of course we have the resources, but if it costs the govt $50 to provide the same medical services that a private company can provide for $12, we need to fix the gap before UHC can be possible.
  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    JOEJOEJOE wrote:
    I agree that it is about human life, and everyone deserves good care, but think of how unorganized it seems anytime you go to a government office? Have you every sought care at a county hospital? Its a madhouse.

    We need to overhaul our govt before we undertake such a huge program.
    Red tape should come after human lives,. imo;.
  • Dylan Stone
    Dylan Stone Posts: 1,145
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    so what confuses me is why you think I should pay for your healthcare.

    Dude... You think it's cool to see sick kids without healthcare?

    You think it's fine that in one of the richest nations in the world there are over 40 million people that have no healthcare and others... like myself that go to work everyday and let someone else raise my child...just so I can pay for healthcare?

    You don't see that so much of it is just about the bank accounts of the wealthy and those who are trying to have power and control??? ...Without the people's best interests ever being taken into account.

    Or...that's right... Why should the best interests of anyone other than yourself (Not to mention that everyone having healthcare and kids being raised by their parents if the parent chooses to do so IS IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF EVERYONE) be taken into account? Why should you care to put forth a dime so the kid standing next to you in the supermarket doesn't cough some TB into the air and make you sick. Hmmmm......

    You don't see the need for and the benefit to all of us working together? One people?

    Ugh. People like you make me so sick I need to use my $800/month healthcare.
  • JOEJOEJOE
    JOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,822
    Commy wrote:
    Red tape should come after human lives,. imo;.

    Of course it should, but if they implement UHC too soon, and it doesn't work, then we'd be worse-off then we are now in terms of healthcare.
  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    JOEJOEJOE wrote:
    Of course it should, but if they implement UHC too soon, and it doesn't work, then we'd be worse-off then we are now in terms of healthcare.
    UHC isn't this great leap into the future. We have examples-working examples-that we can draw from. Europe is covering its citizens, the US is not. Some 40 million people are without healthcare, in the US. That's a crime, given our resources.
  • sweet adeline
    sweet adeline Posts: 2,191
    Commy wrote:
    So there is a catch to life. given the current societal structure. That's criminal.

    no. you asked if there was a benefit to keeping people alive. i took that as a cost/benefit analysis question. since 80-90% of the health problems people have in this country are preventable by proper diet and exercise, isn't the criminal part people treating their bodies like shit and then asking someone else to pay to fix them?

    if it costs X amount of dollars to provide someone with healthcare and keeping them alive provides X amount of utility (tax revenue, volunteer work, etc.) then from a cost benefit analysis, yes it does make sense.

    if you want to talk about it from a humanitarian standpoint, obviously its not okay to "let" people die. however, if like i said above most disease and illness is preventable, then shouldn't people just focus on taking better care of themselves? i'm for some form of a universal health care program, but i'm also more for a form of universal take care of your bodies program.
  • JOEJOEJOE
    JOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,822
    Commy wrote:
    UHC isn't this great leap into the future. We have examples-working examples-that we can draw from. Europe is covering its citizens, the US is not. Some 40 million people are without healthcare, in the US. That's a crime, given our resources.

    I disagree....the fact that UHC would require 1000s and 1000s of physical structures, a new computer system and new employees does make it seem like a great leap into the future.

    Think of how few govt departments serve a huge chunk of our population...IRS and SSA are all that come to mind, and they don't require local physical locations everywhere in order to carry out their functions.
  • lazymoon13
    lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    Commy wrote:
    I know, its hard to imagine.

    you didnt answer my question. you admit to not paying taxes. so why should I, a tax payer, be obligated to pay for your healthcare?
  • Dylan Stone
    Dylan Stone Posts: 1,145
    sweet adeline wrote:
    i'm for some form of a universal health care program, but i'm also more for a form of universal take care of your bodies program.

    I certainly think a key to the whole thing would be the preventative health care that would be provided. Health and nutritional education...bloodwork, routine physical exams and screenings...etc...
  • lazymoon13
    lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    baraka wrote:
    I asked the same question of ffg.......do you think folks that go to public schools are getting a 'free ride'? Your tax dollars are paying for that system, whether or not you utilize it.

    I dont think its a fair comparison. (schools and healthcare)

Categories