0
   

They always say the US has the best health care in the world

 
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jul, 2008 09:22 pm
Imagine if you didn't need the same number of police, probation officers, parole officers, defenders, crown counsellors, judges, psychiatrists, social workers, guards and prisons that currently exist with respect to processing youth, drug and alcohol, etc., crimes. What we could save! And what a better society as a whole it would be.

However, I'm cynical/pragmatic/whatever enough to know this will not happen in my lifetime.

But I see the same thing in the health care field.

Why are doctors seeing a person who wants a wart removed? They look at it, confirm it's a wart, then refer them to a dermatologist.

A. Why can't a nurse (at less cost) or nurse practitioner (at even lesser cost) diagnose/confirm and refer?

B. Why can't you confirm your own wart and just head on over to the wart removal person?

It's so ridiculous. There are so many, many ways to cut costs in the health care system in Canada that are either being ignored or overlooked.

And another thing is that non-traditional health care professionals are not covered under many provinces' health care acts, like Chinese Medicine Practitioners, acupuncturists, massage therapists (minimal), NUMMA chiropractors, naturopaths, NAET practitioners. Traditional doctors cannot remedy everything, but sometimes these other professionals can provide alternative help.

But never mind the waste of time and money, the main problem with our health care system, IMO, is that we're not Preventative-Oriented.
0 Replies
 
Stray Cat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jul, 2008 06:08 am
Mame wrote:
Quote:
I have always thought that health and lifestyle issues that cost the medical system $$, like smoking cessation products, birth control, condoms, detoxes and rehabs for alcohol and drug-related addictions, diet products, etc., should be provided free if the governments of any country were truly serious about the health and preventative health of their citizens.


There are free programs in the States to help people rid themselves of their addictions. Almost all hospitals have programs to help people quit smoking; there is AA for alcaholics and NA for drug-users. These are all free programs. There are countless other rehab clinics as well.

Of course, I'm sure that's not enough for the average liberal, who believes that your government needs to do everything for you...... including your thinking.

Need to lose weight? We'll give you any products you need, tell you what you should and shouldn't eat, and weigh you every Tuesday.

Want to have sex? We'll give you condoms, teach you how to put them on.....hell!....we'll even use them for you if you want us to!

Because you people just can't be trusted to think for yourselves!

Georgeob wrote:
Quote:
More to the point, however, government-mandated universal health care is not a remedy for the callous indifference and inhumanity illustrated by the incident Gus reported that launched this thread.


Agreed.

Quote:
"Help" isn't usually very successful in the absence of an act of the will of the victim, and, with such a committment , success usually occurs even in the absence of "help".


A-f*cking-men!

You can have programs out the yin-yang, but unless someone has the will to do it, it ain't gonna happen.

Quote:
whether the Universal system is wholly or partly government operated such as those in Canada and the UK or based on government-mandated insurance schemes, the government sets the limits for coverage - particularly for the poor and the indigant - through its budget decisions.


An inconvenient fact.

Greenwitch wrote:
Quote:
I would rather my tax money go to the health of Americans than new roads in Iraq.


And if a Democrat gets elected, your tax dollars (and there will be a lot of them) will always be spent wisely. (except for the How To Diet Program, How To Wear a Condom Progam, How To Wipe Your Ass Program, etc., etc., etc.)

Greenwitch wrote:

Quote:
Stray Cat, three pages ago - "Should universal health care cover smokers?"

Liberal people - "yes"

Conservative people - "no"

Mame - "Governments should help people get over these addictions"

Liberal people - 'yes"

Conservative people - "no"


Because liberals are the only ones who care about humanity, right?

Meanwhile, Europe -- the land of socialized medicine -- lags way behind the US when it comes to medical research (especially cancer research). Know why?

Because they don't have the profits to put into it!

As far as I'm concerned, Europeans can have their socialized junkcare. Keep the damn government out of my life as much as possible. They **** up enough on their own without screwing with my health. I'll take private industry and competition over socialism any day.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jul, 2008 06:29 am
Well on this 4th July we are celebrating 60 years of the National Health Service. This country was broke after WW2. But we still managed to get our priorities right when to comes to health care, free at the point of use for all citizens.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jul, 2008 06:42 am
Stray Cat wrote:


Meanwhile, Europe -- the land of socialized medicine -- lags way behind the US when it comes to medical research (especially cancer research). Know why?

Because they don't have the profits to put into it!

As far as I'm concerned, Europeans can have their socialized junkcare. Keep the damn government out of my life as much as possible. They **** up enough on their own without screwing with my health. I'll take private industry and competition over socialism any day.
This is BS.

Ask soccer star Gary Lineker about the treatment his son had for leukaemia. Lineker wanted the best treatment...anywhere and at any cost (he can afford it). The doctors told him the best treatment in the world is available right here in the UK, free.
0 Replies
 
Stray Cat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jul, 2008 07:09 am
Junk.



Quote:
This country was broke after WW2


and you still are.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jul, 2008 08:39 am
georgeob1 wrote:
old europe wrote:

universal health care Not Equal government run health care


But you know that of course, george!

Very Happy


I do know that. However, whether the Universal system is wholly or partly government operated such as those in Canada and the UK or based on government-mandated insurance schemes, the government sets the limits for coverage - particularly for the poor and the indigant - through its budget decisions.


I don't know what you're trying to say here, george. Do you mean poor people get less coverage than the rest?

I would say that's not true. Here at least, everyone who pays into statutory health insurance gets the same coverage. Budget decisions by the government have nothing to do with it - it's a private system.

Of course, if you want to opt out of the statutory system (you have to show that you have income to pay for your own health insurance), you can buy private health insurance - and, depending on your premium, get preferential treatment: your choice of top doctors, a private hospital room, etc.


georgeob1 wrote:
That is why these are generally hotly debated political issues in most countries with such systems.


We just like to keep our system up to date. It's a 125 year old system. You need to tweak it every now and then....


georgeob1 wrote:
More to the point, however, government-mandated universal health care is not a remedy for the callous indifference and inhumanity illustrated by the incident Gus reported that launched this thread.

But you know that, of course, old europe!


Well, people can be indifferent and even inhumane.... and there's no guarantee that all the mechanisms countries have put into place to prevent something like this will always work. I still think it's worth trying.
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jul, 2008 08:46 am
Stray Cat, I'm more in favour of prevention. Looking around and seeing what hasn't worked, perhaps more assistance, especially prior to the major damage being done, would help. Perhaps not. But a lot of our tax dollars go into policing, monitoring, etc. and we still have huge problems (here in Vancouver, anyway).
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jul, 2008 09:07 am
Steve 41oo wrote:
Well on this 4th July we are celebrating 60 years of the National Health Service. This country was broke after WW2. But we still managed to get our priorities right when to comes to health care, free at the point of use for all citizens.


So I see:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-490233/Record-numbers-abroad-health-treatment-70-000-escaping-NHS.html

http://www.deadfishwrapper.com/britons_flee_socialized_medicine

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/world/europe/21britain.html
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jul, 2008 09:26 am
Mame wrote:
Stray Cat, I'm more in favour of prevention. Looking around and seeing what hasn't worked, perhaps more assistance, especially prior to the major damage being done, would help. Perhaps not. But a lot of our tax dollars go into policing, monitoring, etc. and we still have huge problems (here in Vancouver, anyway).


I agree with Mame; prevention is cost effective.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jul, 2008 12:23 pm
Stray Cat wrote:
Junk.



Quote:
This country was broke after WW2


and you still are.
Speak for yourself. You might be broke, I'm not Smile
0 Replies
 
gustavratzenhofer
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jul, 2008 12:25 pm
I agree with Cicerone Imposter agreeing with Mame.

And, as a side note, I would do either one of those two in a pinch.


(But.... I would probably lean towards Mame)
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jul, 2008 12:29 pm
gus exactly what is it you chew?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jul, 2008 12:32 pm
His cud?
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Jul, 2008 11:57 am
Smile

Stray Cat...stay there and be ill. Thanks.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Jul, 2008 03:39 pm
georgeob, What do you think about McCain's plan on taxing health insurance benefits?


McCain's health plan: A threat to employer plans?

By KEVIN FREKING and NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writers 2 hours, 12 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - There's a great unknown about Sen. John McCain's health plan: How many employers would drop insurance coverage for their workers because of his tax policies?

The Republican presidential nominee-in-waiting has proposed that everyone buying health insurance get a refundable tax credit, $2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families. At the same time, he would treat employer contributions toward health insurance like income, meaning workers would have to pay income, but not payroll, taxes on it.

McCain's Democratic rival, Barack Obama, says the plan would "shred" the employer-based system that provides health insurance to about 158 million workers.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 12/21/2024 at 07:06:49