Kevin, there are plenty in the USA who argue to this day that the US Health Care system pre-Obamacare was "holding up just fine".
Are you suggesting that there are no critics of the European health care system(s)? Or are you suggesting all such criticisms are baseless?
Not that I care. I never should have popped into this discussion. Reality will intrude on many people's lives in the near future, and it is that reality that will change their minds, not my predictions.
You should include yourself on that last, should your predictions prove wrong. Also, are you iNcluding yourself in that first?
If you believe that the "universal health care" in Europe and Asia is actually providing health care without interminable delays and rationing of procedures, drugs and services, then there''s really no point discussing it with you.
And when that starts happening here, I suppose you'll be surprised. Oh well.
This is something i hear far more often from the American right (who have a notorious;y tenuous relationship with reality) than I do from any Europeans.
Its also not like this doesn't happen in our current system. When I came back from Africa with malaria the doc said he'd see me in 2 weeks. Told him if its the wrong kind of malaria it could kill me in three days. He said 1 week.
I sat in his office shaking until he gave me a script to get rid of me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As someone who lives in a country were several goverment run things were privatised (Rail, Power, telecomunications and as we speak the mail to name a few) I can honestly say that in every case services have gotten worse and more expensive
In some areas it makes sense. In others, such as healthcare, public transportation, etc, it doesn't make sense to privatize. These are public goods that you pretty much need to have a functional society, they are not really profitable areas. That's why we pay taxes to maintain these functions.
Privatizing those areas suddenly mean that a company has to turn a profit from inherently non-profitable services, and the only way to do that is to cut quality and increase costs.
I've seen a lot of companies guarantee that they could run a given service cheaper, better and more efficiently. It has yet to actually happen.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you believe that the "universal health care" in Europe and Asia is actually providing health care without interminable delays and rationing of procedures, drugs and services, then there''s really no point discussing it with you.
And when that starts happening here, I suppose you'll be surprised. Oh well.
This is entirely true. As we all know, Stephen Hawking would have died if he had to use the NHS.
@AD- I don't think 6 months will be enough to actually see how things adjust. It will probably be a bumpy ride for the next 18 months as everyone adjusts. I think 2 years from now would be a better timeframe by which to judge its success or failure.
Just for the record though, right now I have two options.
1) get on my girlfriend's insurance which is VERY good, costs about $120 a month in premiums (there is no 2 person plan, just single for 80 and "family"-up to 5 dependents, for 200. It's b!&+!~!$) and effectively another $100 or so because, since we're not married and merely domestic partners, she is taxed on the employer contribution. Essentially 220 bucks a month.
2) Shop on the exchanges, which will likely not allow me to keep my previous doctor, and appears to cost roughly $187 for equivalent coverage. After subsidy because I'm poor.
So, for me, the exchanges MIGHT be a good deal. Unfortunately the website is a clusterf*$$, as you say.
Mind you, all of this would be moot if my jackass of a governor had accepted the medicaid expansion, because I'd be able to get on that for $0.
This is entirely true. As we all know, Stephen Hawking would have died if he had to use the NHS.If you believe that the "universal health care" in Europe and Asia is actually providing health care without interminable delays and rationing of procedures, drugs and services, then there''s really no point discussing it with you.
And when that starts happening here, I suppose you'll be surprised. Oh well.
I hope that was sarcasm. Because, ya know, facts.
:)
|
|
This is entirely true. As we all know, Stephen Hawking would have died if he had to use the NHS.If you believe that the "universal health care" in Europe and Asia is actually providing health care without interminable delays and rationing of procedures, drugs and services, then there''s really no point discussing it with you.
And when that starts happening here, I suppose you'll be surprised. Oh well.
I hope that was sarcasm. Because, ya know, facts.
:)
Being British, about 9/10s of everything I say is sarcasm.
In that case you'll understand when I say that sarcasm comes off SOO well on the internet that there's no need to gird your statements against misapprehension.
If you believe that the "universal health care" in Europe and Asia is actually providing health care without interminable delays and rationing of procedures, drugs and services, then there''s really no point discussing it with you.
And when that starts happening here, I suppose you'll be surprised. Oh well.
Healthcare rationing not only happens here already, it is a necessary part of the system. We also have massive delays when you show up to a hospital for anything not critical. We do not have sufficient doctors to care for the population. With the population rising but the number of new doctors not rising the problem is only going to get worse. The only proper way to adjust for this is to ration healthcare. Right now this is done by the poor not getting as much healthcare because they can't afford it. I'd rather it be rationed along non-economic lines. I know rationing is horrible and unfair, but when you don't have something, you don't have it. We can't just wave our hands and say everybody gets seen in a comfortable time frame and given the maximum care possible, because those resources do not exist. Healthcare needs to be handed out via triage, and that means there will be times where you wait months for a procedure, and there will be times when doctors feel something is too terminal to treat when those resources can go to others who have a better chance. That's what it will take to cover the whole population.
That would be a good idea, but it'll take a couple decades at the very least, and probably a lot longer, to start getting enough personnel. It takes time to shift people towards desiring those careers, and it takes at least a decade to get a trained surgeon. Until then, rationing will be a tragic necessity when we start covering everybody, because we don't have sufficient personnel as it stands right now.
Yeah it's nuts. When I was at my old employer we paid $80/paycheck or $160/month and it was really good insurance. After being on that for about 9 months they switched us all to a high deductible policy that was only $70/month, but basically we were paying ALL of that. It didn't pay a DIME until the deductible was met, which was $1500. I basically didn't go to the doctor after that.
Oh, and this was all pre-Obama, for the folks who would pin it on him.
My company provides me all of my insurances sans driving. Costs about $150/pay period, but I have seen no increase at all in it's costs since I got on 5 years ago... EDIT: By all indurance I mean medical, dental vision, life and emergency long term.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just got the notice today of what obamacare is doing to my health insurance. it is now covering several things I will never need and my cost is going up about 25%. Then add up how much my taxes will go up to pay for subsidies, thanks obummer
Obummer? Are you 12?
Edit: And you do realize that the president doesn't pass legislation, right?
ARGH! I simply can't wrap my head around the raging hatred of Obama. He's not a dictator, he's not a socialist, he's not the most liberal ANYTHING. He's RIGHT of center from a global perspective. Would it kill you people to read a book?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just got the notice today of what obamacare is doing to my health insurance. it is now covering several things I will never need and my cost is going up about 25%. Then add up how much my taxes will go up to pay for subsidies, thanks obummerObummer? Are you 12?
Edit: And you do realize that the president doesn't pass legislation, right?
ARGH! I simply can't wrap my head around the raging hatred of Obama. He's not a dictator, he's not a socialist, he's not the most liberal ANYTHING. He's RIGHT of center from a global perspective. Would it kill you people to read a book?
This is his pet that he was willing to do whatever he had to to make it happen so yes I do blame him. And those that fought so hard to do this regardless of cost, knowing it would have little or no effect on themselves. And calling him obummer is the nicest thing I would call that man. His policies have screwed me again
This is his pet that he was willing to do whatever he had to to make it happen so yes I do blame him. And those that fought so hard to do this regardless of cost, knowing it would have little or no effect on themselves. And calling him obummer is the nicest thing I would call that man. His policies have screwed me again
It isn't Obama -- or his policies -- that are "screwing" you. Even so, it's one thing to dislike someone's politics, and another to loathe him.
I'm curious...do you even know why you hate the man?
[Raises hand]
Oooo! Oooo! Mr. Kotter, Mr. Kotter!
Just got the notice today of what obamacare is doing to my health insurance. it is now covering several things I will never need and my cost is going up about 25%. Then add up how much my taxes will go up to pay for subsidies, thanks obummer
If you want to end regressive taxation, voting more republicans in won't do it.
Obamacare Worse Than Doing Nothing?
I'm not so sure myself, but Dr. Quentin Young, national coordinator of Physicians for a National Health Program seems to be considering it:
"Had I been in Congress, I would have unequivocally voted against Obamacare,” Young writes. “It’s a bad bill. Whether it’s worse than what we have now could be argued. We rather think because of its ability to enshrine and solidify the corporate domination of the health system, it’s worse than what we have now. But whether it is somewhat better or a lot worse is immaterial. The health system isn’t working in this country — fiscally, medically, socially, morally."
Also, another Ralph Nader editorial for Comrade X on a CIA-funded website:
Time for a House Cleaning:
The Democrats Can’t Defend the Country from the Retrograde GOP
|
|
Just got the notice today of what obamacare is doing to my health insurance. it is now covering several things I will never need and my cost is going up about 25%. Then add up how much my taxes will go up to pay for subsidies, thanks obummerIf you want to end regressive taxation, voting more republicans in won't do it.
Voting for either party makes a tax screw job a certain thing, along with many other bad thing. the first step to us not being over the barrel is getting rid of them both.
Voting for either party makes a tax screw job a certain thing, along with many other bad thing. the first step to us not being over the barrel is getting rid of them both.
Which simply isn't possible. I'm sorry but this is a pipe dream filled with nothing but grarg that has no chance of actually getting any results. Parties have split and imploded before, they just reform under a new name under the same management.
Two parties is the inevitable byproduct of a winner take all system in a country with instant communications.
|
|
Voting for either party makes a tax screw job a certain thing, along with many other bad thing. the first step to us not being over the barrel is getting rid of them both.Which simply isn't possible. I'm sorry but this is a pipe dream filled with nothing but grarg that has no chance of actually getting any results. Parties have split and imploded before, they just reform under a new name under the same management.
Two parties is the inevitable byproduct of a winner take all system in a country with instant communications.
I disagree i think our instant communication (that we lacked when the party crap started) via the internet is the one thing that might give us a chance to break this system
I disagree i think our instant communication (that we lacked when the party crap started) via the internet is the one thing that might give us a chance to break this system
The only time we've ever had more than 2 parties has been local regional parties. Those were only possible because you NEEDED to meet in person to organize things like this. When your social net work was based around the speed of a horse rather than the speed of the electron it was possible to have a cult of personality spring up in some far flung corner of the country.
Walk me through this. How does having the internet let you get in a third party?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Problem is ro break the system you need a new way of voting since first past the post inevitably leads to a two party system.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo
Also
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUS9mM8Xbbw&list=SPqs5ohhass_QZtSkX06DmW OaEaadwmw_D&index=26
And
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&list=SPqs5ohhass_QZtSkX06DmW OaEaadwmw_D&index=27
|
|
I disagree i think our instant communication (that we lacked when the party crap started) via the internet is the one thing that might give us a chance to break this systemThe only time we've ever had more than 2 parties has been local regional parties. Those were only possible because you NEEDED to meet in person to organize things like this. When your social net work was based around the speed of a horse rather than the speed of the electron it was possible to have a cult of personality spring up in some far flung corner of the country.
Walk me through this. How does having the internet let you get in a third party?
Because it is easier than ever for an individual to get a message to the masses instead of the last decades of "pick team a or b". We never needed a 2 party system it grew out of foolish "my friend or my enemy" childishness, it can be done away with if people can get their heads out of their asses. All of you, come up for air. We CAN have an individual stand for more or less than the party lines. All we need is for people to start voting for the person and platform instead of party.
All we need is for people to start voting for the person and platform instead of party.
And you loose. Every. Single. Time. Because the platforms of the major parties have already been tweaked to within (beyond?) and inch of their lives to appeal to exactly 51% of the voters. If everyone goes with the platform they want then 10% of people go with a far right party, 10% of people go with a far left party, 40 percent of people go with republicans and 40% of people go with democrats.. and guesse what that gets you? The same even split of republicans and democrats that you have now.
And if a platform garners 25% or so of the population? It will be absorbed into the party in a week.
Health Care in Canada is so awful that none of our notables would be caught dead using it, right?
Market Watch is not generally known for being a pink liberal advocacy rag, so you might want to read this article
Yes there are medical procedures that tend to be delayed. They are generally the ELECTIVE non-emergency procedures so that costs can be kept down.
Guess we have to add Market Watch -- Along with 86% of Canada -- to the list of those with whom it is "not worth having a discussion."
It's certainly a time saver. :P
Looks pretty sucky to me, frankly. Oh; and "elective" isn't just boob jobs.
You can need elective surgery and be in excruciating pain, which is pretty sucky.
As you can be here, as well. My girlfriend waited over a year from initial visit to surgery, and she has top-notch state employee healthcare, for which she pays a pretty penny.
I'd like to point out that the Fraser Institute is a far-right political think-tank who wears their agenda on their sleeve. Their methodology is a non-verified survey sent to practitioners and with a response rate of 21% that is highly suspect on the basis of its self-selectivity.
Self-selected surveys, especially ones that offer cash prizes for participation as this one did, are often summarily dismissed in serious discussions.
Looks pretty sucky to me, frankly. Oh; and "elective" isn't just boob jobs.
You can need elective surgery and be in excruciating pain, which is pretty sucky.
As opposed to the ~48 MILLION people in the United States that have no insurance whatsoever, and no access to primary care, let alone specialists?
Even assuming the worst about Canadian health care, I know which I'd prefer.
Looks pretty sucky to me, frankly. Oh; and "elective" isn't just boob jobs.
You can need elective surgery and be in excruciating pain, which is pretty sucky.
Healthcare resources are limited. When resources are limited, rationing occurs. Rationing sucks, but rationing is necessary.
Just got the notice today of what obamacare is doing to my health insurance. it is now covering several things I will never need and my cost is going up about 25%. Then add up how much my taxes will go up to pay for subsidies, thanks obummer
On the other hand, my girlfriend's brother will soon be able to purchase truly excellent health insurance for $24 a month, where he was previously unable to afford any coverage beyond catastrophic.
And man you can just taste the bitter conservatism in this thread.
Kevin, there are plenty in the USA who argue to this day that the US Health Care system pre-Obamacare was "holding up just fine".
Are you suggesting that there are no critics of the European health care system(s)? Or are you suggesting all such criticisms are baseless?
(Warning: Scandinavian perspective)
There are lots of critisism, experts complain mostly about resources not being spent efficiently enough, while patients mostly complain about top-end treatments not being offered (for free), or about having to wait for operations.I've never heard anyone suggest switching to anything resembling the US system!
The basic line of thought is that health care is there to get people back in business - not that health care is business.
On the other hand, my girlfriend's brother will soon be able to purchase truly excellent health insurance for $24 a month, where he was previously unable to afford any coverage beyond catastrophic.
When one robs Peter to pay Paul, one can always count on Paul's support.
And, apparently, Paul's family's as well.Yay progressivism!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On the other hand, my girlfriend's brother will soon be able to purchase truly excellent health insurance for $24 a month, where he was previously unable to afford any coverage beyond catastrophic.
When one robs Peter to pay Paul, one can always count on Paul's support.
And, apparently, Paul's family's as well.Yay progressivism!
Well, the democrats wanted to rob Trump to pay for Peter AND Paul, but you were so worried about your own pocket you voted in the people who protected Trump by robbing peter.
So nice job breaking that.
Yeah I' m a crazy guy who thinks that people shouldn't be robbed. You, on the other hand, seem okay with robbing people. As long as yor own hands don't get dirty.
Yeah I'm a crazy guy who thinks that people shouldn't be robbed. You, on the other hand, seem okay with robbing people. As long as your own hands don't get dirty.
Interesting idea; no tax, no liability.
Oh. Right. Because taxes are theft. *eyeroll*
Furthermore, because of your original analogy, the free market is theft. I mean, you do realize that the insurance policies being purchased, whether they're going up or down, are being purchased on the free market right?
Blame the insurance companies for being for profit and gobbling up 20% of your premium costs for profit and/or administrative costs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah I' m a crazy guy who thinks that people shouldn't be robbed. You, on the other hand, seem okay with robbing people. As long as yor own hands don't get dirty.
Yes, thinking we can have a society without taxes IS insanity.
Tossing people into the street to die because they can't pay is callousness.
Thinking that the trumps of the world are paying their fair share is ignorance.
Combine them and you have quite the tea party.