IT'S TIME FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

@roger,

roger wrote:

I've got a feeling the quote was from Alexis de Tocqueville, but, whoever said it, it does sound good. Maybe Alex de stole it from Alex Taylor.

Generally it's attributed to Alexander Fraser Tytler. But there some doubts, see wikipedia and here.

0 Replies

Some people work themselves to death and through no fault of their own still are denied coverage until sometimes it is too late.

Example:

Real 'Norma Rae' has new battle involving cancer

Inspiration for movie 'Norma Rae' dies at 68

Folks such as Okie would dismiss Crystal Lee Sutton as a socialistic communist because she fought for better conditions at the textile factory where she worked. Despite the fact she worked hard all of her life, her insurance took two months to approve medicine for her cancer and in that time her cancer grew. She is now dead. This is a classic example of why we need to fix our current health care system for even people who have insurance as well as people who don't.

2 Replies

@revel,

The reality is that companies are either dropping health insurance benefits or they are getting employees to pay a higher share of the premiums.

There's a huge problem with how our government treats health insurance premiums; companies are able to write off benefits as a deduction to figure their tax liabilities, but individuals pay their premiums without any tax benefits. This must change with the new health insurance plan.

0 Replies

@revel,

I read your links, but found no detail suggesting the delay in getting the unnamed drugs was at all material in her death.

Do you really believe this aspect of medical care will get any better with the government calling the shots and making the cost/benefit decisions to "bend the cost curve"??

The current health care legislation beforte the Congress will do nothing to improve this. Indeed for many it will become worse.

4 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

I read your links, but found no detail suggesting the delay in getting the unnamed drugs was at all material in her death.

Do you really believe this aspect of medical care will get any better with the government calling the shots and making the cost/benefit decisions to "bend the cost curve"??

The current health care legislation beforte the Congress will do nothing to improve this. Indeed for many it will become worse.

So Asserts George, So the Conversation Should Be Over At This Point.

Do I have it right?

Cyclotpichorn

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

and lots of things have to get worse before they get better, so what...

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob, How do you figure that government will manage anybody's health care? You really believe bureaucrats in Washington is going to control the care everybody receives over the doctor? Where in any of the new legislation being planned says this?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Here's a huge problem in our country when a veteran can't afford health insurance.

Quote:

Uninsured Americans hope reform brings health coverage

By Nick Carey Nick Carey " Wed Sep 16, 1:10 am ET

NEWARK, Ohio (Reuters) " As debate rages on how to reform the U.S. healthcare system, many of the one in six Americans now without medical insurance are hoping that reform brings at least one thing -- affordable coverage.

"I'd like to have some sort of health insurance I could actually afford," said Stuart Burrows, a Vietnam War veteran in Newark, a small town in central Ohio. "I stand to lose everything I ever worked for if I can't pay my medical bills."

Burrows, 61, said he was exposed in Vietnam to Agent Orange, a toxic mix of herbicides used by the U.S. military as a defoliant that has since been linked to numerous diseases.

He is retired on partial disability. But in March he had emergency surgery to remove blockages in his arteries and now owes tens of thousands of dollars in medical bills, since his veteran's disability only covers service-related health issues and he has no other insurance.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Quote:

I read your links, but found no detail suggesting the delay in getting the unnamed drugs was at all material in her death.

I am sure the two month long wait where she was denied coverage by her insurance for treatment didn't help. (after I thought about I wanted to take out the part where I implied it directly caused her death..but was too slow in thinking of it)

Quote:

Do you really believe this aspect of medical care will get any better with the government calling the shots and making the cost/benefit decisions to "bend the cost curve"??

Hopefully the plan which finally get approved upon (after perhaps some more changes) will in fact do better than our current insurance companies who make decisions on what they will pay for based on cost and their own profit vs. what the doctor prescribes for treatment.

Coverage Denied: How the Current Health Insurance System Leaves Millions Behind

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

So Asserts George, So the Conversation Should Be Over At This Point.

Do I have it right?

Cyclotpichorn

No, you are making this up, perhaps to suit your prejudices.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Here's a huge problem in our country when a veteran can't afford health insurance.

Quote:

Uninsured Americans hope reform brings health coverage

By Nick Carey Nick Carey " Wed Sep 16, 1:10 am ET

NEWARK, Ohio (Reuters) " As debate rages on how to reform the U.S. healthcare system, many of the one in six Americans now without medical insurance are hoping that reform brings at least one thing -- affordable coverage.

"I'd like to have some sort of health insurance I could actually afford," said Stuart Burrows, a Vietnam War veteran in Newark, a small town in central Ohio. "I stand to lose everything I ever worked for if I can't pay my medical bills."

Burrows, 61, said he was exposed in Vietnam to Agent Orange, a toxic mix of herbicides used by the U.S. military as a defoliant that has since been linked to numerous diseases.

He is retired on partial disability. But in March he had emergency surgery to remove blockages in his arteries and now owes tens of thousands of dollars in medical bills, since his veteran's disability only covers service-related health issues and he has no other insurance.

Agent orange is not associated with arterial sclerosis. That is a disease associated with lifestyle choices and ageing. No explanation is offered about why this individual doesn't have health insurance or whether he has other discretionary assets.

1 Reply

@revel,

revel wrote:

Hopefully the plan which finally get approved upon (after perhaps some more changes) will in fact do better than our current insurance companies who make decisions on what they will pay for based on cost and their own profit vs. what the doctor prescribes for treatment.

Do you believe the government will not make decisions about what they will pay for or allow based on cost? The Administration has explicitly affirmed that it intends to do so to forcibly "bend the cost curve" as our ever eloquent President puts it.

Supporters often brag about the supposed "low overhead costs" of government programs compared to those of insurers. This is a fiction. Government accounting doesn't comply with even the legal minimums for corporations. It knows the explicitly appropriated costs for various functions, but it generally doesn't know the real costs for any of its organizations, simply because the appropriations don't follow organizational or functional lines. It doesn't take much real experience in life to know that government overhead costs are several times those in corporations.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

So Asserts George, So the Conversation Should Be Over At This Point.

Do I have it right?

Cyclotpichorn

No, you are making this up, perhaps to suit your prejudices.

But, I don't understand. You make these absolutist comments about government (and their inability to do anything right), but never provide any factual data to back them up. So what else is there to discuss?

I counter-assert that Government is not only completely capable of managing the programs in question, they also have a longer track record of successfully running a large organization than any private company currently existing in America. The purpose of the Government is not to provide the most efficient service, but to provide the most Redundant service, one which will exist and persist.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

George is good at putting out gobs of words, but providing no proof of the accuracy of what he is saying. He is virtually always wrong. Most of his writing is composed of big and little lies and quibbles.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

Well, I would hope they do think of bending the cost of health care but I think it more in the nature of a long term goal.

Quote:

The bill will also include my commitment to slow the growth of health care costs in the long run. "bend the cost curve" Lot of debate and disagreement. Our proposal would change incentives to get the best care and not the most expensive care. Talking about the MedPAC reform. Independent group of doctors and experts to oversee best practices. They're calling it IMAC. "Force Congress" to act on recommendations to bend the cost curve each and every year. Independent group empowered to make these changes.

source

This is a far cry from denying coverage to someone because of preconditions or because they get sick through a process called rescissions.

Lastly if you don't like the proposed plan, if it passes; don't opt for it.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I counter-assert that Government is not only completely capable of managing the programs in question, they also have a longer track record of successfully running a large organization than any private company currently existing in America. The purpose of the Government is not to provide the most efficient service, but to provide the most Redundant service, one which will exist and persist.

Cycloptichorn

Well, I do agree with that. Government organizations are masters of redundancy and persistence - often long after any need for them has vanished.

Unfortunately in the health care debate the assertion is often made that government will somehow be more efficient than insurers, the free market, or individual customers and service providers. I believe there is ample reason to doubt the validity of such assertions.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I counter-assert that Government is not only completely capable of managing the programs in question, they also have a longer track record of successfully running a large organization than any private company currently existing in America. The purpose of the Government is not to provide the most efficient service, but to provide the most Redundant service, one which will exist and persist.

Cycloptichorn

Well, I do agree with that. Government organizations are masters of redundancy and persistence - often long after any need for them has vanished.

Unfortunately in the health care debate the assertion is often made that government will somehow be more efficient than insurers, the free market, or individual customers and service providers. I believe there is ample reason to doubt the validity of such assertions.

I think you will agree with me, that the removal of the profit motive gives the government a certain ability to run the operation more 'efficiently' than those organizations who must please stockholders and must turn profits on a quarterly basis; they simply have 5-15% less overhead than for-profit insurers would.

Conservatives often hold up the 'free market' as a tool of innovation and efficiency; but what innovation and efficiency do private Health insurers bring to the equation? What is their added value? I'd like to hear specific examples, not generalizations based on ideology. I ask, because I can't seem to figure out what their added value is; that is to say, since Health Care isn't a commodity or product, but rather a service, the upside of 'innovation' seems to be rather limited compared to the billions of dollars the downside costs us, in profits and money wasted on things like advertising and marketing.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

What he actually said was

Quote:

...used by the U.S. military as a defoliant that has since been linked to numerous diseases.

I do not believe how agent orange and his current health problems are related is the issue; it's about affordability of health insurance.

His blocked arteries may have several causes that can include life style, but I'm not so sure he should be penalized for it. There is evidence that farmers who have eaten meat most of their life have not suffered from clogged arteries. Most health problems arise as we age; healthy diets and exercise help with good health, but there's never a guarantee.

Universal health care is provided in most developed countries; they are not bankrupt while spending less on health care, or their economy has not become socialistic. In most cases, they have a healthier society, and their longevity is better than ours. I'm not sure what conservatives are afraid of.

0 Replies

So; the Senate proposed a bill today that doesn't include a public options.

What are the odds that we end up with this version?

2 Replies

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

So; the Senate proposed a bill today that doesn't include a public options.

What are the odds that we end up with this version?

Zero; it had no co-sponsors whatsoever.

Nice job, Baucus, you dumb ****. You gave the Republicans a month and a half to play with, and have nothing to show for it.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

IT'S TIME FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know