Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

because it only takes in to effect of people who have to pay for health care
while i like the idea of universal health care it is fundamentally flawed
Ex: my health care is payed by my dad(who i dont speak to) its court ordered
my moms is payed for in full by her employler
how will we benifet if taxes a raised for others health care when we dont get money back since we never payed for it in the first place
p.s. i know there are problem with my grammer and spelling
know what i should have mention was that im plagued by chronic headaches that impire my ability to do thrings right
im lucky to be getting an b in english
thats just my 2 cents

That's all true, but if universal health care is in place, your mothers employer no longer has to pay for it, which is good for them (hey, your mom might even get a raise), and your dad doesnt ahve to pay for it either. essentially it means that everyone who needs health care gets it. The main driving force behind universalising health care is that some people who need it cant get it because they cant afford it/don't have insurance. This eliminates that problem. Yes, you pay a bit more in taxes, but chances are, you'll get that value back if you ever need health care. Yeah you have to pay for it now, but if i understand correctly, you wouldn't have to pay for your health care until you're at the age of majority anyway, am i right? and most people under the age of majority don't pay income tax, (or any tax apart from sales tax). So yes it has downsides, but IMO it's worth it.

Yeah, our (US) lack of universal health care really helped me out with the permanent soft tissue damage in my right hand.
Good thing I couldn't afford to see a doctor because I was employed.
It was really helpful that it took 4 years after the injury occurred before I had coverage.
I'm glad that I couldn't afford to go into dept paying out of pocket because I had to fulfill my financial obligations (rent, food, transportation to job).
Thus give my hand the time it needed to heal wrong, and give me the ability to work injured.
Thanks (lack of) US health care, you saved my bacon.
...
really...
come on.

i like the idea of it but it is flawed we just need to find a way to do it without such high taxes

As is, if I paid out of pocket (in the current system) for decent coverage it would cost me over a 1/3 of my income.
If my taxes went up 50% instead, I'd still pay less than what I would pay as the current system stands.

Plus the State burns crap-tons of cash on emergency care that could have been avoided by a level of preventative care that is currently financially unattainable by most uninsured.

Your mom doesn't pay a premium for her health insurance?

no its payed entirly by the Boss

This is how america works

"socilised medicine is good"

"socilised...?, socilist, commy, commy, burn the commy"

Universal Health care takes the incentive to be a good doctor out of the equation. When being the best doesn't garner any profit at all the talented individulas weill go into some other field that doesn't take TONS of expensive education to do.

Everybody gets health care, gakky health care.

youbedead wrote:This is how america works

"socilised medicine is good"

"socilised...?, socilist, commy, commy, burn the commy"

And leaving it to corrupt imperialist megacorporations is better? It's time to come out of the dark ages.

garret wrote:no its payed entirly by the Boss

Nice!

I don't think most health plans work that way...

I would add that by burdening private business with the cost of employee health care we make them less competitive on the global market as they must compete with companies who do not have to carry said burden. Also, it's incentive for foreign companies to not open offices in the US as they would have to pay to provide health care to potential employees. If they go north of the border (or to another nation with government run health care) they don't have to bear the financial risk.

Also one of the biggest advantages to a government run program is collective bargaining. Essentially since the government would purchase such large quantities of medicine and medical equipment, it could use it's position as customer #1 to arrange for better deals saving everyone money.

My primary concern regarding the issue is that people's choices regarding their health are able to be made by them.

I don't know that the current health system is terrific in that regard, but I know there are also a lot of people who think that if the government is going to provide health care then popular vote should be able to prohibit people from making unhealthy choices.

Nurgleboy77 wrote:Universal Health care takes the incentive to be a good doctor out of the equation. When being the best doesn't garner any profit at all the talented individulas weill go into some other field that doesn't take TONS of expensive education to do.

Everybody gets health care, gakky health care.

not true. everything still works the same, except the money comes from the government, not the patient. you still need to be a good doctor to get the best jobs ( or any job in this economy)

Nurgleboy77: Everybody gets health care, gakky health care.

Even if this was true, gakky health care still beats the pop-tarts out of no health care.

Nurgleboy77 wrote:Universal Health care takes the incentive to be a good doctor out of the equation. When being the best doesn't garner any profit at all the talented individulas weill go into some other field that doesn't take TONS of expensive education to do.

Everybody gets health care, gakky health care.

Why does it take the incentive to be a good doctor out of the equation? Its not like under universal health care all doctors get paid the same.....

I would think that the united states would have caught on by now...and provide some services for its citizens.....you know...maybe something important like ones health? The only thing i like about NO universal health care...is that people need to be motivated to get at least an ok job...that provides benefits...even if the employer pays 80%. Which is what mine pays. I pay about $90 per month through my employer..and this covers medical, dental, and vision. Paying for all of this with no job would runs several hundred dollars per month. So either people are motivated to get a job with benefits....or they suffer. I would still like to see universal health care. I just wonder how much of a problem it will be for with all the people that leech off it. Maybe some people from places outside the US can chime in...and let us know what their views on univeral health care are.

Universal healthcare is preferable to the alternative because it does not exclude the poor. A healthcare service that only the well-off can use is no healthcare at all.

And people, let's not kid ourselves that everybody is well off, or that your lives will somehow be made unlivable by having to pay a little more. You'll manage.

Nurgleboy77 wrote:Universal Health care takes the incentive to be a good doctor out of the equation. When being the best doesn't garner any profit at all the talented individulas weill go into some other field that doesn't take TONS of expensive education to do.

Everybody gets health care, gakky health care.

I think I heard something very similar to this line.... I can´t exactly place it, perhaps in a Street with a Wall or so.

M.

But if America gets "Free" health care.... where will the people of other countries come if they want good heath care???

What about the pregnant peoples from Canada who are denied care in Canada and come to USA for care insted?? Won’t somebody please think of the children?!?!



honestly people, what about our government makes you think they can run the health care indursty well? is it the 50$ the army spends for a hammer? Or is it the $1,000,000,000 + (thats billion) a DAY that lord obama has spent since he was elected?

Stop rewarding people for being lazy and fix the friggin system we have...

Yes, much better to leave healthcare to the private companies who recently have completed such a good demonstration of the triumph of capitalism.

Having the NHS doesn't mean I can't then have Private Healthcare.

I had my tonsils out by BUPA when I was a nipper, yet when my Appendix ruptured, the NHS hoiked it out, saving my life.

My Grandad had a dodgy hip. Rather than sit on the waiting list, my Step-Gran paid for him to go private. A Dr which then promptly buggered it up, leading to the NHS sorting out. Joke here is, Private Op and NHS Op? Both done by the same surgeon! Can anyone say refund kthxplz?

Universal Healthcare is a great thing. I can go to my GP's when I'm feeling rough (once in a blue moon thankfully!) and get a diagnosis, and a prescription. If I get run over, the Paramedics check my pulse and *not* my Wallet.

I have to say, I think it's pretty immoral to deny people Medical Care because of money...

And lets think of Monopolies....entirely Private, the various clinics can quite effectively price rig, as soon or later, when something goes wrong, you HAVE to pay what they demand. Introduce Universal Care, and thats another, free, option. This can encourage lower prices across the board, leading to lower Health Insurance premiums for those who choose them, and less money being spent by employers who offer it. Good thing bad thing ill considered thread, your choice!

The US military hospitals work like Universal health care. It so great I never have to worry about getting sick any not only losing my job but getting buried under bills. My frind on the other hand hurt himself at a box making warehouse, and he could only go to the companies chosen clinic, who tied to do things as cheaply as possible leaving him with lingering pain and such. And his crappy insurance costs a gakk load for himself and kids.

Belphegor wrote:As is, if I paid out of pocket (in the current system) for decent coverage it would cost me over a 1/3 of my income.
If my taxes went up 50% instead, I'd still pay less than what I would pay as the current system stands.

Plus the State burns crap-tons of cash on emergency care that could have been avoided by a level of preventative care that is currently financially unattainable by most uninsured.

Here's the problem. Right now thats effectively additional income you are receiving. Corps like the idea because they don't have to pay for healthcare under universal coverage. You and I will be paying via taxes. But guess what, your salary is not going to go up. All the expenses are transferred directly to you without income benefit. And now you will have joyous government coverage, brought to you by the same people who bring you the Department of Motor Vehicles.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I have to say, I think it's pretty immoral to deny people Medical Care because of money...

Just like it's immoral to deny people food because of money, or a place to live because of money. And yet we have hunger and homelessness too. Because, there is a finite amount of stuff, and too many people. This leads to scarcity, which leads to high costs for these finite supplies, hence screwing the poor. Whatever. Supply and demand exist, and things, even medical care, cost money. If you're not contributing to society, why should society feel compelled to contribute to you.

You want to fix the US healthcare problem? Don't look at the medical system, look at the legal and insurance industries that are hiding just behind it. Want to make healthcare affordable? Cap malpractice suits. As things stand right now, there are doctors quitting the business because they cannot afford to keep practicing. The cost of their malpractice insurance makes it unprofitable to be a doctor, especially in certain fields, like neurosurgery. It's not the doctors getting rich, its the insurance companies that dictate how long, and how much treatment patients can get, and the lawyers who represent people who believe that if a doctor makes a mistake that's as good as winning the lottery. When was the last time you had an error-free day at work?

Universal Health Care isn't the answer. It's lovely in theory, just like communism is a good theory. In practice, it sucks. I have friends in both Canada, and the UK, who have been stuck on huge waiting lists for serious problems, and then got crap service when they finally did get it. (One of my Canadian friends has a tumor behind her eye that causes her near-permanent migranes and she's had to wait over a year to see a doctor whose advice was then to wait and see if it went away on its own).

What universal healthcare will really do is transfer more of everyone's money into the pockets of the insurance companies and the lawyers. Because I don't believe that the government sponsored healthcare systems that are being proposed will be any better than the free clinics that already exist to serve the downtrodden.

Redbeard wrote:
Universal Health Care isn't the answer. It's lovely in theory, just like communism is a good theory. In practice, it sucks. I have friends in both Canada, and the UK, who have been stuck on huge waiting lists for serious problems, and then got crap service when they finally did get it. (One of my Canadian friends has a tumor behind her eye that causes her near-permanent migranes and she's had to wait over a year to see a doctor whose advice was then to wait and see if it went away on its own).

Universal healthcare works pretty well in most countries which have it, such as the UK and France, and private medicine is available for cases which cannot be dealt with quickly by the NHS.

I'm not saying the British/French/Japanese/Canadian or whoever's system is perfect. No system is perfect.

My father recently was diagnosed with cataracts in both eyes, went private, and got the operation done in a couple of weeks for about thousand pounds. If he didn't have the money, he would have had to wait a few months, but it would have got done.

I fail to see how that situation is worse than the US one where if you have heaps of money you get good care straight away, and if you don't you get something limited by the insurance company, or nothing. US citizens save on taxes, then pay out a lot extra for health insurance, or if they can't afford it they go bankrupt or die. Overall, the richest citizens get the most benefit, which is fine if everyone has a good chance to become rich, but that's not how things work.

The fact that malpractice suits against doctors in the US are such a problem also shows that private doctors make mistakes the same as NHS doctors.

I'd balk at Universal health care if I hadn't seen it work in the Us military and countries I have visited. Then I come home and see people suffer because they don't have enough rainy day money to get an Operation. We've all seen the please help my kid get an operation sign, or some old person or vet limpin from untreated wounds. We should and can do better for our citizens.

Agreed. The most efficient system that retains competition and the drive for new R&D/techniques while not bankrupting me is what is needed.

I think it's embarrasing that the US has (arguably) the best health care in the world, but that it's not acccessable by many people.

Redbeard has it. The problem isn't your doctor, it's the lawyers and insurance giants behind him. Health care in the US is a huge bureacracy that is a poorly run business model. For example, OSU Hospital has three billing departments - Anesthesia, Physicians, and Facility. It used to be like 25+ billing departments. This would be like my company sending someone three different bills each month, they'd get pissed in a hurry. It'd be like your getting three gas bills - one from the plant, one from the pipeline group, and one from the line to your house.

The US Health Care Industry needs reform. In fact, a lot of businesses in the US do as well, including universities. And to me, health care and universities are similar - they're both poorly run business models that don't offer a 'produced good' they offer a 'service' that is almost impossible to put a hard value on. And both industries have suffered from having a bloated bureacracy (more accountants, secretaries, etc.) that has grown out of proportion to their 'product' (doctors, professors) over the last 20 years.

I'd like to see some form of universal health care in the US, as long as the government doesn't run it. The government runs some things well, but not many. Michael Moore likes to compare it to Social Security and comment how his father gets his social security check the same day every month. Which is fine, but social security is spending more money than it's taking in - I don't want a repeat of that with health care.

I can't believe that the OP benefits from health care by not paying for it directly then lambasts the notion that others should not have the same benefit.

If you want/need something it needs to be paid for.

Coming from the medical field I will say that Universal Healthcare cannot work in the U.S. as long as there is a threat to the pay doctors and nurses will receive and as long as the country remains so sue happy.

We already lack nurses in most places severely and doctors are scarce as well. Don't think your sitting in a waiting room at a hospital or doctors office because the doctor wanted to get one more game of pong in. He probably has a line of at least 20 patients ahead of you. That's why you also only see him for a few minutes, he has 19 other people to see to try and dwindle this line down.

The lack of nurses is even worse. A patient starts coding in his room, well there aren't enough nurses on staff, the other nurse is handling a situation where a seventy year old Alzheimer's patient down the hall who's family refuses to put him in a nursing home has pulled his I.V. line out and blood is shooting everywhere. In this ruckus she/he doesn't notice the alarms and isn't at the nurses station to get the alert.

If you tell these people that you will not be paid well anymore, they will leave the industry and go work in the legal side of the business. Nurses can do consultation work for lawyers and get paid quite handsomely in most cases. Nurses can do quite a lot of things, and if for one second you think they are going to sit in a state run hospital, be paid less and overburdened you my friend might need to get a C.A.T. scan. But good luck getting one of those if you have state run medicine, the list is probably pretty long.

Now don't get my wrong. I think it would be wonderful for the United States to do the socialized medicine thing. But if they do that, they first need to take out the insurance companies and the ridiculous laws that allow people to sue doctors. Ever been to a O.B.G.Y.N. for your baby? No? That's because they are leaving the field. If they deliver a baby during a difficult birth (tortion is involved or inversion of the fetus) and that doctor accidentally pulls the babies arm out of the socket, even though he can put it right back in no damage done, he can be sued for amounts in the tens of thousands. That's why he might be paying half his mighty doctor salary for all types of insurance. He is still well off, but that threat of being legally destroyed will scare him off and he will go do something else. Or maybe he won't even get into the field in the first place, that mind can go practice law instead. Who needs medical school when you can sue a doctor as a lawyer.