[paraclete]

I am sure you get 100 politicans in a room and you will get 100 ideas

I really can't see anybody trying to force a single system onto the US especially when the insurance companies and vast amount of medical companies would loose out, which I understand have a powerful say in the government

Private Medical Cover will still be available like it is anyway in the world regardless of what system of health plan is in place

You show an unreasonable faith in politicians, if you get 100 politicians in a room you get no ideas they are all lobbying each other to see who will be the leader

[phlanx]

Hahahahaha, Maybe I was still clinging to that last thread of hope on that one mate :)

[ETWolverine]

I am sure you get 100 politicans in a room and you will get 100 ideas

I really can't see anybody trying to force a single system onto the US especially when the insurance companies and vast amount of medical companies would loose out, which I understand have a powerful say in the government

Private Medical Cover will still be available like it is anyway in the world regardless of what system of health plan is in place

I disagree on several points.

First of all, with the Democrats in control of both houses of Congress (with a supermajority) and the Presidency, the fact is that the insurance companies don't have all that much power right now within government. They don't have the power to stop a full-court press by the Democrats in Congress right now.

Second of all, in Canada there is no private insurance permitted (they are in the process of opening that up a bit, but it is still true as a general rule). For a long time in the UK, there was no private insurance. What makes you so sure that private insurance would continue to exist in the USA... especially when the people at the highest levels of government are telling us that their goal is to eliminate private insurance? As they have said, it may not happen immediately, but it is their goal to use the idea of a government-run "public option" to create a single-payer system. Given enough time and effort, that is exactly what will happen... unless it is stopped dead right here and now.

Elliot

[phlanx]

I did read something along those lines before, but I put that down to some politicians trying to get something so far out of their reach that a compromise would be the way forward and therefore the goal would be reached

You have to understand, some of my comments are based on very limited information, and I have no problem being corrected where I am wrong, that is why I talk to people like yourself Elliot who give an honest (although strange) opinion on how america works,so yep you are represneting 300m americans right now :)

I didn't know that about canada either, I thought they had private doctor practices, but not hospitals, cheers for that as well

I really think the only thing that Bill Clinton and Obama was and are hoping for is a health care that allows or enforces health insurance for all americans, and as usual, you get all the different dynamics of politics coming out with Fear and Hope tactics

Thanks for the correction

[jakester]

I did read something along those lines before, but I put that down to some politicians trying to get something so far out of their reach that a compromise would be the way forward and therefore the goal would be reached

You have to understand, some of my comments are based on very limited information, and I have no problem being corrected where I am wrong, that is why I talk to people like yourself Elliot who give an honest (although strange) opinion on how america works,so yep you are represneting 300m americans right now :)

I didnt know that about canada either, I thought they had private doctor practices, but not hospitals, cheers for that as well

I really think the only thing that Bill Clinton and Obama was and are hoping for is a health care that allows or enforces health insurance for all americans, and as usual, you get all the different dynamics of politics coming out with Fear and Hope tactics

Thanks for the correction

Steve - I'd be curious to hear your perspective on your own country's health care system (you're from England, right?). What is your experience like in England as a consumer of health care?

Just curious to hear about it since I've not really heard a perspective from someone across the pond.

[phlanx]

Salvo Jake

From my personel point of view the service has been first notch

I have had broken arms, a leg, and ankle, stiches to both knees, and right leg, dislocated shoulder, two broken ribs, concussion and skin cancer

All totally self inflicted, except the skin cancer :)

The service I have received has been first notch, When I have been to A&E (ER) I have been seen within an hour, and xrayed and patched up within a couple more

Check ups and appointments are casual for an am or pm which is annoying but the waiting is always a max of 45 minutes, I have sat in traffic jams for more time than at the hospital

When I had skin cancer, I saw my local doctor which again is under the NHS scheme, I made the appointed late one afternoon and was seen the next day

He referred me to an appointment 4 days later at the Hospital, of which they removed the lump from above my skin, and booked me in a few days later to have the entire lump removed

All in all I have no complaints about the British Health Service

The Nurses were great, doctors were professional, and the hopsital was clean and welcoming

Now, don't get me wrong, I have seen the stories of miscare, and total shambles when it comes to the running and how clean some places are

We have had a system whereby there has been no competition and some poor investment due to poor areas of employment

This has now changed or is changing and you can nominate where you wish to go, you can choose which doctor, instead of being your local, and which hospital even though it is 100 miles away

This will now mean we as nation can pick which is the best hospital for us to have treatment in

This will improve the system by introducing a level of competition

Members of my family have all had treatment, some serious, and friends of mine have suffered some serious forms of cancer, of which the treatment I have witnessed has been first class

Our stats though do show one problem we have as a nation.

We do not go to the doctors until we really have to, so catching cancer early is not always possible and people die when it is too late to do anything about

I can talk forever, especially as I have been to the hospital quite a few times

The thing is for us, (majority) we do take the health system for granted, because it has always been there when we needed it.

It is one of the few places that you can work in and get service, with a smile most of the time, and can walk, (hobble) out without having to pay for it, fill in insurance forms or any hassle

Now I know some will say you do pay for it through taxes which is of course correct, but if I am going to be taxed anyway, I am more than happy to be taxed for something I think is an amzing service

Especially when we see, whether correctly or not through the different media forms, people in the US having been denied treatment due to no insurance, or people with insurance but with a dodgy insurance company that doesn't provide cover when it is needed

Or the stories of people who work all their lives, pay taxes, are good people, diagnosed with an illness that their insurance doesn't cover and they spend their entire life savings on treatment

I think it is the responsibility of a civilised nation to look after their weak, poor, or misfortunate

Even to those that make stupid mistakes, to those that take from the system and not give back, it is a small price to pay for what we have

Finally, Stephen Hawking, who is arguably one of the most intelligent people on the planet, praises the NHS as he declares he would not be alive today if it wasn't for the way the NHS provided care and assitance for a very difficult condition

We could have lost a brilliant mind if it wasn't for a simple thing as paying a few extra pounds in tax per week

Hope this answers your question

[paraclete]

I disagree on several points.

First of all, with the Democrats in control of both houses of Congress (with a supermajority) and the Presidency, the fact is that the insurance companies don't have all that much power right now within government. They don't have the power to stop a full-court press by the Democrats in Congress right now.

Second of all, in Canada there is no private insurance permitted (they are in the process of opening that up a bit, but it is still true as a general rule). For a long time in the UK, there was no private insurance. What makes you so sure that private insurance would continue to exist in the USA... especially when the people at the highest levels of government are telling us that their goal is to eliminate private insurance? As they have said, it may not happen immediately, but it is their goal to use the idea of a government-run "public option" to create a single-payer system. Given enough time and effort, that is exactly what will happen.... unless it is stopped dead right here and now.

Elliot

Elliot what needs to be stopped dead right now is this laissez faire attitude to medical care. There is nothing wrong with a single payer option so long as choice of doctor remains, but in any case there is no reason why a private insurance option shouldn't remain. Even though it is not in your constitution every human being should have a basic right to health care, just as they should have a right to food and shelter. If you founding fathers didn't consider such rights important they were dolts, but I think they covered it in a right to welfare. As I understand it what is wrong with your current system is denial of coverage under certain circumstances and a very legalistic interpretation of what is covered. As I read this debate I come to the conclusion that those in the US for some reason don't want health care to be cheaper through competition with insurance companies by a public option. This is inexplicable in a market place that prides itsself on competition.

[speechlesstx]

As I read this debate I come to the conclusion that those in the US for some reason don't want health care to be cheaper through competition with insurance companies by a public option. This is inexplicable in a market place that prides itsself on competition.

I don't know how we could have been more plain, everyone believes we need some reform, everyone would like to see it cheaper and we all believe everyone needs access to health care. But when the government - the one that makes the rules and doesn't have to make a profit - becomes part of the marketplace, it's no longer a free market. As has been stated numerous times our federal government has specifically enumerated powers and being in the health care/health insurance business is not one of them.

[tomder55]

Clete you are not that naiive . If it was a matter of competition the gvt. Would ease rules regulating the market place including allowing across state purchase of insurance and easing anti-trust exemptions the insurance companies currently have.

But this is not about competition . It is about direct government control of a growing segment of the GDP.
I see it no different than seizing of almost all the domestic auto industry ,or allocating money for the purchase of bad mortgages and instead using the money to gain an equity share of the banking industry.

[ETWolverine]

Elliot what needs to be stopped dead right now is this laissez faire attitude to medical care. There is nothing wrong with a single payer option so long as choice of doctor remains, but in any case there is no reason why a private insurance option shouldn't remain. Even though it is not in your constitution every human being should have a basic right to health care, just as they should have a right to food and shelter. If you founding fathers didn't consider such rights important they were dolts, but I think they covered it in a right to welfare. As I understand it what is wrong with your current system is denial of coverage under certain circumstances and a very legalistic interpretation of what is covered. As I read this debate I come to the conclusion that those in the US for some reason don't want health care to be cheaper through competition with insurance companies by a public option. This is inexplicable in a market place that prides itsself on competition.

Do you really think that a government option will compete with private insurance?

That's sort of like saying that the referees will compete with the regular teams... it won't happen, because the referees control the rules, make the calls and decide who gets the point. And they AREN'T going to make the playing field even.

The proposals that conservatives have put forward WOULD increase competition. They would increase competition in each state from 2 or 3 or even 12 insurers to 1300 immediately. 1300 privately-run organizations competing against each other under the same rules and regulations.

THAT'S competition.

Elliot

[excon]

Do you really think that a government option will compete with private insurance?

That's sort of like saying that the referees will compete with the regular teams... it won't happen, because the referees control the rules, make the calls and decide who gets the point. And they AREN'T going to make the playing field even.

Hello:

If one assumes that the bill, as proposed, DOESN'T mean what it says, because the real intent of the authors is to do something entirely DIFFERENT than the bill SPELLS OUT, then you'd make the assumptions the Wolverine does...

But, if you believe the WORDS in the bill, instead of the loony right wing conspiracy theories being thrown about, a public option WOULD compete with private insurance. Why wouldn't it?? It's an insurance policy too, after all. It just doesn't have to make a profit. Sure it's going to be cheaper than the private plans. THAT'S the idea - so they LOWER their costs.

Is it going to bother the American taxpayer that the insurance company CEO can't send their children to private school anymore?? I don't think so.

excon

[speechlesstx]

If one assumes that the bill, as proposed, DOESN'T mean what it says, because the real intent of the authors is to do something entirely DIFFERENT than the bill SPELLS OUT, then you'd make the assumptions the Wolverine does...

Wow ex, I'm still not believing my eyes about how much faith you're putting into politicians to be straightforward and honest in their language. What does the bill spell out anyway?

[excon]

Wow ex, I'm still not believing my eyes about how much faith you're putting into politicians to be straightforward and honest in their language. What does the bill spell out anyway?

Hello Steve:

I'm able to distinguish between political rhetoric, and the WORDS in the law.. If the words we write in our laws mean NOTHING, then we're in bigger trouble than just needing health care reform.

I can't tell you what's IN the bill exactly because there isn't a final bill. But, I can tell you what's NOT in there. What's NOT in there is language saying that we're just kidding, and we can scrap this LAW anytime we want and go commie on you.

excon

[speechlesstx]

I'm able to distinguish between political rhetoric, and the WORDS in the law.. If the words we write in our laws mean NOTHING, then we're in bigger trouble than just needing health care reform.

Good, then maybe you can finally explain CFR 49 for me. I always have trouble interpreting that one. And trust me, you need to actually view the links to get my point.

[excon]

Good, then maybe you can finally explain for me.

Hello again, Steve:

It means you can't carry bad crap in your truck... Look. I didn't say you could understand everything they write... But, I think you COULD discern a plot to DO exactly the opposite of what a bill purports... After all, you guys discerned plenty of those.

excon

[ETWolverine]

Hello:

If one assumes that the bill, as proposed, DOESN'T mean what it says, because the real intent of the authors is to do something entirely DIFFERENT than the bill SPELLS OUT, then you'd make the assumptions the Wolverine does...

But, if you believe the WORDS in the bill, instead of the loony right wing conspiracy theories being thrown about, a public option WOULD compete with private insurance. Why wouldn't it??? It's an insurance policy too, after all. It just doesn't have to make a profit. Sure it's going to be cheaper than the private plans. THAT'S the idea - so they LOWER their costs.

Is it going to bother the American taxpayer that the insurance company CEO can't send their children to private school anymore??? I don't think so.

excon

Why should we "believe the words of the bill" when the people who wrote the bill admit they are lying in the bill?

Do you make it a habbit of believing liars?

Apparently you do, but only when it serves your political point of view. Otherwise you get all upset about it and spend your time ranting and raving about it.

Elliot

[ETWolverine]

I can't tell you what's IN the bill exactly because there isn't a final bill.

Nevertheless, we should believe the words of the bill anyway, right?

Bwahahahahahaha

Elliot

[speechlesstx]

It means you can't carry bad crap in your truck...

Not exactly, it tells you what bad crap you can't carry on your truck and HOW you can carry other bad crap but that's just a small fraction of the code. That's how the health care reform bill will end up once it becomes law, about as easily understood as CFR 49.

Look. I didn't say you could understand everything they write... But, I think you COULD discern a plot to DO exactly the opposite of what a bill purports... After all, you guys discerned plenty of those.

Mostly we've argued against what's being proposed, which the news today is about the Democrat's push for the 'public option' to 'compete' (terms which are intentionally deceptive) with private insurers. When the issue is one you favor you guys think we're supposed to ignore the rhetoric, focus on how innocuous the 'specifics' are and get behind it while representing us as moonbat wackos if we don't. You'd like that because then it'll be too late once the bill is passed and signed. Sorry ex, but the time to object is BEFORE Congress does their dirty little deed.

[ETWolverine]

Hello again, Steve:

It means you can't carry bad crap in your truck... Look. I didn't say you could understand everything they write.... But, I think you COULD discern a plot to DO exactly the opposite of what a bill purports... After all, you guys discerned plenty of those.

excon

So... let me get this straight.

You claim that you have the ability to discern a plot to make a bill do something OTHER than what it is perported to do.

You have the magical ability to do this just by reading the bill, even though you have now admitted that you cannot understand everything they write.

And yet when government officials (not just one or two, but SEVERAL of them, including the President, and the Secretary of HHS, who will be in charge of implementing the bill if it gets passed) TELL US that they are planning to make the bill do something other than what it purports to do, you can't discern a plot to do exactly that.

Uh huh...

Elliot

[speechlesstx]

Again speaking of government insanity, I give you Alan "Republicans want you to die/Holocaust in America" Grayson's latest charade... Names of the Dead.com