I'm not sure if my opinion was already stated... I didn't read through all of this...


But in my own opinion (I know many will not share my veiws)

I believe that getting HEALTHCARE when ill or in need of healthcare is a RIGHT as an american.

I don't believe that insurance is a RIGHT.

However, hospitals and doctors make it difficult to get any healthcare WITHOUT insurance (make it extreamly expensive, won't accept a payment plan, turn you away completely if you don't have insurance)

Unless its an emergency room where they can't turn you away for no insurance. And even then you are billed an absurd amount of money for that emergency room visit, even if all you do is go in, sit in the waiting room, and then have the doctor tell you 'you have the flu, take tyenol and go home'


So... yeah... I don't believe it should have to be a right... but unfortunately the way the system is set up, I believe it needs to be. At least at the moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jenniepepsi

im not sure if my opinion was already stated...i didnt read thru all of this...


but in my own opinion (i know many will not share my veiws)

i believe that getting HEALTHCARE when ill or in need of healthcare is a RIGHT as an american.

i dont believe that insurance is a RIGHT.

however, hospitals and doctors make it difficult to get any healthcare WITHOUT insurance (make it extreamly expensive, wont accept a payment plan, turn you away completely if you dont have insurance)

unless its an emergency room where they can't turn you away for no insurance. and even then you are billed an absurd ammount of money for that emergency room visit, even if all you do is go in, sit in the waiting room, and then have the doctor tell you 'you have the flu, take tyenol and go home'


so...yeah...i dont believe it should have to be a right...but unfortunately the way the system is set up, i believe it needs to be. at least at the moment.

---

Are you aware, Jennie, that there are some doctors out there who don't take insurance at all? They only accept out of pocket payments.

So there are certainly places to go if you don't have insurance.

Also, you are completely ignoring free clinics as a good source of medical care for the uninsured.

Pharmaceutical companies give some of their drugs away free to those who need it.

So there are places to go that won't give you a hassle even if you don't have insurance. Yes, there are practitioners who do give a hassle and make things difficult. But there are plenty of places to go where they don't.

I happen to disagree with the idea that health care is a right. The government disagrees with me, however, and there are already laws on the books regarding providing medical care to those in need who cannot pay. That right is already covered in existing law.

But the question here, as you pointed out, is with regard to HEALTH INSURANCE, not care. And health insurance is definitely NOT a right. Nor should it be. Or rather, there should be a right to purchase it if you want to and have the ability to pay for it. But it should not be something that everyone should be FORCED to take if they don't want it, nor should it be something supplied even if you can't afford it.

Elliot

Yes but I feel that it would be cheaper and more convientent for our country as a WHOLE, to simply provide insurance for everyone, rather than the government forking out more money they can't afford at the moment for the free clinics and free services.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jenniepepsi

yes but i feel that it would be cheaper and more convientent for our country as a WHOLE, to simply provide insurance for everyone, rather than the government forking out more money they can't afford at the moment for the free clinics and free services.

---

The average cost of private insurance (without the assistance of an employer) for a family of 4 is about $1500 per month. Assuming 300 million people in the USA, that means that the cost of private insurance for one year (each family of 4 paying for themselves) is $1.35 trillion.

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated the 10-year cost of Obama's nationalized health plan at $23 trillion over the next 10 years. That's $2.3 trillion per year. (There are those who say that's an underestimate of the actual cost, but let's use that number for the heck of it.)

In other words, it is going to cost one trillion per year MORE to insure everyone through nationalized health care than it would cost to simply allow people to buy their own health care. The government would get off cheaper by simply giving each family of 4 $1500 to pay for the insurance of their choice than to create a single-payor nationalized health care system. (And if we only did it for those who are uninsured, instead of for everyone, it would be even cheaper. A few million dollars, instead of $1.35 trillion.)

THAT is what we ought to be working on... helping those who are uninsured become insured. Not creating a whole new system that will be MORE COSTLY and will also provide less service.

Elliot

Ahh I understand what your saying. Thanks elliot :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

So I'm glad that the Canadian health care system works for you...it won't work very well for America either.

---

I've already admitted that our system won't work well for you. Your government serves the interests of corporate america not the people. You view yourselves as "I got mine, screw the others" whereas we view ourselves as part of a larger society.

Can I move to canada? How hard would it be to get citizen ship to canada?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

The average cost of private insurance (without the assistance of an employer) for a family of 4 is about $1500 per month. Assuming 300 million people in the USA, that means that the cost of private insurance for one year (each family of 4 paying for themselves) is $1.35 trillion.

Elliot

---

Really? That is how much Private Health Insurance costs? That's crazy. I didn't realise that private insurance was so expensive in the US.

It costs about one third of that here for a family of 4. And that's the top end of the market.

When I was paying for my insurance it was maybe 400 for my family of 3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jenniepepsi

when i was paying for my insurance it was maybe 400 for my family of 3.

---

What percentage of your insurance was covered by your employer?

Generally speaking, when I have employer-provided health insurance, my out of pocket cost was about $300-400 per month too. But I was talking about the cost of the insurance if we had to pay for all of it ourselves, without any employer assistance. That averages about $1500/month or so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skell

Really?? That is how much Private Health Insurance costs?? That's crazy. I didn't realise that private insurance was so expensive in the US.

It costs about one third of that here for a family of 4. And thats the top end of the market.

---

Is that with or without an employer contribution.

Also, I don't know what everage salaries are in the various parts of Australia. Nor do I know the current currency conversion rate between the US$ and the AU$. So I don't know how something that costs two thirds less in Canada actually compares in relatavistic terms. I also don't know what services your high-end insurance covers and how it compares to ours.

So a cost comparison between the USA and Australia is a bit premature. I'm not saying your insurance isn't cheaper than ours. I'm saying I don't have enough facts to compare.

But my point to Jennie was that nationalized health insurace is actually more expensive than private health insurance by nearly 2-1. And that assumes that the CBO wasn't underestimating the costs of the program, which is something they have done in the past. It could be more like 3.5- or 4-1, if the Heritage Foundation numbers are accurate.

Elliot

It wasn't employer insurance. It was american family insurance.

I understand what your saying.


The problem is I'm sort of a socialist. Lol. I wish we could forget about money, work for what we need, barter and trade. Like waaaay back a lOOOOOOOONG time ago!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jenniepepsi

it wasnt employer insurance. it was american family insurance.

i understand what your saying.


the problem is im sort of a socialist. lol. i wish we could forget about money, work for what we need, barter and trade. like waaaay back a lOOOOOOOONG time ago!!!

---

I'd love to give you a lesson about "the good old times" of socialism when people died in the fields trying to pay off their debts to the lords of the manor (feudalism is a form of socialism, in case you didn't know). Or the "good old times" when people starved to death waiting on food lines. Or the "good old times" when people died in hospitals waiting for doctors who had already finished their daily quota and were satisfied to slack off for the rest of the day (or year). Or the "good old times" when families living a subsistance lifestyle ("work for what you need, barter and trade") died off because they had a bad crop one year and didn't have enough to survive on or trade with.

But this isn't the thread for a full economics-of-agronomy or economics-of-feudalism class. I leave it to your imagination.

Elliot

Yes I understand. I didn't say it was possible :P I just WISH the world could be perfect :P feudalism/socialisim, no disease, no problems, no worries. Just a nice fancy fairy tale.

Yes I know it can't happen :) but you know. Dreams and all ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx;1873932And this one is interesting...

In your opinion, if Canadians were allowed to purchase [B

private insurance[/B] for health
services already covered under medicare, do you [agree] that this would:
public, agree or strongly agree:

Result in shorter waiting times: 63% (32% strongly)

Lead to a shortage of doctors and nurses in the public system, as they leave to
work in a new private system: 62% (36% strongly)

Create a two-tier system where those who can afford to pay will get better
treatment than those who can’t: 59% (41% strongly)

Improve access to health care services for everyone: 57% (33% strongly)

Result in increasing costs of health care: 56% (26% strongly)

Lead to improved quality in health care services: 55% (26% strongly)

Add the boom in private practice and the scenario in Canada isn't as rosy as you want us to believe.

---

Hello NK:

I don't know. I looks like the survey is designed to come up with answers the surveyor wants. That's why I don't believe it.

excon

In Texas we have workers comp insurance. It's about dead though. Most doctors will not accept it and have posted signs in their front offices saying so.

That is what will happen when government limits the pay of doctors. You may have the coverage, and it may not be worth the paper it's printed on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galveston

In Texas we have workers comp insurance. It's about dead though. Most doctors will not accept it and have posted signs in their front offices saying so.

That is what will happen when government limits the pay of doctors. You may have the coverage, and it may not be worth the paper it's printed on.

---

On this point I disagree with you, Gal.

If we go to a single-payor system, the government's "coverage" is the only thing they will be sure to take.

If we go to a multi-payor system, the government can just simply say that all doctors MUST take government health insurance.

People will be covered for their health care costs all right. That's not the issue.

The issue is the availability of service. If there SERVICE isn't available, then the insurance isn't worth the paper it's written on, even if it's backed by the "full faith" of the government.

Elliot

Hello again, gal:

Here's another scare tactic that I can debunk right now too. You know the one. About all the doctors and nurses quitting because they can't make as much money as they hopped??

Nahhhh. They ain't going anywhere. Where are they going to go? Canada?

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, gal:

Here's another scare tactic that I can debunk right now too. You know the one. About all the doctors and nurses quitting because they can't make as much money as they hopped???

Nahhhh. They ain't going anywhere. Where are they gonna go? Canada?

excon

---

They'll just exit medicine and become lawyers. That way they can make money comensurate with their training. Which they can't if the government is capping pay for services.

It's not that doctors will leave here and go elsewhere. It's just that they won't become doctors in the first place, 'cause there's nothing in it for them.

I don't think that Obama knows how to explain to the people what this health care plan really is. When asked about who will pay for it, he simply babbles on and on and you never get a straight answer.
I was watching one of his news conferences last night and he said that 2/3 of it would be paid for by this or that, can't really figure out what he was talking about; and then the other 1/3 would be coming from the deductions of the people who are making over 100,000 a year? Quote me if I'm wrong, I don't have the best of memories.
He also said that if congress proposed that the money be taken from deductions of the middle class people that he would be opposed to that. Because he thinks there is a better way of doing than taking from the middle class families that are already struggling in the economy today.
He also said that this healthcare plan would be able to let doctors take care of the patient for the real cause of their sickness. He used the example of someone coming in with a sore throat and knowing that they could get more money if they had them come back in to get their tonsils removed that they would do that instead of running some tests to see if the patient just had allergies.
After awhile of babbling, he mentioned something about people could still have the choice of different insurance companies if that's what they wanted. That insurance premiums kept rising and blah blah blah and that in the end people would end up having the money taken out of their own pockets.
Could someone please explain to me what this healthcare thing really is about because I'm still not sure if I understand it...

Lets face it, Congress does not want REAL health care reform. It is not in their best interest. Now, if those dolts in Congress were forced onto the same system that they are trying to shove down out throats it would for sure never happen. They as the elite few get exceptional and free to them coverage for life.
There is only one real way to reform health care. Enact tort reform laws that will hamper the lawyers. When a doctor has to pay over $100K a year for malpractice insurance there is something drastically wrong with the system. Start with the lawyers and the crooks and health costs would come down drastically.