Free Healthcare
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-08-2013, 05:51 PM
RE: Free Healthcare
(29-08-2013 04:14 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(29-08-2013 12:28 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  Blimey Chas, are we agreeing on a political issue here?

Yes.

[Image: bth_17377fbc.gif]

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2013, 08:58 PM
RE: Free Healthcare
I support national health insurance on moral grounds, and from research and a few videos (including the John Green video linked by Hafnof), it seems economics are on my side. I can't find an argument against it except that it costs more for people who don't want to pay for insurance of any kind, private or public. But those people are few in number. For everyone else, it's cheaper. Every argument I've come across has so far been debunked or is philosophical in nature.

I never really use healthcare; I don't see doctors for anything, because all my injuries and illnesses since childhood have been minor. I don't even have a family doctor. I've never had anything requiring treatment except penumonia as a kid, and dental stuff that was covered through private insurance. But I've always supported the public system. I'd gladly pay for other people to have treatment. Even if it costed more than a private system I'd still support it. It seems a basic human right in this day and age. If we can do something to help someone without burdening them afterward and with no harm done to anyone, why not do it?

Since August 12 I've been very thankful for national insurance, because as an unemployed uninsured person I would have been screwed without it thanks to my internal biological WMD misfiring. My prior beliefs have just been strengthened by personal experience. Tongue

If something can be destroyed by the truth, it might be worth destroying.

[Image: ZcC2kGl.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2013, 10:28 PM
RE: Free Healthcare
I work in healthcare marketing (although I mostly do experimental clinical stuff and OTC), I see the many headed hydra pretty clearly I think...

There are so many players involved...The bankers financing it all, the drug companies pushing patents, the big money diagnostics (x-ray/mri) industries, the insurance companies crunching the numbers and protecting their bottom lines, the good doctors and the bad doctors, the lecherous hospitals syphoning off money, the career politicians seeking re-election or retirement.

Insurance is a racket, even my corporate healthcare is being cut back, and the damn insurance co. goes after me to pay for damn near everything they can (shit that will be illegal next year). These companies are becoming more and more invasive and petty as they work to pass the scandalous hospital and medication costs down to me. They drop cancer patients mid treatment, refuse payment on a all sorts of bogus grounds, etc. They probably spend as much on lawyers as they do on claim payments.

Big Pharma has my whole generation hopped up or made numb by sad blankets pushing anti-depressants and doctors who are just itching to feed your kids medication cocktails and prescription speed, demanding constant visits and constant billing. We pay for all the wrong things and none of the right things, we treat but never prevent. What happened to the hippocratic oath? What happened to your doctor prescribing what you need and not what he stands to profit off? Why do pretty blondes make 6 figure salaries to to hand samples to doctors? They are a primary pusher of the archaic and failed drug war. Regulation is a joke, they engage fleets of lawyers to fret about the spacing around disclaimers and what does or does not constitute a claim of effectiveness while they simultaneously spend 15 years ignoring the fact that teens on prozac are throwing themselves from rooftops before finally doing the right tests and adding a back box. The companies themselves do all the tests, the only oversight from government comes from ex employees. You don't know lumbering inefficiency until you have worked with a pharma co. It's a song and dance and the cost is passed down to us.

With malpractice threats looming doctors need to fork over huge sums for insurance and are forced out of private practice, they leave school in agonizing debt and some resort to making a buck at the expense of your patients health and the insurance companies coffers.

Hospitals are charging Ins Co's 18 bucks for a box of tissues and one charge 30k for the same MRI that another bills 12K for, etc. They are pushing on unnecessary and incredibly expensive c-sections on damn near expectant mother that walks through the door to turn a buck and fill rooms.

The government is useless under this system, The FDA is bought and sold, K street writes the legislation, Clinton wouldn't even touch it, Bushes medicare part D was a big shinny gift to pharma. The only thing Obama managed to do in 2 years of work was upset the balance between big pharma and big insurance only to watch it fall into a slightly better yet total unstable equilibrium. We need single ***ing payer Ins!

Of course the real gotcha is that healthcare is the biggest growth industry in the country and it employs a vast number of Americans, it's the only means of care we have, it's far to large to fail, it's got more financial backing than anything else...It's an unstoppable juggernaut and it is here to fuck us all.

Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2013, 10:34 PM
RE: Free Healthcare
Wait, so your doctors make profit from giving treatment? So the same guy diagnosing you stands to profit if that diagnosis requires more treatment? Seriously tell me that isn't the case?

Over here our doctors (and all healthcare staff) are paid salaries by the Government. No matter what treatment they give, or how much of it, their pay stays exactly the same. Surely that's the only possible way to work things?

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Hughsie's post
29-08-2013, 11:00 PM
RE: Free Healthcare
(29-08-2013 10:34 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  Wait, so your doctors make profit from giving treatment? So the same guy diagnosing you stands to profit if that diagnosis requires more treatment? Seriously tell me that isn't the case?

Well sure!

Nobody would do anything for any reason other than the purest of profit motives. Don't want none of that pesky SOSHULIZM infecting their FREEDOM down there, right?

I mean, I had to get clearance from my local death panel just to be re-extended breathing privileges this year. I had a hard time convincing them physics research was essential state business, and they were all ready to come down hard on my lack of ideological purity, but fortunately I used to live near the border, and they were amenable to a hefty bribe in good, patriotic Freedom Dollars ($3.17 USD).

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2013, 11:17 PM
RE: Free Healthcare
(28-08-2013 02:35 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  I was the guy he is referring to. My short answer: Healthcare is more efficient and more affordable without government intervention...think pre-medicare and pre-medicaide, so up until the 60's. Even the poor received basic healthcare. It also help prevent pharmaceutical lobbyists from corrupting government. This is partially why you have absurd laws against medical uses of marijuana and the like, but that's a side note. Additionally, I don't feel that anyone is entitled to the professional services of anyone else for personal problems just for existing. Healthcare for those who are unable to do so because of physical and mental deficiencies, sure. Maybe even temporary medical coverage for someone who is on welfare (which needs dramatic reformation as well). Forcing people to buy insurance they can't afford is stupid, hurts the people, and encroaches on a persons personal liberty. In what world does this make sense? Problem: You are too poor to afford healthcare. Answer: Threaten the people to buy healthcare which they cannot afford.

I'd be a little more receptive to America using a different model, but I'd still be against it. We would see something similar to what we have when the government decided to do the same thing with education at the college level. The colleges jacked up the prices and Uncle Sam covered the costs by taking more money from the taxpayers and inflating the dollar by printing money out of thin air behind closed doors with no real oversight.

I agree it's cheaper to do it like the US, privately. I assume it is cheaper anyway, private institutes are usually always more efficient than public institutes.

However I disagree with you that people are not entitled to healthcare.
I think they are. I think healthcare is one of several (the others being education, safely/security (police, fire services, national security etc..)) things that everyone should be instantly entitled too simply because they were forced out someones vagina.
If you work barely minimum wage/slightly above minimum wage and you get cancer or something, not only is that than a huge expense that you likely can't afford but you'll have to take time off work as well as little costs like petrol.
It's safe to say, you're fucked.
But who's fault is it you got cancer? Nobodies (depending on the cancer obviously).
It's unfair
It shouldn't matter what your level of income is. It's the states duty to ensure the safety and well-being of it's citizens and leaving the poor to 'fend for themselves' is not achieving this.
Health is one of those issues that could hit anyone. Everyone has different genetics, my dad had prostate cancer a while back which means I have a higher chance of getting prostate cancer (thanks dad Dodgy ). Cancer doesn't discriminate between rich and poor for example. As such, everyone should bare the cost of healthcare for the population via income tax. The rich pay for the poor, the poor pay for the rich etc..

IMO, cost isn't the issue, the issue is entitlement and IMO, everyone should be entitled to healthcare.

Also, it doesn't matter to the professional healthcare provider where the money comes from. You're not ripping him off by making him treat poor people because at the end of the day he still gets paid the same amount.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Now with 40% more awesome.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2013, 11:31 PM
RE: Free Healthcare
(29-08-2013 11:17 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(28-08-2013 02:35 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  I was the guy he is referring to. My short answer: Healthcare is more efficient and more affordable without government intervention...think pre-medicare and pre-medicaide, so up until the 60's. Even the poor received basic healthcare. It also help prevent pharmaceutical lobbyists from corrupting government. This is partially why you have absurd laws against medical uses of marijuana and the like, but that's a side note. Additionally, I don't feel that anyone is entitled to the professional services of anyone else for personal problems just for existing. Healthcare for those who are unable to do so because of physical and mental deficiencies, sure. Maybe even temporary medical coverage for someone who is on welfare (which needs dramatic reformation as well). Forcing people to buy insurance they can't afford is stupid, hurts the people, and encroaches on a persons personal liberty. In what world does this make sense? Problem: You are too poor to afford healthcare. Answer: Threaten the people to buy healthcare which they cannot afford.

I'd be a little more receptive to America using a different model, but I'd still be against it. We would see something similar to what we have when the government decided to do the same thing with education at the college level. The colleges jacked up the prices and Uncle Sam covered the costs by taking more money from the taxpayers and inflating the dollar by printing money out of thin air behind closed doors with no real oversight.

I agree it's cheaper to do it like the US, privately. I assume it is cheaper anyway, private institutes are usually always more efficient than public institutes.

However I disagree with you that people are not entitled to healthcare.
I think they are. I think healthcare is one of several (the others being education, safely/security (police, fire services, national security etc..)) things that everyone should be instantly entitled too simply because they were forced out someones vagina.
If you work barely minimum wage/slightly above minimum wage and you get cancer or something, not only is that than a huge expense that you likely can't afford but you'll have to take time off work as well as little costs like petrol.
It's safe to say, you're fucked.
But who's fault is it you got cancer? Nobodies (depending on the cancer obviously).
It's unfair
It shouldn't matter what your level of income is. It's the states duty to ensure the safety and well-being of it's citizens and leaving the poor to 'fend for themselves' is not achieving this.
Health is one of those issues that could hit anyone. Everyone has different genetics, my dad had prostate cancer a while back which means I have a higher chance of getting prostate cancer (thanks dad Dodgy ). Cancer doesn't discriminate between rich and poor for example. As such, everyone should bare the cost of healthcare for the population via income tax. The rich pay for the poor, the poor pay for the rich etc..

IMO, cost isn't the issue, the issue is entitlement and IMO, everyone should be entitled to healthcare.

Also, it doesn't matter to the professional healthcare provider where the money comes from. You're not ripping him off by making him treat poor people because at the end of the day he still gets paid the same amount.

I would agree, but I think the crux of the argument lies in the question of what method of healthcare is going to provide the highest level of healthcare at the fairest price for everyone? Everyone may be entitled to free care, but if the level of care is shit then who, if anyone, is really benefiting?

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2013, 03:09 AM
RE: Free Healthcare
(29-08-2013 11:17 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(28-08-2013 02:35 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  I was the guy he is referring to. My short answer: Healthcare is more efficient and more affordable without government intervention...think pre-medicare and pre-medicaide, so up until the 60's. Even the poor received basic healthcare. It also help prevent pharmaceutical lobbyists from corrupting government. This is partially why you have absurd laws against medical uses of marijuana and the like, but that's a side note. Additionally, I don't feel that anyone is entitled to the professional services of anyone else for personal problems just for existing. Healthcare for those who are unable to do so because of physical and mental deficiencies, sure. Maybe even temporary medical coverage for someone who is on welfare (which needs dramatic reformation as well). Forcing people to buy insurance they can't afford is stupid, hurts the people, and encroaches on a persons personal liberty. In what world does this make sense? Problem: You are too poor to afford healthcare. Answer: Threaten the people to buy healthcare which they cannot afford.

I'd be a little more receptive to America using a different model, but I'd still be against it. We would see something similar to what we have when the government decided to do the same thing with education at the college level. The colleges jacked up the prices and Uncle Sam covered the costs by taking more money from the taxpayers and inflating the dollar by printing money out of thin air behind closed doors with no real oversight.

I agree it's cheaper to do it like the US, privately. I assume it is cheaper anyway, private institutes are usually always more efficient than public institutes.

However I disagree with you that people are not entitled to healthcare.
I think they are. I think healthcare is one of several (the others being education, safely/security (police, fire services, national security etc..)) things that everyone should be instantly entitled too simply because they were forced out someones vagina.
If you work barely minimum wage/slightly above minimum wage and you get cancer or something, not only is that than a huge expense that you likely can't afford but you'll have to take time off work as well as little costs like petrol.
It's safe to say, you're fucked.
But who's fault is it you got cancer? Nobodies (depending on the cancer obviously).
It's unfair
It shouldn't matter what your level of income is. It's the states duty to ensure the safety and well-being of it's citizens and leaving the poor to 'fend for themselves' is not achieving this.
Health is one of those issues that could hit anyone. Everyone has different genetics, my dad had prostate cancer a while back which means I have a higher chance of getting prostate cancer (thanks dad Dodgy ). Cancer doesn't discriminate between rich and poor for example. As such, everyone should bare the cost of healthcare for the population via income tax. The rich pay for the poor, the poor pay for the rich etc..

IMO, cost isn't the issue, the issue is entitlement and IMO, everyone should be entitled to healthcare.

Also, it doesn't matter to the professional healthcare provider where the money comes from. You're not ripping him off by making him treat poor people because at the end of the day he still gets paid the same amount.

No, in practice it is many many times more expensive going this route. For profit medicine is an abomination on every level and the fact that we have never even gotten close to single payer is ridiculous.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2013, 07:01 AM
RE: Free Healthcare
Can some1 explain the single payer system y'all talk about?

I don't really like going outside.
It's too damn "peopley" out there....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2013, 07:20 AM
RE: Free Healthcare
Lightvader,

A single payer system is where government negotiates health care costs on behalf of the bulk of its population. This model is inherent to socialised health systems, but the economic argument is that the single payer is able to negotiate better deals than individuals are able to. This argument is supported by data on the health care costs and outcomes for the USA versus socialised systems.

In principle, country-sized HMOs could offer a similar economy of scale and negotiating power.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-payer_health_care

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: