›

Public Health Care Option "Is Gonna Kill People"

DORDOR Two Ron Toe 9,905 Posts
edited July 2009 in Strut Central
Can I nominate someone else for the Soulstrut Facepalm Award Nominee list???

Britain and Canada "don't have the appreciation of life as we do in our society, evidently" Anyone watch Bill Moyers on PBS?Every American should watch this.http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/watch2.html
«1345

  Comments

  • barjesusbarjesus 872 Posts
    Man, this shit is sickening. What happened to my country?
  • DORDOR Two Ron Toe 9,905 Posts
    http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/07/11


    "Face it, America. You are a corporate-controlled country with the symbols of democracy in the constitution and statutes just that-symbols of what the founding fathers believed or hoped would be reality."
  • pcmrpcmr 5,591 Posts
    the commercial from some interest group presents ''shocking'' events of the horrible canadian system that is much worse than the
  • cpeetzcpeetz 2,112 Posts
    Not giving people healthcare must be part of the "culture of life" the Republicans are always talking about.
  • DORDOR Two Ron Toe 9,905 Posts
    the commercial from some interest group presents ''shocking'' events of the horrible canadian system that is much worse than the


    Coming from a commercial is one thing. Coming straight from the mouth of a United States Representative is downright disingenuous.
  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts
    http://www.biggovhealth.org/stories
  • DORDOR Two Ron Toe 9,905 Posts

    These are complete bullshit.
  • SoulOnIceSoulOnIce 13,027 Posts

    Across the globe, citizens of nations with government-run health care systems experience long wait times, a lack of access to certain treatments and, in some instances, a diminished quality of medical care. Navigate the links below to learn more about patients??? health care horror stories.

    Yeah, because those things never happen in our privatized insurance-based health care system.

    LOL, SMH and all that. How about not having access to any health care? How does that work out for people?

    I know plenty of people with jobs and paid-for HMO coverage that have to wait for treatment, are denied certain treatments, and in some cases, face a diminished quality of health care. Sound familiar?
  • georgeibrahimgeorgeibrahim 676 Posts
    Across the globe, citizens of nations with government-run health care systems experience long wait times, a lack of access to certain treatments and, in some instances, a diminished quality of medical care. Navigate the links below to learn more about patients??? health care horror stories.

    Yeah, this happens in the UK, but no public run health system would ever be perfect! it would be naive to even try and think they would be. But the real horror stories are people having to pay $60,000 to have one of their fingers sewn back on or having to pay $12,000 for an ambulance because of an accident meaning their insurance doesn't pay out as the ambulance "wasn't scheduled".
  • Big_StacksBig_Stacks "I don't worry about hittin' power, cause I don't give 'em nuttin' to hit." 4,670 Posts
    Man, this shit is sickening. What happened to my country?

    Hey Barjesus,

    Sadly, America loves money (and related trappings) more than people. There will be no empathy under such conditions.

    Peace,

    Big Stacks from Kakalak
  • barjesusbarjesus 872 Posts
    I don't like money that much. So much, that I let my neighbor die so I can get in his wallet.
  • The_Hook_UpThe_Hook_Up 8,182 Posts
    I just dont understand how getting folks health insurance who dont have any is a bad thing.

    The repubs say 2 different things that are contradictory:

    public health will be poorly run and will cost people their lives...

    public health will be able to provide health coverage that the private insurance companies wont be able to compete with...

    which is it, republican dipshits? is it a terrible option that will kill people, or is it cheaper alternative that will provide the same or better coverage than private insurance?

    It cant be both.
  • barjesusbarjesus 872 Posts
    I have a bad feeling, though, that there will be some sort of fucked up compromise. Like a mandate forcing everyone that's uninsured to buy into a weakened plan run by the insurance companies. I could see the insurance companies eating that up.
  • DORDOR Two Ron Toe 9,905 Posts
    I never understood the line "Do you really want the government between you and your health care?" compared to "Do you really want a corporation between you and your health care?"


    I'm curious Rock. Did you watch the PBS video I posted above. Try and take 30 mins if you ever have the time to give us your opinion after watching it.
  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts
    I never understood the line "Do you really want the government between you and your health care?" compared to "Do you really want a corporation between you and your health care?"


    I'm curious Rock. Did you watch the PBS video I posted above. Try and take 30 mins if you ever have the time to give us your opinion after watching it.

    I haven't watched it but will when I get a chance.

    I assume you'd like an opinion beyond "This is complete bullshit".

    I do have one question about Universal Helathcare that I don't think I have ever heard addressed...

    How will it effect malpractice cases...will you be suing the government?....will the government be "self insured"? I've read that doctors paying malpractice insurance is one of the reasons we have high medical costs.
  • Jonny_PaycheckJonny_Paycheck 17,825 Posts
    Well the thing is insurance companies are driven by profit. Supposedly, this is the motivating factor to provide better insurance - in a service industry, the better your service, the more people will buy it, the more money to be made. This is an argument I hear trotted out against public health insurance - it will be inefficient because efficiency rewards companies through profit. No profit? No efficiency.

    There's one fundamental flaw in that logic though - an insurance company profits by collecting premiums and keeping them - eg, NOT paying out claims. That is actually how they are evaluated in the stock market. In the insurance world, a dog or a pig is an expensive claim or a company/individual with chronic problems. A policy holder with good claims history is a very desirable one - the kind that gets actively competed over for their business.

    Unfortunately, in life, we are not all golden. A lot of us are pigs. Often times - most times, not by our choosing. In fact, today's golden child IS tomorrow's pig, whether it's basic health, injuries on the job, automobile accidents... people get older. Their bodies break down. Doctor visits increase, and basic faculties do the opposite.

    Insurance should be government run. It should be a public service. When people say "oh, well, private companies are more efficient and less bureaucratic than the government..." I think to myself, this person hasn't had much experience dealing with or working with insurance companies.

    There's also no reason, in my eyes, why private companies couldn't collaborate with and streamline a government insurance program, as agents. I think that's a great way to go. Have the government provide the bucket, let private companies control the spigots. Make the private companies represent - at least, in theory - the consumer. Currently, most insurers are represented by brokers. People go to brokers thinking they will get them the best coverage. The broker represents the insurer, not the customer.
  • barjesusbarjesus 872 Posts
    When people say "oh, well, private companies are more efficient and less bureaucratic than the government..." I think to myself, this person hasn't had much experience dealing with or working with insurance companies.
  • OkemOkem 4,617 Posts
    Strangely enough, here, where we are luckily enough to have Gov. Healthcare, we also have malpractice cases. Crazy Europeans. The money, as far as I know, comes from a big pot of gold that we stole off a leprecon some time ago. (He had no legally binding proof of ownership so it was ok)
  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts

    There's one fundamental flaw in that logic though - an insurance company profits by collecting premiums and keeping them - eg, NOT paying out claims. That is actually how they are evaluated in the stock market. In the insurance world, a dog or a pig is an expensive claim or a company/individual with chronic problems. A policy holder with good claims history is a very desirable one - the kind that gets actively competed over for their business.

    Unfortunately, in life, we are not all golden. A lot of us are pigs. Often times - most times, not by our choosing. In fact, today's golden child IS tomorrow's pig, whether it's basic health, injuries on the job, automobile accidents... people get older. Their bodies break down. Doctor visits increase, and basic faculties do the opposite.

    Insurance should be government run. It should be a public service. When people say "oh, well, private companies are more efficient and less bureaucratic than the government..." I think to myself, this person hasn't had much experience dealing with or working with insurance companies.

    There's also no reason, in my eyes, why private companies couldn't collaborate with and streamline a government insurance program, as agents. I think that's a great way to go. Have the government provide the bucket, let private companies control the spigots. Make the private companies represent - at least, in theory - the consumer. Currently, most insurers are represented by brokers. People go to brokers thinking they will get them the best coverage. The broker represents the insurer, not the customer.

    Could you see other insurance industries being taken over by the government as well??
  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts

    There's one fundamental flaw in that logic though - an insurance company profits by collecting premiums and keeping them - eg, NOT paying out claims. That is actually how they are evaluated in the stock market. In the insurance world, a dog or a pig is an expensive claim or a company/individual with chronic problems. A policy holder with good claims history is a very desirable one - the kind that gets actively competed over for their business.

    Unfortunately, in life, we are not all golden. A lot of us are pigs. Often times - most times, not by our choosing. In fact, today's golden child IS tomorrow's pig, whether it's basic health, injuries on the job, automobile accidents... people get older. Their bodies break down. Doctor visits increase, and basic faculties do the opposite.

    Insurance should be government run. It should be a public service. When people say "oh, well, private companies are more efficient and less bureaucratic than the government..." I think to myself, this person hasn't had much experience dealing with or working with insurance companies.

    There's also no reason, in my eyes, why private companies couldn't collaborate with and streamline a government insurance program, as agents. I think that's a great way to go. Have the government provide the bucket, let private companies control the spigots. Make the private companies represent - at least, in theory - the consumer. Currently, most insurers are represented by brokers. People go to brokers thinking they will get them the best coverage. The broker represents the insurer, not the customer.

    Could you see other insurance industries being taken over by the government as well??

    The government has already taken over many other insurance industries.
  • brody152brody152 13 Posts

    this website is set up by CMPI, the Center for Medicine in the Public Interest, hardly a unbiased source. it is the pharma arm of the Pacific Research Institute, a hard right, conservative think tank with an extremely questionable history. I'd do some research on them before using them as a good source of information on the debate.
  • DORDOR Two Ron Toe 9,905 Posts
    I never understood the line "Do you really want the government between you and your health care?" compared to "Do you really want a corporation between you and your health care?"


    I'm curious Rock. Did you watch the PBS video I posted above. Try and take 30 mins if you ever have the time to give us your opinion after watching it.

    I haven't watched it but will when I get a chance.

    I assume you'd like an opinion beyond "This is complete bullshit".

    I do have one question about Universal Helathcare that I don't think I have ever heard addressed...

    How will it effect malpractice cases...will you be suing the government?....will the government be "self insured"? I've read that doctors paying malpractice insurance is one of the reasons we have high medical costs.



    Well, I'll wait until you get a chance to watch the video and then we can get into it.

    But just so you know. I've lived in all 3 countries talked about. I've used all 3 health care systems.


    At the very least use of the American system I can remember being billed $500 for an xray and being told to get some tylenol and to come back in a couple of days for some more test. I didn't go back. I just dealt with the pain.

    At the extreme end. Around 2003 my step father (Who while living in the US for about 10+ years) had a small business which shut down in small part due to cost of health benefits. A few months after the biz shut down he started having pains in his back. Because he didn't have coverage as well anymore, he decided to not go to the doctor in fear of costs. Months later he only went to the hospital once the pain became to much. 4 days later he died from cancer.

    Now never did any doctor find signs of cancer when he went for checkups before hand. Which is understandable. Not everything is going to be found at any given time.

    The one thing that was a bit much was the way the vultures swept in after he died looking for their payment not even a few days after he died. With threatening language to my step sister if she didn't pay up.

    Also, it's very sad when humans will not seek help due to the factor of costs.


    I'm not saying that ours or anyone else's system is perfect. Or that some of those things in the post you threw up don't happen. (But to be perfectly honest, those are the exception. Not the rule.) I can just report on my life and the people around me (Not one person I have ever known in my life has anything close to a story like from the link you posted above). From the 20-50 times I've been to a doctor or in the hospital. To the time my best friend got cancer and received amazing care (Even down to the government covering the pills he has to take even now 3 years after he's gone into remission). To all the times my grandfather has been in and out of the hospital in the last 3 years. Not once has cost been a factor in their lives (Or the people around them).


    I just don't understand the idea that a lot of people have no problems paying for costs of the military which in effect kills people, but feel the need to swear at the heavens on the idea of everyone having health coverage.


    This isn't all directed at you Rock. I would just like your opinion after you watch the video.
  • Jonny_PaycheckJonny_Paycheck 17,825 Posts

    There's one fundamental flaw in that logic though - an insurance company profits by collecting premiums and keeping them - eg, NOT paying out claims. That is actually how they are evaluated in the stock market. In the insurance world, a dog or a pig is an expensive claim or a company/individual with chronic problems. A policy holder with good claims history is a very desirable one - the kind that gets actively competed over for their business.

    Unfortunately, in life, we are not all golden. A lot of us are pigs. Often times - most times, not by our choosing. In fact, today's golden child IS tomorrow's pig, whether it's basic health, injuries on the job, automobile accidents... people get older. Their bodies break down. Doctor visits increase, and basic faculties do the opposite.

    Insurance should be government run. It should be a public service. When people say "oh, well, private companies are more efficient and less bureaucratic than the government..." I think to myself, this person hasn't had much experience dealing with or working with insurance companies.

    There's also no reason, in my eyes, why private companies couldn't collaborate with and streamline a government insurance program, as agents. I think that's a great way to go. Have the government provide the bucket, let private companies control the spigots. Make the private companies represent - at least, in theory - the consumer. Currently, most insurers are represented by brokers. People go to brokers thinking they will get them the best coverage. The broker represents the insurer, not the customer.

    Could you see other insurance industries being taken over by the government as well??

    The government has already taken over many other insurance industries.

    Indeed.


    But I'm not sure why the government would take over a private, profitable insurance company. Health insurance is a necessity - car insurance is a luxury. I'm not sure what other kinds of insurance could be considered mandatory.

    That said, the government owns a huge stake in AIG, one of the biggest insurance companies in the world and one with many diverse interests in various forms of insurance (corporate, individual, life, reinsurance, etc etc)
  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts

    There's one fundamental flaw in that logic though - an insurance company profits by collecting premiums and keeping them - eg, NOT paying out claims. That is actually how they are evaluated in the stock market. In the insurance world, a dog or a pig is an expensive claim or a company/individual with chronic problems. A policy holder with good claims history is a very desirable one - the kind that gets actively competed over for their business.

    Unfortunately, in life, we are not all golden. A lot of us are pigs. Often times - most times, not by our choosing. In fact, today's golden child IS tomorrow's pig, whether it's basic health, injuries on the job, automobile accidents... people get older. Their bodies break down. Doctor visits increase, and basic faculties do the opposite.

    Insurance should be government run. It should be a public service. When people say "oh, well, private companies are more efficient and less bureaucratic than the government..." I think to myself, this person hasn't had much experience dealing with or working with insurance companies.

    There's also no reason, in my eyes, why private companies couldn't collaborate with and streamline a government insurance program, as agents. I think that's a great way to go. Have the government provide the bucket, let private companies control the spigots. Make the private companies represent - at least, in theory - the consumer. Currently, most insurers are represented by brokers. People go to brokers thinking they will get them the best coverage. The broker represents the insurer, not the customer.

    Could you see other insurance industries being taken over by the government as well??

    The government has already taken over many other insurance industries.

    Indeed.


    But I'm not sure why the government would take over a private, profitable insurance company. Health insurance is a necessity - car insurance is a luxury. I'm not sure what other kinds of insurance could be considered mandatory.

    That said, the government owns a huge stake in AIG, one of the biggest insurance companies in the world and one with many diverse interests in various forms of insurance (corporate, individual, life, reinsurance, etc etc)

    I wasn't even thinking AIG.

    In my state car insurance is not a luxury, it is required for all cars on the road.
  • Jonny_PaycheckJonny_Paycheck 17,825 Posts
    ... and there is government car insurance - mainly for those who are otherwise uninsurable or can't afford private insurance.

    But car insurance isn't exactly "mandatory" - it's mandatory if you own a car, but owning a car is certainly a luxury.
  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts

    this website is set up by CMPI, the Center for Medicine in the Public Interest, hardly a unbiased source. it is the pharma arm of the Pacific Research Institute, a hard right, conservative think tank with an extremely questionable history. I'd do some research on them before using them as a good source of information on the debate.

    I don't know the people on that site, whether or not their stories are true nor was I using it in any debate other than showing that being "disingenuous" is a relative term based on personal experience.

    There are people who aren't backing a Universal Healthcare system, not because they don't feel everyone is entitled to decent healthcare, but because they don't see how it will work economically.

    I pay a ridiculous amount of money for healthcare and I promise you if someone in my family gets seriously ill I will feel they need/deserve BETTER care than what they will get.
  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts
    ... and there is government car insurance - mainly for those who are otherwise uninsurable or can't afford private insurance.

    But car insurance isn't exactly "mandatory" - it's mandatory if you own a car, but owning a car is certainly a luxury.

    You sound like a New Yorker. No
  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts
    ... and there is government car insurance - mainly for those who are otherwise uninsurable or can't afford private insurance.

    But car insurance isn't exactly "mandatory" - it's mandatory if you own a car, but owning a car is certainly a luxury.

    Jonny....how would you feel if the government said that in order to qualify for the necessity of free healthcare you couldn't be the owner of "luxury" items.

    That if you have money to by I-Phones, Cable-TV, cars, $110+ kicks, etc. you should have money to have paid for your healthcare?

    That each and every person's top priority should be healthcare and that before you piss money away on non-necessity "luxuries" you have to have your healthcare burden taken care of in the way of a governmental fee?
  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts

    This isn't all directed at you Rock. I would just like your opinion after you watch the video.


    Greed....plain and simple....the root of most of our societal problems.

    There's nothing wrong with making as much profit as possible.

    There is something wrong with doing it unscrupulously.
  • DORDOR Two Ron Toe 9,905 Posts

    This isn't all directed at you Rock. I would just like your opinion after you watch the video.


    Greed....plain and simple....the root of most of our societal problems.

    There's nothing wrong with making as much profit as possible.

    There is something wrong with doing it unscrupulously.


    If profit on human suffering is not just agreeable, but to be promoted. I'd rather be poor. But hey, thats just me.
Sign In or Register to comment.