IT'S TIME FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

Miller wrote:

There will be hundreds of thousands of patients visiting their physicians, who don't have a medical problem, but enjoy getting attention in a clinic setting. The system will be over burdened and those who're really in need of care, will have to wait in long lines
for appointments.

I don't think so. But since nearly all countries besides the USA have a universal health care system, you certainly can give evidence of that - which will be far better than my personal and anecdotical knowledge about the situation in Germany, the UK, Austria, Switzerland, and France. (And perhaps The Netherlands and Sweden, but that more from hearsay than own views.)

0 Replies

Miller wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:
... a universal health system assures that those who need medical care will get it.

There will be hundreds of thousands of patients visiting their physicians, who don't have a medical problem, but enjoy getting attention in a clinic setting. The system will be over burdened and those who're really in need of care, will have to wait in long lines
for appointments.

Actually, I think she is dead on. It happens now. A large portion of patients in an ED (they're not really called ER anymore) are non-emergent. People go to the ED for just about anything. They waste a lot of time and hold up people who actually are in need.

And as I said before, there are a large number of people who are drug-seeking. They will go to their provide with "back pain" just so they can get some vicodin. I can only imagine it getting worse when there is free health care for all.

0 Replies

USAFHokie80 wrote:

Miller wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
... a universal health system assures that those who need medical care will get it.

There will be hundreds of thousands of patients visiting their physicians, who don't have a medical problem, but enjoy getting attention in a clinic setting. The system will be over burdened and those who're really in need of care, will have to wait in long lines
for appointments.

Actually, I think she is dead on. It happens now. A large portion of patients in an ED (they're not really called ER anymore) are non-emergent. People go to the ED for just about anything. They waste a lot of time and hold up people who actually are in need.

And as I said before, there are a large number of people who are drug-seeking. They will go to their provide with "back pain" just so they can get some vicodin. I can only imagine it getting worse when there is free health care for all.

USAF, You have actually argued in support of universal health care. If everybody had health care, they wouldn't need to be seen at the ED/ER, and most could probably be taken care of the advise nurse. Seeing a doc in the ER is the most expensive and inefficient way for our health care system to work. BTW, how many of those drug addicted patients seeking painkiller represent the whole? Don't you think a physician would make that determination?

0 Replies

I didn't really see an answer to my question earlier... so I'll ask again.

Suppose a person with no insurance, no job comes into an ED during a heart attack. Suppose this guy needs a bypass or he'll most likely be dead within a few months...

Does he get his surgery or not?

Keep in mind this surgery will cost approx. $60K

0 Replies

Miller wrote:

There will be hundreds of thousands of patients visiting their physicians, who don't have a medical problem, but enjoy getting attention in a clinic setting. The system will be over burdened and those who're really in need of care, will have to wait in long lines
for appointments.

Like Walter said, it's not like this has never been tried before. Universal healthcare already does exist in many countries, and your scenarios are not playing out there.

I went to my physician in Holland when I was back home last month; I called in the morning to make an appointment for the same afternoon, and had to wait about 10 minutes when I arrived. And thats exactly how its been for all my life.

USAFHokie80 wrote:

Actually, I think she is dead on. It happens now. A large portion of patients in an ED (they're not really called ER anymore) are non-emergent. People go to the ED for just about anything. They waste a lot of time and hold up people who actually are in need.

Um yeah, they go to the ED because they dont have health insurance, and cant afford regular treatment.

Lots of uninsured people wait with their illnesses until it's bad enough to go to the ED, because that is free. Family of an American friend of mine lives on welfare, and thats what they do.

If everyone'd be insured, there'd be fewer people clogging up the emergency departments.

0 Replies

Wow, USAFHokie80, c.i. and I all three posted in the same minute - that must be some kind of record..

0 Replies

USAF, Your scenario misses one big point. That kind of emergency is taken care of by calling 911. If you call any hospital with symptoms of a heart attack, you don't wait to drive to the hospital; you call 911, and the medics will take you there - while treating you during the transfer.

When anybody calls 911, they don't ask if you have insurance.

0 Replies

BBB
President Bush just announced his plan to provide health insurance for everyone.

Jesus is your health insurance.

BBB

0 Replies

The Census Bureau's report on the state of American health insurance was as disturbing as its statistics on poverty and income.

The bureau reported a large increase in the number of Americans who lack health insurance, data that ought to send an unmistakable message to Washington: Vigorous action is needed to reverse this alarming and intractable trend.

The number of uninsured Americans has been rising inexorably over the past six years as soaring health care costs have driven up premiums, employers have scaled back or eliminated health benefits and hard-pressed families have found themselves unable to purchase insurance at a reasonable price.

Last year, the number of uninsured Americans increased by a daunting 2.2 million, to 47.0 million in 2006 from 44.8 million in 2005. That scotched any hope that the faltering economic recovery would help alleviate the problem.

The main reason for the upsurge in uninsured Americans is that employment-based coverage continued to deteriorate. Indeed, the number of full-time workers without health insurance rose to 22.0 million in 2006 from 20.8 million in 2005, presumably because either the employers or the workers or both found it too costly.

Sadly, the one area where the nation had made progress - reducing the number of uninsured children - took a turn for the worse. The number of uninsured children under 18 dropped steadily and significantly from 1999 to 2004, thanks largely to an expansion in coverage of low-income children under two programs operated jointly by the states and the federal government, Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program.

Then last year the number of uninsured children jumped more than 600,000 to reach 8.6 million. The main reason, advocacy groups say, is that access and funding for the low-income programs became tighter while employer coverage for dependents eroded.

The challenge to the White House and Congress seems clear. The upward trend in the number of uninsured needs to be reversed because many studies have shown that people who lack health insurance tend to forgo needed care until they become much sicker and go to expensive emergency rooms for treatment. That harms their health and drives up everyone's health care costs.

The most immediate need is to reauthorize and expand the expiring State Children's Health Insurance Program. It has already brought health coverage to millions of young Americans. It should be reinvigorated to bring coverage to many millions more.

0 Replies

USAFHokie80 wrote:

I didn't really see an answer to my question earlier... so I'll ask again.

Suppose a person with no insurance, no job comes into an ED during a heart attack. Suppose this guy needs a bypass or he'll most likely be dead within a few months...

Does he get his surgery or not?

Keep in mind this surgery will cost approx. $60K

As far as I know and as it stands now, if he needs it to survive that very minute he gets the surgery. If he'll survive without it long enough to leave the hospital then he doesn't. Bottom line is that if he's dying they have to treat him, health insurance or not. If he's not dying, they can send him on his way.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Miller wrote:
There will be hundreds of thousands of patients visiting their physicians, who don't have a medical problem, but enjoy getting attention in a clinic setting. The system will be over burdened and those who're really in need of care, will have to wait in long lines
for appointments.

I don't think so. But since nearly all countries besides the USA have a universal health care system, you certainly can give evidence of that - which will be far better than my personal and anecdotical knowledge about the situation in Germany, the UK, Austria, Switzerland, and France. (And perhaps The Netherlands and Sweden, but that more from hearsay than own views.)

Hmmm... I wonder how many of the Germans, English, Austrians, Swiss and French are Americans?

We do things our own way thank you. Please stop trying to compare Europeans to Americans.

0 Replies

Thanks, McG, for portraying your countrymen as a bunch of hypochondriacs.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

We do things our own way thank you. Please stop trying to compare Europeans to Americans.

Why? Miller's argument against universal healthcare in America is that it wouldn't work. European countries, on the other hand, already have universal healthcare, and it does work. This is evidence -- not proof, but evidence -- that Miller's argument is wrong.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Hmmm... I wonder how many of the Germans, English, Austrians, Swiss and French are Americans?

We do things our own way thank you. Please stop trying to compare Europeans to Americans.

Well, then how can YOU say, write anything about Universal Healthcare?

You (the USA) neither invented it nor even has it.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

McGentrix wrote:

Hmmm... I wonder how many of the Germans, English, Austrians, Swiss and French are Americans?

We do things our own way thank you. Please stop trying to compare Europeans to Americans.

Well, then how can YOU say, write anything about Universal Healthcare?

You (the USA) neither invented it nor even has it.

Then how can you YOU say, write anything about health care in the U.S.A., Walter?

You (Germany) neither invented it nor even has it.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Then how can you write anything about health care in the U.S.A., Walter?

I've read about it, learnt about it at an university course, ... wrote an exam comparing different health care systems.

I haven't asked anybody not compare the US-system to any other. Why and where do you think that I did so?

0 Replies

Okay, since you cahnged your above response: no, we don't have such a system, even not before the 1880's.

But this thread is about "Universal healthcare".

But, okie, I still and certainly admire you as an expert on universal healthcare.

0 Replies

Well, you commented that McGentrix was not qualified to speak on universal health care, but somehow you are qualified to speak on all health care systems. You may have taken a class, but that hardly equals that of actual experience here. Somehow some of you seem to know more about it than some of us here that know doctors and nurses, and have children, grandchildren, elderly parents, and many friends experiencing our health care system 24/7. That somehow surprises me and I am still wondering why you guys there are so interested in reforming the system over here across the pond?

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Well, you commented that McGentrix was not qualified to speak on universal health care, but somehow you are qualified to speak on all health care systems.

No. I didn't. (See above.)

0 Replies

If you say so.

0 Replies

IT'S TIME FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know