historyman12
Fugitive Iroh
IS IT JULY 14TH YET?
Posts: 4,822
|
Post by historyman12 on Nov 27, 2007 17:26:29 GMT -5
this is my 2nd topic on this but nonetheless. should we have UHC in the US? personally I think it would be a bad idea as it raise the national debt A LOT.
oh and the military and the war make up only 4% of the debt, before someone mentions pulling out of Iraq to decrease the debt.
|
|
|
Post by WyrmKing on Nov 27, 2007 18:02:34 GMT -5
If every other western power can do it, I don't see why not.
And those countries are doing a lot better than the U.S.
|
|
historyman12
Fugitive Iroh
IS IT JULY 14TH YET?
Posts: 4,822
|
Post by historyman12 on Nov 27, 2007 20:42:12 GMT -5
If every other western power can do it, I don't see why not. And those countries are doing a lot better than the U.S. a man in Canada is sending people to the U.S. so they can get good health care. in Britain *socialized medicine* the prostate cancer rate is substantially lower than ours. last but not least, you can be "on hold" for things for a long long long long long time in socialized medicine. not so much here.
|
|
|
Post by Gran Gran on Nov 27, 2007 20:53:15 GMT -5
No, around here you can bleed to death in front of the Hospital because you have no insurance.
The British way is not the way to go, but is a heck of a lot better than it is around here. At least you can get your teeth fixed and what not. here, tough luck, you can do without.
Yes, the doctors in the US are superb - for most parts. But the financing of the deal is really the pits.
And even with insurance you have to mind your Ps and Qs: Anything that could cause serious trouble can be excluded from the policy, matters you need the coverage on...the prices usually go up and the services down ( surprise, happens everywhere) We have god insurance now, but the same kind of coverage would be out of reach would it not be offered through the job!
here is the thing: If everybody pays in, everybody has to pay in a little less. The Country profits from healthy citizens, because they are more productive. I don't think a solely government funded solution would work (like the British example) but the current way is a disgrace to a ricj country like the US!
|
|
attonbitus
Blue Spirit
I'm in ur clouds, steel'n ur thundar
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by attonbitus on Nov 29, 2007 11:20:36 GMT -5
i'll just quote myself from the last healthcare topic There are 2 major downsides in my mind. 1) Using Canada (which has a universal health care system) as an example, the level of medical care that is available is often suspect. Doctors have no incentive to provide the 'best' care since they get paid a flat rate per person. While yes doctors should be motivated by keeping people healthy and what not, last time I checked the most common answer to "why do you want to be a doctor" was to make money not save lives. There was a 20/20 special a while back about how wealthy Canadians would travel to the US to receive what they considered better medical treatment. 2) Monstrous cost growth that will always increase because of US cultural attitudes. IMO there 2 factors that have contributed to the increasing cost of health care. I)Increasing number of medical lawsuits (with and without merit). Since mistakes in the medical field often lead to personal tragedies the dollar amount in settlements and litigation is often VERY high. Which in turn cause the cost of medical insurance to increase for all doctors. II)The average US citizen lives a rather unhealthy life style. From eating lots of unhealthy fast food to not exercising at all, these bad habits create a platform for a number of aliments that could be should be solved with simple life style changes instead of medical solutions. --- In a perfect world there SHOULD be universal health care coverage. However, the number of people that use the health care plan will greatly out weight the pay in for it. I mean the government can't get Social Security right not to mention Welfare. Why should anyone think that this type of Universal government plan will work past 5-10 years. At that point it becomes a money sink problem that we leave for our children's children to figure out and wash our hands of it.
|
|
|
Post by Annapurna1 on Dec 1, 2007 22:58:34 GMT -5
If every other western power can do it, I don't see why not. And those countries are doing a lot better than the U.S. every other western power doesnt share our stupid moralism..which is that people exist to serve the economy..and not the other way around...this is of course diametrically opposed to the whole notion of (single payer) universal healthcare...
|
|
|
Post by Consonant*** on Dec 20, 2007 11:25:43 GMT -5
If every other western power can do it, I don't see why not. And those countries are doing a lot better than the U.S. What, you mean the OUTSTANDING health care the government provides? I mean Tricare, of course. If you have a problem, TriCare gives you two options, Emergency Room (Meaning thousands in bills) or an appointment two months from now. Not to mention the fact that NOBODY knows ANYTHING about the process. God forbid you call the wrong office about a problem, you'll get forwarded to another incorrect office, who will forward you to another office (The wrong one, btw), and so on. Not to mention the fact that disabilities incurred from mistakes will skyrocket, we'll lose thousands of doctors, their will be a massive degradation in funds available to hospitals. As people love to point out in the debate on Iraq, we are trillions of dollars in debt. After Universal Health Care gets implemented, I think the government should be REQUIRED to provide every breathing American with a 5-star meal for dinner every day.
|
|
|
Post by KrystalFruit22 on Feb 2, 2008 21:58:07 GMT -5
You can't seriously say what they've got in brittain is better than what we have here. One third of children there don't see a dentist regularly. Why? Because you have to reserve an appointment sometimes years before you actually get to see your doctor. Also: Universal healthcare isn't free. The government doesn't pay for it. Rather, it would come out of your tax money. Regardless of how much health treatment you actually end up needing in the year, you still pay the same amount of money for it. For the average person, it would be much better financially if they just paid when they actually needed it, like for a doctor's appointment, if it weren't for all this health insurance hype, you could probably go for only twenty dollars or so. Now, I do agree that there should be some insurance for really expensive proceedures, like surgery and such, but that's not your average case. Plus, with universal health care, there's no incentive really for people to be doctors. If the government just puts prices on all of their services for them, then where's their motivation?
|
|
historyman12
Fugitive Iroh
IS IT JULY 14TH YET?
Posts: 4,822
|
Post by historyman12 on Feb 3, 2008 8:59:25 GMT -5
No, around here you can bleed to death in front of the Hospital because you have no insurance. The British way is not the way to go, but is a heck of a lot better than it is around here. At least you can get your teeth fixed and what not. here, tough luck, you can do without. Yes, the doctors in the US are superb - for most parts. But the financing of the deal is really the pits. And even with insurance you have to mind your Ps and Qs: Anything that could cause serious trouble can be excluded from the policy, matters you need the coverage on...the prices usually go up and the services down ( surprise, happens everywhere) We have god insurance now, but the same kind of coverage would be out of reach would it not be offered through the job! here is the thing: If everybody pays in, everybody has to pay in a little less. The Country profits from healthy citizens, because they are more productive. I don't think a solely government funded solution would work (like the British example) but the current way is a disgrace to a ricj country like the US! What? If you walk into a hospital, they have to treat you. Have to. But you'll have to pay for it from your own pockets, even if that is pretty bad.
|
|