Today is the Day to Kill Socialized Medicine

I really wish there was a netural arbiter in this debate. As long as neither side can agree with the fundamentals, every single discussion about this turns into a philosophy argument (government is good/government sucks).

I think a good starting point would be..."How many people are unable to get necessary medical treatment because of its cost?" (which is not quite the same thing as how many people are uninsured). The next question would be..."What costs would be involved in providing it through the public sector vs. the private sector?" Then, "Are there any present policies we can change that could reduce those costs?". Only then would we reach a point where the issue of structural change, and apportionment of costs, would come into play...and we simply aren't there yet.

I am a far right wing libertarian, but am willing to consider the possibility of a public health solution (among all other solutions). My problem is that we do not have the basics necessary to formulate a decision. Despite Republicans and Democrats agreeing that we need "change" (which is not the same thing as improvement), and projections of TRILLIONS of dollars in spending, and multiple thousand page bills being presented, it strikes me that we have yet to get any consensus on the fundamental questions we are trying to answer. Just my $.02
 
Last edited:
The problem is not *simply* that people can't agree on the fundamentals. People don't even agree on the *facts*.

Talk to someone on this topic, and you find that even the *number* of uninsured is slightly controversial. Worse, the facts are all argued not on the basis of *accuracy*, but based upon the political implications that facts imply.

Heck, a very high percentage of Americans don't agree that Obama is even an American citizen.

So given that we can't agree on basic FACTS, is it any surprise that we don't have any agreement on core philosophy like putting criminals on trial? And if we can't agree on core philosophy; how on earth does one approach something that might actually be difficult (like healthcare)?

What we are lacking is people who are willing to address the issue (or any issue for that matter) in good faith. Nobody is interesting in anything beyond their own greedy self interests.
 
Well from what Obama has said and the way they want to ram it down our throats it is about distribution of wealth not about health care, and I will guarantee you there is something in the bill where the politicians are isolated from the cost. Nobody knows what is in the bill they say pass it and we will fix it later that is like buying a new boat and leaving the price and interest amount blank and trusting the salesman to give you the best deal it ain't going to happed.
 
JediJD said:
I really wish there was a netural arbiter in this debate. As long as neither side can agree with the fundamentals, every single discussion about this turns into a philosophy argument (government is good/government sucks).

I think a good starting point would be..."How many people are unable to get necessary medical treatment because of its cost?" (which is not quite the same thing as how many people are uninsured). The next question would be..."What costs would be involved in providing it through the public sector vs. the private sector?" Then, "Are there any present policies we can change that could reduce those costs?". Only then would we reach a point where the issue of structural change, and apportionment of costs, would come into play...and we simply aren't there yet.

I am a far right wing libertarian, but am willing to consider the possibility of a public health solution (among all other solutions). My problem is that we do not have the basics necessary to formulate a decision. Despite Republicans and Democrats agreeing that we need "change" (which is not the same thing as improvement), and projections of TRILLIONS of dollars in spending, and multiple thousand page bills being presented, it strikes me that we have yet to get any consensus on the fundamental questions we are trying to answer. Just my $.02
Click to expand...
Good post. Why is it that using your head, some logic and problem solving skills, is so foreign to Washington?
 
This should be free. Who's making money off of this? I should have thought of it first. Bravo!
 
I am Canadian and we have health care. Individuals do not pay, but it costs the provences between 4 and 6 thousand per person a year. This is tax money not a payment by an individual. It covers every thing from treatment for a cold to transplant parts and cancer treatment. You never have to pay for treatment. It may not be the best in the world but it is nice to know if you get sick and are unemployeed or under 65 and retired on a limited income you will not loose all you have to stay alive. There are no pre existing conditions that are exempt and it covers you any where you are in Canada. Is it cheaper than paying premiums in the USA I do not know. Perhaps some one can tells us what an individual pays in the US for single and family plans and if there is a deductable portion.
 
Northern, if you are really looking for a rational discussion of the issue, I'll offer up. One of our problems is that we pay your system as well as ours. We, as Americans, are taxed for Medicare (federal) and Medicaid (state) health programs...in addition to supplements for "teaching" hospitals. I cannot give you the number directly, but as I recall, it works out to several thousand dollars per eligible user. In addition, we have "private pay" where, in some instances, you can pay directly for service. There are also federal systems for active and retired military and their families (covered under a different budget). There is another system for American Indians (yet another system). Finally, there is private insurance, which has graduated scales from very inexpensive for the young and history free...all the way up to the very expensive (or non existent) for high risk and pre-existing and it is widely regulated.

Compounding the problem are state regulations regarding what must be covered by private insurance (but each state is different), Federal regulations governing what must NOT be done (HIPPA), a guild mentality within the medical community that prevents anyone but physicians from prescribing medicines or performing the most basic of surgeries, a protectionist mentality at the federal level that prevents access to medicines (except through the aforementioned guild) that are commonly available over the counter in other countries, and a huge symbiotic malpractice insurance company/litigation industry (one wouldn't exist without the other).

We have the best medical care in the world, but its availability is either randomly accessed, or available at a cost to those who can afford it (sort of a capitalist concept). Basic medical care is available at every emergency room in the country (and they are prevented from turning away anyone). Affecting outcomes is a fairly large population of drug and alcohol abusers, a largely sedentary and overweight population, and medical policies in which health care financial decisions are driven by third parties (employers and governments), instead of individuals.

I have heard the benefits of Canadian (and British) healthcare, but the fact is that no one goes there for treatment because its great...they go because it is free. Despite the non existent cost...a huge industry in Canada has evolved to provide private, for pay, healthcare. In essence, a guy named Adam Smith is showing where the problems lie, and offering solutions. We, unfortunately, appear headed inexorably in the other direction.

At the risk of starting an international incident, I also respectfully suggest that we are subsidizing Canada's health care bills as well. The US spends roughly 4.8% of GDP on defense spending...depending on whose numbers you use for what, that runs out to about a trillion dollars or so. Canada and Mexico spend roughly 1% of GDP. While no one tacitly admits it, the US carries the load for the defense of North America (although Canada's contributions are certainly appreciated) and the 1-2% shift in GDP Canada could easily be sharing for defense, roughly equals one third of your country's total outlay for public health care.
 
Last edited:
northern said:
Individuals do not pay, but it costs the provences between 4 and 6 thousand per person a year. Perhaps some one can tells us what an individual pays in the US for single and family plans and if there is a deductable portion.
Click to expand...

Holy crap...
$4-$6K PER PERSON, per year? If that's a correct figure, I'd like to know why "they're" even considering a "public option".
Of course, it varies by age and state. I have BCBS, Blue Choice PPO plan (individual/family). Myself, Admiral, and two teenage boys. Just over $1,000. per month. No restrictions, any doctor, no referrals required. $500 deductible/person...$20 office visits...80/20 coinsurance to $5,000 then 100% coverage.

And I thought $12 large/year is ridiculous...


On Face the Nation today, the Dem they interviewed (can't recall who it was) made the comment that the reason they want to move so quickly on this (read: ram it down our throats) is so that they can get it 'out of the way' so "they" can concentrate on the economy.

Interesting that this Administration admits they can't deal with more than one issue at a time. How frickin' ridiculous is a statement like that?

I'll bet Obama can't walk and chew gum at the same time...
 
JediJD said:
Northern, if you are really looking for a rational discussion of the issue, I'll offer up. One of our problems is that we pay your system as well as ours. We, as Americans, are taxed for Medicare (federal) and Medicaid (state) health programs...in addition to supplements for "teaching" hospitals. I cannot give you the number directly, but as I recall, it works out to several thousand dollars per eligible user. In addition, we have "private pay" where, in some instances, you can pay directly for service. There are also federal systems for active and retired military and their families (covered under a different budget). There is another system for American Indians (yet another system). Finally, there is private insurance, which has graduated scales from very inexpensive for the young and history free...all the way up to the very expensive (or non existent) for high risk and pre-existing and it is widely regulated.

Compounding the problem are state regulations regarding what must be covered by private insurance (but each state is different), Federal regulations governing what must NOT be done (HIPPA), a guild mentality within the medical community that prevents anyone but physicians from prescribing medicines or performing the most basic of surgeries, a protectionist mentality at the federal level that prevents access to medicines (except through the aforementioned guild) that are commonly available over the counter in other countries, and a huge symbiotic malpractice insurance company/litigation industry (one wouldn't exist without the other).

We have the best medical care in the world, but its availability is either randomly accessed, or available at a cost to those who can afford it (sort of a capitalist concept). Basic medical care is available at every emergency room in the country (and they are prevented from turning away anyone). Affecting outcomes is a fairly large population of drug and alcohol abusers, a largely sedentary and overweight population, and medical policies in which health care financial decisions are driven by third parties (employers and governments), instead of individuals.

I have heard the benefits of Canadian (and British) healthcare, but the fact is that no one goes there for treatment because its great...they go because it is free. Despite the non existent cost...a huge industry in Canada has evolved to provide private, for pay, healthcare. In essence, a guy named Adam Smith is showing where the problems lie, and offering solutions. We, unfortunately, appear headed inexorably in the other direction.

At the risk of starting an international incident, I also respectfully suggest that we are subsidizing Canada's health care bills as well. The US spends roughly 4.8% of GDP on defense spending...depending on whose numbers you use for what, that runs out to about a trillion dollars or so. Canada and Mexico spend roughly 1% of GDP. While no one tacitly admits it, the US carries the load for the defense of North America (although Canada's contributions are certainly appreciated) and the 1-2% shift in GDP Canada could easily be sharing for defense, roughly equals one third of your country's total outlay for public health care.
Click to expand...
I might have missed it in your discussion, but did you include the rather large illegal alien populations that doesn't pay taxes, yet is also included in the emergency room coverage that the rest of us pay for? (especially heavy in the southwest, but is also spread across the rest of the country) They also use up other services, in those areas without contributing towards the taxes to support those services.
 
VTSeaRay said:
I might have missed it in your discussion, but did you include the rather large illegal alien populations that doesn't pay taxes, yet is also included in the emergency room coverage that the rest of us pay for? (especially heavy in the southwest, but is also spread across the rest of the country) They also use up other services, in those areas without contributing towards the taxes to support those services.
Click to expand...

There is no question that they are a serious drain on services as well. I should have included them as a complicating factor. I apologize...I was trying to be thorough but this topic doesn't simplify easily.
 
The most common question I have is, where does it say that the Govt has to supply healthcare, or anything else? I thought the basic design of the Govt was to govern, not interfere and run business. I want a new car, does that mean the Govt and taxpayers should be responsible for paying for it? Bottom line for me, I've never seen the Govt successfully run any business, and I don't want them to continue to try. How well are the banks, mortgage companies, and auto manufacturers doing here in the U.S.?? Now we want them to be involved in your heathcare?:smt089
 
wileecoyote said:
The most common question I have is, where does it say that the Govt has to supply healthcare, or anything else? I thought the basic design of the Govt was to govern, not interfere and run business. I want a new car, does that mean the Govt and taxpayers should be responsible for paying for it? Bottom line for me, I've never seen the Govt successfully run any business, and I don't want them to continue to try. How well are the banks, mortgage companies, and auto manufacturers doing here in the U.S.?? Now we want them to be involved in your heathcare?:smt089
Click to expand...

Wilee...that is indeed one of the philosophical questions. There is a great divide between the "government is great" crowd and the "government sucks" crowd (personally, I think its hardwiring...but that's another rant). The issue before us is a very complicated health care question in general, and a Canadian alternative in particular. I tried to outline some of the competing complications. However, the fact is that the government IS going to run something...whether it is federal control over Indian care, Veteran care and Medicare, or state control over Medicaid...and how are we best going to deal with it.
 
There is no such thing as a "Utopia" purely fiction, the human race has tried all manner of governing and thus far I would say for the most part, it is just one big failure.

I can also understand why I hear the term, "revolution" more and more it seems.

We have about legislated the phrase 'United" out of United States of America, once this illegal alien amnesty is passed and the trial for the 9/11 criminals gets underway, martyring them, I fully expect the term "United" to be completely lost.

We are definitely at the 51% versus the 49% junction. The Romans tried in their heyday as have others.

Once the USA is divided up into enclaves there for sure will be no Democracy or Republic left representing the USA.

Many years ago someone stated I think it was Mao Tse Tung perhaps who stated it. the United States will one day be lost to others without anyone ever having fired a shot.

I sure see us hell bent going down that road.

It is sickening to see what direction we have headed from, the start of the nuclear age, cold war era and now to where we currently are at.

There is no ethics or moral responsibility any more, it is all about me. What I have seen is that many who are leading us down this path are to cowardly to defend their own country.

Like I say, "Ignorance begets ignorance."

My whole nickel, before it is taxed and I can only say then, 'my one cent.'

"42"
 
Last edited:
northern said:
I am Canadian and we have health care. Individuals do not pay, but it costs the provences between 4 and 6 thousand per person a year. This is tax money not a payment by an individual. It covers every thing from treatment for a cold to transplant parts and cancer treatment. You never have to pay for treatment. It may not be the best in the world but it is nice to know if you get sick and are unemployeed or under 65 and retired on a limited income you will not loose all you have to stay alive. There are no pre existing conditions that are exempt and it covers you any where you are in Canada. Is it cheaper than paying premiums in the USA I do not know. Perhaps some one can tells us what an individual pays in the US for single and family plans and if there is a deductable portion.
Click to expand...

Northern, you say you don't pay for Health Care it is paid for by Taxes. I would like to know what your Tax Rate is up there. I know people that drove through Canada and say they will never do it again because the fuel prices are double or more of the states, High Taxes?. So actually you are paying for it with your taxes, in the states we have what is known as choice whether we want to pay for health care or not. I have a 19yro at home that doesn’t have coverage I told him if he has to go to the hospital to tell them he wants’ the same treatment they give the illegal’s. We keep hearing of women that come down here to have babies because there aren’t enough beds in Canada and having to wait 3 to 6 months for Cancer treatment where they need to be taken immediately or die and are told sorry you will have to wait we don’t want that kind of health care. We don’t want a Nanny State. Our biggest problem are the Liberal’s that have
a Mental Disease and want to pass it along to every one else. The cheapest thing to do here is to cover the 15% that don't have coverage and leave the rest of us alone but it is about redistribution of wealth and control of everyones life.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_Canada#Personal_income_taxes
 
I still retain hope, that even if this crap is passed into law, the inevitable Supreme Court challenge to the individual "mandate" will render it unconstitutional long before it takes effect.
 
JediJD said:
Wilee...that is indeed one of the philosophical questions. There is a great divide between the "government is great" crowd and the "government sucks" crowd (personally, I think its hardwiring...but that's another rant). The issue before us is a very complicated health care question in general, and a Canadian alternative in particular. I tried to outline some of the competing complications. However, the fact is that the government IS going to run something...whether it is federal control over Indian care, Veteran care and Medicare, or state control over Medicaid...and how are we best going to deal with it.
Click to expand...

I understand you are trying to outline the different sides on the healthcare issue. I guess my issue is not just healthcare, but the state of our country and society as a whole. It seems there is a total loss of personal responsibility throughout society. It's always someone else's problem or someone else should bail me out mentality. Until we learn to live within our meansand quit trying to "keep up with the Jones'" it won't help. In my opinion, failure shows you faults and makes you work harder to make sure it doesn't happen again. Only problem is no one wants to allow anyone to fail, and therefore learn from their mistakes.
 
wileecoyote said:
The most common question I have is, where does it say that the Govt has to supply healthcare, or anything else? I thought the basic design of the Govt was to govern, not interfere and run business.:smt089
Click to expand...

Uh... It doesn't say that anywhere... The Founding Fathers apparently failed in their mission of writing a concise document limiting the powers of government and ensuring personal freedom. They left too much room for interpretation, allowing the document itself to be rendered invalid. Liberals call it a "living document", I call it twisting the words to make it say whatever the hell you want it to say. The phrase "common good" is one example. It was meant to mean that the government should do everything in its power to protect everyone as a group from a common threat to life, liberty, or property. Instead, it has been used as a way to take over the workplace, the environment, private businesses, as well as personal behavior.
 
skibum said:
Uh... It doesn't say that anywhere... The Founding Fathers apparently failed in their mission of writing a concise document limiting the powers of government and ensuring personal freedom. They left too much room for interpretation, allowing the document itself to be rendered invalid. Liberals call it a "living document", I call it twisting the words to make it say whatever the hell you want it to say. The phrase "common good" is one example. It was meant to mean that the government should do everything in its power to protect everyone as a group from a common threat to life, liberty, or property. Instead, it has been used as a way to take over the workplace, the environment, private businesses, as well as personal behavior.
Click to expand...

100% Agreed!:thumbsup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,241
Messages
1,429,115
Members
61,122
Latest member
DddAae
Back
Top