Health Care

[DRF]

I really don't understand how anyone could possibly think that government health care is a good idea. The government has yet to run any program effectively: Social Security, Fannie Mae, Medicare, and most recenbtly the $1,000,000,000.00 stumuls plan. Why would anyone want to put the goverment in charge of their health???

I'm also not understanding the belief that our present health care system is broken. Has anyone seen a system that works better? Most (85%) of American's are happy with their current health care.

Are people really in favor of waiting months for treatments they could receive in days right now? Does rationing health care really sound good to people?

I don't understand people in America who want the government to control every aspect of their lives. Do you really just want to work and hand over 60% (yes, that's right Obama's new healthcare plan will raise your federal and state taxes that high) of your income to the government so they can tell you how to live??

What happened to Land of the Free??

What are you all thinking?????

[StockMarket77]

I'm a very far right-winger, and words cannot express my anger towards the mere idea of Government-funded healthcare.

When beavers store nuts to eat during the winter, everybody works for their share. You know what happens to the beavers that don't contribute? The working beavers team up and eliminate them. Fiscal conservatism is nature's law. Even the disabled should to find a way to contribute to society. The severely disabled can even serve a purpose in one way or another, but only after receiving their earned healthcare through family members, not entitlement healthcare.

We need to break it off with the socialist Government. Enough is enough. The only things we need are military, police & fire departments. Beyond that - the private sector shall determine.

Society would be much more productive, well-fed and rich if only everybody contributed in their own way to the growth of the private sector. Close the doors of welfare and let true wealth be created. Let the private sector continue to operate as it has.

[camarozz]

I'm a very far right-winger, and words cannot express my anger towards the mere idea of Government-funded healthcare.

When beavers store nuts to eat during the winter, everybody works for their share. You know what happens to the beavers that don't contribute? The working beavers team up and eliminate them. Fiscal conservatism is nature's law. Even the disabled should to find a way to contribute to society. The severely disabled can even serve a purpose in one way or another, but only after receiving their earned healthcare through family members, not entitlement healthcare.

We need to break it off with the socialist Government. Enough is enough. The only things we need are military, police & fire departments. Beyond that - the private sector shall determine.

Society would be much more productive, well-fed and rich if only everybody contributed in their own way to the growth of the private sector. Close the doors of welfare and let true wealth be created. Let the private sector continue to operate as it has.


You have paraphrased my thoughts very well. Im to the point where I could enjoy watching the government fail completely, and at that point we could really start taking care of ourselves.

I was confronted earlier in a similar type post where I was challenged to think that I could not take care of myself if the governement failed. I guarantee that will not happen, and I imagine some of the larger cities would collapse and people there will starve to death.

Currently I cannot think of anything that I could not live without that I could not provide for myself and my family, especially the government controlled aspects.

[DRS]

I'm a very far right-winger, and words cannot express my anger towards the mere idea of Government-funded healthcare.

When beavers store nuts to eat during the winter, everybody works for their share. You know what happens to the beavers that don't contribute? The working beavers team up and eliminate them. Fiscal conservatism is nature's law. Even the disabled should to find a way to contribute to society. The severely disabled can even serve a purpose in one way or another, but only after receiving their earned healthcare through family members, not entitlement healthcare.

We need to break it off with the socialist Government. Enough is enough. The only things we need are military, police & fire departments. Beyond that - the private sector shall determine.

Society would be much more productive, well-fed and rich if only everybody contributed in their own way to the growth of the private sector. Close the doors of welfare and let true wealth be created. Let the private sector continue to operate as it has.

Beavers store nuts?

And now you believe beavers are killing each other over nuts?

[King Cantona]

Has anyone seen a system that works better? Most (85%) of American's are happy with their current health care.


I think nearly every other system in the world is better than the American system....

[StockMarket77]

I think nearly every other system in the world is better than the American system....


I smell a liberal.

[Greyclouds]

I'm a very far right-winger, and words cannot express my anger towards the mere idea of Government-funded healthcare.

When beavers store nuts to eat during the winter, everybody works for their share. You know what happens to the beavers that don't contribute? The working beavers team up and eliminate them. Fiscal conservatism is nature's law. Even the disabled should to find a way to contribute to society. The severely disabled can even serve a purpose in one way or another, but only after receiving their earned healthcare through family members, not entitlement healthcare.

We need to break it off with the socialist Government. Enough is enough. The only things we need are military, police & fire departments. Beyond that - the private sector shall determine.

Society would be much more productive, well-fed and rich if only everybody contributed in their own way to the growth of the private sector. Close the doors of welfare and let true wealth be created. Let the private sector continue to operate as it has.

Sadly, your nature example is incorrect.

Muskrats can live in Beaver Lodges in the winter and even eat from their larder (trees that they store in lakes for winter food) for little to no cooperation with the beavers. Muskrats: nature's welfare queens? Beavers: nature's bleeding heart socialists?

[John2598]

I really don't understand how anyone could possibly think that government health care is a good idea. The government has yet to run any program effectively: Social Security, Fannie Mae, Medicare, and most recenbtly the $1,000,000,000.00 stumuls plan. Why would anyone want to put the goverment in charge of their health???

I'm also not understanding the belief that our present health care system is broken. Has anyone seen a system that works better? Most (85%) of American's are happy with their current health care.

Are people really in favor of waiting months for treatments they could receive in days right now? Does rationing health care really sound good to people?

Did we, to some degree, bring this upon ourselves? What have Republicans (or conservatives) done to try to anticipate this and head it off? Have we done anything?
Are we capable of connecting the dots? Just as liberals were incapable of connecting the dots to see the need for the war in Iraq, most of us on the right are incapable of connecting the dots to see the coming demand for government health care.

Our lifestyle in the U.S. is such that disease rates are double and triple what they are in some other countries. For example, obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer, osteoporosis, arthritis and many other degenerative diseases. But you have to have a willingness to connect the dots. If you're pro-business, you can't be against the above diseases and their "cultural causes" because to do so would be anti-business.

For example, how can we fix the obesity/diabetes problem without hurting business? The standard answer from conservatives has been: "Get up off your fat butt and get some exercise!" They give that answer because exercising doesn't hurt business, but exercising alone won't solve the problem.

Think about this: If we could cut the rate of degenerative diseases in half, we might also cut the national health care bill in half. And just think what that would do to health care premiums. But you have to be willing to connect the dots. And talk-radio won't/can't teach that.

[mysticbeauty_nbeast]

Did we, to some degree, bring this upon ourselves? What have Republicans (or conservatives) done to try to anticipate this and head it off? Have we done anything?
Are we capable of connecting the dots? Just as liberals were incapable of connecting the dots to see the need for the war in Iraq, most of us on the right are incapable of connecting the dots to see the coming demand for government health care.

Our lifestyle in the U.S. is such that disease rates are double and triple what they are in some other countries. For example, obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer, osteoporosis, arthritis and many other degenerative diseases. But you have to have a willingness to connect the dots. If you're pro-business, you can't be against the above diseases and their "cultural causes" because to do so would be anti-business.

For example, how can we fix the obesity/diabetes problem without hurting business? The standard answer from conservatives has been: "Get up off your fat butt and get some exercise!" They give that answer because exercising doesn't hurt business, but exercising alone won't solve the problem.

Think about this: If we could cut the rate of degenerative diseases in half, we might also cut the national health care bill in half. And just think what that would do to health care premiums. But you have to be willing to connect the dots. And talk-radio won't/can't teach that.

Interesting post. Question...whom in our society is 'demanding' governmental health care? In that question lays several very hot topic answers. Off the top of my head..what are categorized 'the poor' and illegal immigrants. Both need health care...no doubt...just as any human being requires health care...but does the need justify the plan Obama has pushed for? I don't think so. Insurance reform would do more in less time with little to no money outgo from our tax dollars...yet no one is touching that idea in Washington.....why is that?

I've heard several horrific stories lately of how some families have gone bankrupt over medical care costs/bills due to a traumatic event. I get that..I do...been through that traumatic event...had insurance...and after three years...I was dropped from insurance due to my chronic condition...and now can't get insurance as I'm the uninsurable due to said chronic/terminal condition. This specific group has a better argument for and on the topic of health care then the two groups mentioned previous. They worked and paid their premiums...only to watch their condition slowly take away everything they had/have worked for. It's sad..but it happens. That said..why should the rest of the country be punished for the uninsurable, poor and illegals? Why should everyone else pay a higher tax rate to cover these three groups...or worse yet..pay more for wanting to keep their private insurance?

My heart says it's a good thing to have access to health care regardless who needs it. My mind says why punish the few in order to serve the many? I've yet to hear an argument that persuades me this plan is a good plan.

~Mysty

[King Cantona]

I smell a liberal.

Nothing wrong with your nose then.......:cool:........

[Greyclouds]

Interesting post. Question...whom in our society is 'demanding' governmental health care? In that question lays several very hot topic answers. Off the top of my head..what are categorized 'the poor' and illegal immigrants. Both need health care...no doubt...just as any human being requires health care...but does the need justify the plan Obama has pushed for? I don't think so. Insurance reform would do more in less time with little to no money outgo from our tax dollars...yet no one is touching that idea in Washington.....why is that?

I've heard several horrific stories lately of how some families have gone bankrupt over medical care costs/bills due to a traumatic event. I get that..I do...been through that traumatic event...had insurance...and after three years...I was dropped from insurance due to my chronic condition...and now can't get insurance as I'm the uninsurable due to said chronic/terminal condition. This specific group has a better argument for and on the topic of health care then the two groups mentioned previous. They worked and paid their premiums...only to watch their condition slowly take away everything they had/have worked for. It's sad..but it happens. That said..why should the rest of the country be punished for the uninsurable, poor and illegals? Why should everyone else pay a higher tax rate to cover these three groups...or worse yet..pay more for wanting to keep their private insurance?

My heart says it's a good thing to have access to health care regardless who needs it. My mind says why punish the few in order to serve the many? I've yet to hear an argument that persuades me this plan is a good plan.

~Mysty

In a society that does not provide euthanasia for terminal illnesses, and a medical association that is forced by both creed and law to work on patients to their utmost limits of human endurance, there is a significant financial burden created by the diagnosis and treatment of diseases.

I believe that life is about choices, and you have to decide between them promptly. Here are the choices in front of us that I can think up off the top of my head:

1. Disproportionately tax the better-off to cover the uninsured.

2. Remove our restriction on Euthanasia and:
a. make it regulated by the government.
b. make it regulated by insurance.
c. make it a personal choice available on demand.

3. Allow the system to remain the same.

4. Nationalize health insurance for all.

5. Completely privatize insurance and remove all government manipulation.


Which would you choose?

[DRS]

There are doctors in Quebec asking the government to consider leagal euthenasia for those patients requesting it who are terminal and in pain

[Greyclouds]

There are doctors in Quebec asking the government to consider leagal euthenasia for those patients requesting it who are terminal and in pain

I am undecided on the topic of Euthanasia...

Medical treatment of terminally ill patients only prolongs suffering... yet at the same time Euthanasia touches on some ethical "nerves."

[StockMarket77]

Why don't we just deport the uninsured?

[mysticbeauty_nbeast]

In a society that does not provide euthanasia for terminal illnesses, and a medical association that is forced by both creed and law to work on patients to their utmost limits of human endurance, there is a significant financial burden created by the diagnosis and treatment of diseases.

I believe that life is about choices, and you have to decide between them promptly. Here are the choices in front of us that I can think up off the top of my head:

1. Disproportionately tax the better-off to cover the uninsured.

2. Remove our restriction on Euthanasia and:
a. make it regulated by the government.
b. make it regulated by insurance.
c. make it a personal choice available on demand.

3. Allow the system to remain the same.

4. Nationalize health insurance for all.

5. Completely privatize insurance and remove all government manipulation.


Which would you choose?

Are those the only choices? Really? I wouldn't choose any of the above then...for even that is a choice. ;)

Taxing the wealthy...or the few...in order to service the many is just wild in it's base premise. The outcome of doing so would bring even more economic crises to our door step...for why stay and work hard if your only benefit is to have your earnings taken from you?

As to the rest...we have a darn good idea what those look like long term...which puts us right were we are now...so we know that doesn't work. I don't want Canada's health system...hell, I don't want England's health system either..both would literally kill me. There has to be a middle of the road here somewhere...right? This nationalization of health care is scaring the bejesus outta me...it doesn't sound right...it seems to punishes those who work hard to attain wealth and sucess. Seems down right un-American to me.

What about the option of full reform on health care insurance/private insurance/pharmaceuticals companies? What about full restructuring of pharmaceuticals and medical groups?...what about reform within the medical lobby itself? Wouldn't that action do more with less? Or am I missing something in the larger picture?

~Mysty

[StockMarket77]

I think I just found the answer though. The uninsured can be deported, or at least temporarily relocated to socialist nations that will take care of them.

[RTchoke]

I think I just found the answer though. The uninsured can be deported, or at least temporarily relocated to socialist nations that will take care of them.

We have catastrophic accident insurance only. We pay for every damn dime of our healthcare out of pocket and not once have I asked for the gov to help me, provide insurance for me or hold my hand. I don't want it.

Your suggestion sucks.

[Greyclouds]

Are those the only choices? Really? I wouldn't choose any of the above then...for even that is a choice. ;)

The only viable ones I could think of in a hurry :)


Taxing the wealthy...or the few...in order to service the many is just wild in it's base premise. The outcome of doing so would bring even more economic crises to our door step...for why stay and work hard if your only benefit is to have your earnings taken from you?

Well, the wealthy have little refuge outside the country! Sure, they could live like barons on Aruba, but they would still have to deal with America in order to maximize profits. Our lower classes still have enough purchasing power (and per capita-income) to wring extensive profits from smart marketing.

Also, Japanese culture would not benefit them quite as much, assuming they themselves are not Japanese.

Our CEO's make ~235 times the base wages they pay out. In other countries? They make at least one degree less (more like 25 times).


As to the rest...we have a darn good idea what those look like long term...which puts us right were we are now...so we know that doesn't work. I don't want Canada's health system...hell, I don't want England's health system either..both would literally kill me. There has to be a middle of the road here somewhere...right? This nationalization of health care is scaring the bejesus outta me...it doesn't sound right...it seems to punishes those who work hard to attain wealth and sucess. Seems down right un-American to me.

Now, I'm not a proponent of high taxes by any means, but think about it this way (all numbers taken from statistics if filing as a single person):

A. You make $1,000,000 a year, and the government taxes you 35%. How much net income do you have left? $650,000.

B. Another person makes $40,000 a year and the government taxes them 25%. How much net income does that person have left? $30,000.

So, let's increase the tax bracket on Person A to 50%, which will be the UK's new tax on all persons making above 150,000 pounds from 2010 onwards. Person A is still left with $500,000.

Let's also define the minimum (no frills) living expense at around $20,000 for a single person. Sound good? That's what I'm living on right now, and I have enough to save a small portion while renting an apartment, buying my groceries, paying my phone and car bills and other necessities.



Even with the 50% tax bracket, is person A being punished with respect to person B? Does person A have less money than person B despite being more successful?


What about the option of full reform on health care insurance/private insurance/pharmaceuticals companies? What about full restructuring of pharmaceuticals and medical groups?...what about reform within the medical lobby itself? Wouldn't that action do more with less? Or am I missing something in the larger picture?

~Mysty

Research grants for the pharmaceuticals.

But, removing medical company lobbyists and insurance company lobbyists might actually do more good than harm in this case. Unfortunately, it might not do enough to drive down the costs which necessitate insurance for basic/advanced medical techniques. We might also have to drive down Doctor pay.

[Greyclouds]

We have catastrophic accident insurance only. We pay for every damn dime of our healthcare out of pocket and not once have I asked for the gov to help me, provide insurance for me or hold my hand. I don't want it.

Your suggestion sucks.

Please tell me that you go for regular dental cleanings and physicals.

[RTchoke]

Please tell me that you go for regular dental cleanings and physicals.

Nice jab. :rolleyes:

We just did physicals this past January not that it's any of your damn business and yes we go to the dentist. :rolleyes: Why is it so hard for people to understand I don't need nor want the gov to take care of me. I am quite capable of taking care of myself, my family and paying for it.

So, care to tell me about your pap smear?

[RTchoke]

I think I just found the answer though. The uninsured can be deported, or at least temporarily relocated to socialist nations that will take care of them.

Why don't you suggest those living here who want a socialized medical type system move to those countries that already have this system instead of changing ours? That makes more sense.

[gdoane]

Why don't we just deport the uninsured?

We can't even deport the terrorists in Gitmo because no other nation wants the bums.

You're talking about people who are so worthless that they can't cough up a couple of shekels to save their own life and who needs 'em?

I figured out early on in life that people take better care of things that they have an ownership stake in than they take care of gifts and rentals.

Jeff Foxworthy once joked that when he rents a car and they ask if he'd like the insurance, he says "Yes I would!" because he's going to be jumping that car around like a Dukes of Hazzard rerun.

Everybody knows the story of the kid who wants a puppy, he promises to feed it and walk it and clean up its messes, please please please can I have the puppy and then what happens to the puppy? The stupid parents who believed the kid would take care of the puppy wind up doing everything and it's now their dog.

Bottom line is health care has to cost something for people to care for themselves. It's not like a human body is a rental car and if you drive it like you stole it, then you can't throw the keys at the next guy and make it somebody else's problem. It's still your problem and you're just asking the next guy to help you take care of the dog when that puppy grows up.

My solutions to national health care would be seven steps.

#1. Everybody pays something, or else gets nothing. Period. No free rides.
#2. If a doctor orders you to lose weight and exercise, and you don't... who's fault is that? YOURS.
#3. If you're convicted of illegal drug abuse, then you're on your own, meth-head.
#4. Pre-existing conditions are NOT INSURABLE. The car wreck you had a week ago isn't covered by the insurance you buy today.
#5. If you're supposedly broke and you can afford to smoke and booze, then you're not broke and stop lying about it.
#6. Bring medicines more in line with what they actually cost. When prescription meds cost less than vitamins, that's crazy.
#7. Be willing to JUST SAY NO. Some people you can't save from themselves.

It blew my mind a week ago that I filled a prescription for Percocet, 40 pills for $5.00 because of an insurance copay. Oxycodone is NOT a one-dime pill and the problem I see with that is over-the-counter meds are practically more expensive than prescription meds are because of an abuse of insurance.

There's no denying that the invitation to abuse is real and the only way I can see to defend against such abuse is to make people pay for what they're getting.

Which is the system we had years ago. People who pay for what they get appreciate what they get. People who don't are likely to neglect the puppy after it grows up to be a dog.

[mysticbeauty_nbeast]

The only viable ones I could think of in a hurry :)

Sorry..my response was more rhetorical in nature...should have added the tone of disbelief to the statement of 'is that all the choices we have?'.:redface:


Well, the wealthy have little refuge outside the country! Sure, they could live like barons on Aruba, but they would still have to deal with America in order to maximize profits. Our lower classes still have enough purchasing power (and per capita-income) to wring extensive profits from smart marketing.

Also, Japanese culture would not benefit them quite as much, assuming they themselves are not Japanese.

Our CEO's make ~235 times the base wages they pay out. In other countries? They make at least one degree less (more like 25 times).

I understand the information as you put it forth. This is what a free market and capitalism grants our nation...opportunity. Opportunity, I might add, that is not afforded in any other nation. ;)


Now, I'm not a proponent of high taxes by any means, but think about it this way (all numbers taken from statistics if filing as a single person):

A. You make $1,000,000 a year, and the government taxes you 35%. How much net income do you have left? $650,000.

B. Another person makes $40,000 a year and the government taxes them 25%. How much net income does that person have left? $30,000.

So, let's increase the tax bracket on Person A to 50%, which will be the UK's new tax on all persons making above 150,000 pounds from 2010 onwards. Person A is still left with $500,000.

Let's also define the minimum (no frills) living expense at around $20,000 for a single person. Sound good? That's what I'm living on right now, and I have enough to save a small portion while renting an apartment, buying my groceries, paying my phone and car bills and other necessities.



Even with the 50% tax bracket, is person A being punished with respect to person B? Does person A have less money than person B despite being more successful?

I understand the numbers...I even understand the question. What I don't understand is the thought that it's ok to simply tax those who make more...regardless how much is left to them after the government is done picking their pockets...no matter how good intention said picking of pocket is. Why not merely go to a standard 10% tax rate and make it fair all the way around? That I would sign on too. ;)

Now I'm not wealthy...far from it..and live/survive on very little. I'm not materialistic and don't require a high standard of living (ie huge home, pools, new cars, jewelry, going out to eat, buying cloths *I hate to shop* etc etc etc.) I do need a roof over my head, food in my belly, my medications so I can function day to day (RSD, full head to toe nerve pain from a brown recluse bite 14 years ago...I have a close cousin of MS) and the assurance of freedom to live life as I deem fit. My conscience wouldn't let me sleep if I knew my life was being improved by taking from someone else...even if I knew they could afford it. It's not some strangers job to take care of me...it's my job to take care of me. I know ...I"m nuts right? :((



Research grants for the pharmaceuticals.

But, removing medical company lobbyists and insurance company lobbyists might actually do more good than harm in this case. Unfortunately, it might not do enough to drive down the costs which necessitate insurance for basic/advanced medical techniques. We might also have to drive down Doctor pay.

Doctor's pay is already stipend when that doctor chooses to join hospital instead of private practice. And...the job cost what the job costs. Can you imagine the government telling a mechanic/mandating what they can charge to fix your car? or how about what a grocer can charge for his food? or how about how much a farmer can charge for his produce or meat? Ludicrous right? Yet I hear all to often the public demanding doctors make less. Just how much do you think the average doctor makes? If they take a set price of doctor fee's allowed...just what type of doctors are we going to get in the next generation? Why become a doctor?..go through 14 years of school...have god knows how many student loans to repay...just to make 14 an hour? No thanks. :drool: No brainer there.

Our 'glut' if you will is inlaid within the insurance and pharmaceutical industry. Hidden under the radar for decades is our biggest expense within the health care industry. The waste..the over managed admin glut in each industry...it's astounding. Money, money and more money...pure and simple greed...it's a business that has eeked out of this nations populace 'billions' of dollars. Now...take them into a fully monitored and over seen industry...like say GM and Ford...and watch how fast those health care expenses fall! ;)

Obamas' health plan hurts people like you and me...it over burdens those enterprises who make our base financial free market thrive; offer jobs to the populace; and creates security for our nation.

~Mysty

[DRF]

I think nearly every other system in the world is better than the American system....
Please name one and what is better about it.

[DRF]

I'm not seeing any posts here that would covince me that a nationlized health care system would bring BETTER health care to the USA. Killing people off earlier doesn't sound like the best answer to me, but that is the Obama plan.

The USA is a wonderful county based on a consitution that specifies a limited goverment where the people are free. Free to choose where they live, what school they will go to, where they will work, what car they drive, what they eat and what doctor they see. Why do Americans want to give this up? Why would anyone want the government to decide their lives for them? Why do people want to become drones for the government.... just work and hand over your paycheck so the government can tell you what to do with it.

WAKE UP!!!!

If you want to live as a drone in a socialist state MOVE and leave the rest of us who want to live where the sky is the limit alone.

[DRF]

Why don't you suggest those living here who want a socialized medical type system move to those countries that already have this system instead of changing ours? That makes more sense.

I couldn't agree more!

[DRF]

How come if I go the emergency room and say I don't have insurance I still receive a big fat bill, but if I were an ILLEGAL immigrant I would get a free ride.

Maybe if illegals had to pay something everytime they used our hospitals they wouldn't be so quick to come here.

Obama's plan will raise our taxes to 51% and that doesn't include property tax, school tax and sales tax. Raise your hand if you want to give more than half your income to the government so they can tell you if you live or die.

[StockMarket77]

My point is that I don't want to pay for them. Send them away.

[King Cantona]

Please name one and what is better about it.

I know that if I say the British system is better you'll provide links to show the bad parts of it as if they're the norm...

I would say that a system that requires people to be insured in order to receive healthcare is bound to be flawed. A mate of mine who lives in the US has a girlfriend who is a waitress, the trouble is that her employer won't give her enough hours so he doesn't have to pay for her healthcare...

I also recounted a story in an earlier thread where a homeowner had his home repossessed to pay for his wife's treatment, both things that wouldn't happen in Britain...

[gdoane]

How come if I go the emergency room and say I don't have insurance I still receive a big fat bill, but if I were an ILLEGAL immigrant I would get a free ride.

Because illegal aliens are trespassers, thieves and liars.

Where you make the mistake is calling them immigrants. That's liberalism, that's total political correctness and it's basically wrong because these bandits are not immigrants at all... they have zero intention of becoming Americans, they don't want to learn the language or the history of this nation, they're just here for the money.

My Great Grandfather was an immigrant from Germany. When he came to America, he was AMERICAN. He spoke English, he raised his sons and daughters to be Americans and he was an immigrant. A proud man doing proud by his family.

This crap that liberals call "undocumented immigration" now is appalling. These are men (generally) running off on their families to work illegitimate jobs and send money off to a wife and kids who don't have a daddy anymore.

That's not immigration. Illegal aliens don't even want to be citizens, their families aren't here, their futures aren't here, and the only thing they're here for is money.

Maybe if illegals had to pay something everytime they used our hospitals they wouldn't be so quick to come here.


They don't care because they're crooks. "Send me the bill" and it's a fake address. The US Health Care System is supposedly the only one without universal coverage, but yet it's so easily cheated that criminals in the act of committing a crime can defraud it at will.

We had a case in Arizona of an illegal alien, a guy, sending his medicaid card to his sister to pay for her childbirth. He was in Tuscon, she was in Flagstaff. The records showed she was female, the card showed he was male, she was pregnant giving birth and NOBODY CARED. Why? Because once everybody has their money, who cares about the facts? Everybody saw the lie but who was going to say anything and blow the flow of money?

Obama's plan will raise our taxes to 51% and that doesn't include property tax, school tax and sales tax. Raise your hand if you want to give more than half your income to the government so they can tell you if you live or die.

I plan on working for things the government can't tax. I already get 29 paid vacation days per year that they can't tax. I wouldn't mind making it 50.

[Greyclouds]

Sorry..my response was more rhetorical in nature...should have added the tone of disbelief to the statement of 'is that all the choices we have?'.:redface:

That's quite alright :)


<snip>
Doctor's pay is already stipend when that doctor chooses to join hospital instead of private practice. And...the job cost what the job costs. Can you imagine the government telling a mechanic/mandating what they can charge to fix your car? or how about what a grocer can charge for his food? or how about how much a farmer can charge for his produce or meat? Ludicrous right? Yet I hear all to often the public demanding doctors make less. Just how much do you think the average doctor makes? If they take a set price of doctor fee's allowed...just what type of doctors are we going to get in the next generation? Why become a doctor?..go through 14 years of school...have god knows how many student loans to repay...just to make 14 an hour? No thanks. :drool: No brainer there.

Farmers are actually a poor example... their crops ARE regulated by the government, and they are often paid to grow crops of certain types. In this regard, the government lessens the fluctuation of food prices by organizing crops. http://books.google.com/books?id=dySmF_1Of_0C&pg=PA215&lpg=PA215&dq=us+government+regulation+of+crops&source=bl&ots=KLljkPla5E&sig=35x_5MY4Dghf70T1vAibqqKWaVo&hl=en&ei=xddkSvihA5GaMcKyvJ8M&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5

After I earn my PhD I will demand an average salary of ~$90,000 a year. That's after 5 years of Grad. School PLUS an obligatory year to two of Post-Doc projects (total of about 7 years).

A general surgeon can demand an average salary of ~$200,000 a year. That's after 4 years of Med School and 5 years residency (total 9 years. Also, they make FAR more than I do in residency (I make $20k and they make $45k!!!)).

Market demand SHOULD drive salaries, but in this case, it is hard to tell if it does! In terms of investment of years in school, MD's have it VERY easy right now!


Our 'glut' if you will is inlaid within the insurance and pharmaceutical industry. Hidden under the radar for decades is our biggest expense within the health care industry. The waste..the over managed admin glut in each industry...it's astounding. Money, money and more money...pure and simple greed...it's a business that has eeked out of this nations populace 'billions' of dollars. Now...take them into a fully monitored and over seen industry...like say GM and Ford...and watch how fast those health care expenses fall! ;)

It's hard to tell how much waste there is until you hire consultants, and unfortunately, you must spend money to do so. It's also hard to determine if said waste is the only issue in the healthcare industry today!


Obamas' health plan hurts people like you and me...it over burdens those enterprises who make our base financial free market thrive; offer jobs to the populace; and creates security for our nation.

~Mysty

See, I'm still not sold on "supply side." I think that short term ramifications of placing more tax burden on the rich would be a negative fluctuation on the market, but mostly because they are used to certain luxuries that their current net pay can afford!

Is $500,000 alot of money for you to live on?

Well, upper class people in NY city apparently cannot live on less than that! http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/02/poor_little_rich_boys.php

Glut at the top distorts prices to the effect that social stratification worsens at the bottom due to the inflation. True, the wasteful spending of the rich could supply people at the bottom with jobs or boons, but there is only so much leeway we can provide to the rich. Also, what if they decide to SAVE their income or invest it ELSEWHERE!?

I'm no economist, but I see a problem with placing trust in ANY social class for the expansion of our economy. MODERATION is a missing element in economics these days...

[Patty31756]

I think we need to look at the Malpractice Insurance problem in this country. Each time a suit is put against a physician even if they win their premiums go up. How about the pharmecutical companies that charge so much for prescriptions? How is this money disbursed Salaries? Research? Paying lobbyist?

[DRF]

Where you make the mistake is calling them immigrants. .... they don't want to learn the language or the history of this nation, they're just here for the money.

My Great Grandfather was an immigrant from Germany. When he came to America, he was AMERICAN. He spoke English, he raised his sons and daughters to be Americans and he was an immigrant. A proud man doing proud by his family.



I'm am totally with you here. My mothers was a young child living in a one room apt. in Italy with 7 siblings and her parents after their home was bombed during WWII. They waited almost 10 years to receive permission to come to America, and when they did they worked very hard to become Americans. In addition, as a side note, my mother often spoke of how kind the American soldiers were and how they helped her family at times. She had developed sores on her legs from who knows what and the American Soldiers gave her medical attention.

... and one more thing.... a little off topic... but as you can see, my family was not in America when slavery existed...

[Paul Augie]

This is a boring, but true, tale of my Mother and the potential consequences of ‘end of life” health care rationing.

At the age of 77 my Mother was diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Our “trusted” family doctor of 30 years dismissed her complaints of stomach pain. It was a nurse that finally sent her for tests. Fortunately, last minute surgery and chemo therapy saved her life.

The same situation reoccurred three years later at age 80. Again, the “trusted” doctor never sent her for tests. This time a tumor had grown so large that it completely strangled her intestines finally forcing her to the emergency room.

Our “trusted” doctor, the hospital’s head surgeon and a gynecological oncologist all told me that “this was incurable and to take her home with pain killers and make her comfortable”. The “trusted” doctor stated: “She’s 80 years old, I’ve known her a long time, the cancer has spread all over”. The other two doctors concurred.

It was a surrealistic nightmare with three doctors surrounding me outside her hospital room trying to convince me to let her die. They refused to even try to save her. They wouldn’t even do a colostomy to relive her pain. While my Mother was in a pain killer induced stupor the surgeon “consulted” her on her end of life options.

In the middle of these discussions, in a desperate attempt to do something, I called the Sloan Kettering oncologist who had supervised her previous chemo therapy. He was completely appalled by the diagnosis, explaining that ovarian cancer is very responsive to chemo and manifests itself in tumors that are generally operable.

As I relayed this information to the three doctors I heard the most amazing response. It wasn’t “oh great! Maybe Sloan Kettering can help her”, it was “don’t believe him; they just say that because that’s what they do”. I was stunned.

The Sloan Kettering doctor interceded, insisting the surgeon perform an emergency colostomy and then had her care transferred to Sloan Kettering. They operated, removing the tumor and reversing the colostomy, followed up by chemo. That was three years ago. She’s had an extra three Christmases and birthdays. She drives around town, goes out to lunches and dinners with her friends, attends family and community events and enjoys her family immensely.

Under close supervision by Sloan, she was recently diagnosed with a new bout of ovarian cancer. This time it was caught in its earliest stages and requires only a relatively few chemo sessions to control it. Prognosis is at least another couple of years before it reappears. A few more Christmases and a few more birthdays!

Sorry for this long tale! My point is that I could not understand doctors refusing and discouraging treatment until recently. I realize now that the “end of life” health care rationing theory being proposed today has already been accepted by some doctors and institutions in the profession.

My Mother had no insurance issue, she was well covered. It was the decision of Doctors that would have let her die. Under this new health care plan it will be bureaucrats that make those decisions with NO options for the patient. Not even a doctor will be able to intercede. My mother would have been dead and buried three years ago. It is more than just the patient that is affected by these decisions. As my Mother said to the Sloan Doctor, “I’m eighty three and I’m not afraid to die, but my kids don’t want me to!”

[mysticbeauty_nbeast]

I know that if I say the British system is better you'll provide links to show the bad parts of it as if they're the norm...

I would say that a system that requires people to be insured in order to receive healthcare is bound to be flawed. A mate of mine who lives in the US has a girlfriend who is a waitress, the trouble is that her employer won't give her enough hours so he doesn't have to pay for her healthcare...

I also recounted a story in an earlier thread where a homeowner had his home repossessed to pay for his wife's treatment, both things that wouldn't happen in Britain...

Hate to tell ya King..but some of your own countries government officials seem to agree that socialized health care IS the nightmare we think it will be. They are warning us not to follow in their footsteps.

Why...well maybe the link below can fill in the blanks?

http://www.angelfire.com/pa/sergeman/issues/healthcare/socialized.html

Truth hurts buddy. America may have a flawed (and what system isn't?)and expensive system (you get what you pay for)..within medical science and care itself..we are the best of the best of the best Sir! Why do you think other countries dignitaries, officials and VIP's come here instead of being treated in their own country's? With so many horror stories about socialized health care in other country's..do you really blame them for wanting the best treatment available?

~Mysty

[mysticbeauty_nbeast]

That's quite alright :)

:hug:

Farmers are actually a poor example... their crops ARE regulated by the government, and they are often paid to grow crops of certain types. In this regard, the government lessens the fluctuation of food prices by organizing crops. http://books.google.com/books?id=dySmF_1Of_0C&pg=PA215&lpg=PA215&dq=us+government+regulation+of+crops&source=bl&ots=KLljkPla5E&sig=35x_5MY4Dghf70T1vAibqqKWaVo&hl=en&ei=xddkSvihA5GaMcKyvJ8M&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5

Your speaking about Corporate Farmers who receive 'governmental funding' are price regulated. This topic gets more into the world economic system then using it as I intended. Your point is valid however. Let's take current policies out of the mix..and say a local farmer..small farming...and the government telling that farmer who doesn't receive governmental funding how much he can and can not charge. (Trying to keep it simple...other wise smoke will start rising outta my ears...lol)

After I earn my PhD I will demand an average salary of ~$90,000 a year. That's after 5 years of Grad. School PLUS an obligatory year to two of Post-Doc projects (total of about 7 years).

it can take 9 to 14 years all total (depending on what area of medicine one's endeavors to practice within) for a medical PhD. I know..I was going to be one. 2 years of pre med out of high school; 4 to 6 years med school, 2 years post med intern; and 2 years post med residency...that's 10 to 12 years right there...with picking/choosing a specialty you can easily add 1 to 3 years depending on the specific specialty. Maybe it's just the difference in what school system one goes through? This schedule is for a California system 10 years ago..so maybe it's changed? I thought all med schools were standard? Am I wrong on that?

Money it costs to attain your PhD?...varies from school to school. It's not cheap...last report I heard one too soon to be doctor grad stated she would have almost 300 grand in loans to repay. :eh: I mean holy cow and flying frogs! That's expensive!

As for interns and residency...why do you think nurses like me constantly feed these poor kids? They don't make enough money to live..much less live well. Can't tell you how many times the only decent meal our baby docs got was the twice a week buffet we nurses set up for them. I know how pitiful the pay is...no reason for it..especially with the hours you all pull. It's a rough ride to be sure. Not for the faint of heart! :hand:

A general surgeon can demand an average salary of ~$200,000 a year. That's after 4 years of Med School and 5 years residency (total 9 years. Also, they make FAR more than I do in residency (I make $20k and they make $45k!!!)).

The pay is wide and diverse. 200 grand a year here wouldn't get you much. Cali is expensive to say the very least. I don't recommend doctors making one pay scale..as individual economic areas are varied in the cost of living.

Market demand SHOULD drive salaries, but in this case, it is hard to tell if it does! In terms of investment of years in school, MD's have it VERY easy right now!

Oh..I'm sure there are doctors out there that would disagree with you. :eh: nothing easy about todays current climate within the field of medicine. Many private practice doctors are willing to shut everything down and run to the shelter of a larger run medical system rather then tough it out on their own. The expense to stay out there on your own two feet is astounding and staggering. When going into a system..you watch your pay fall drastically lower then what a private practice can bring. But...you are sheltered from all that cost of operating a private practice with mal practice insurance. ;)


It's hard to tell how much waste there is until you hire consultants, and unfortunately, you must spend money to do so. It's also hard to determine if said waste is the only issue in the healthcare industry today!

You don't need a consultant to tell you how much waste there is inlaid within the medical system. From admin to janitors...there is waste. In the insurance and pharmaceutical side..it's not fair to call it waste...so lets call it what it is...higher and higher profits for less service or product rendered. Goodie for them within capitalism right? If this were any other product, the market itself would allow them to fail or prosper. It's not just any business though..it's human lives..so they get away with murder.


See, I'm still not sold on "supply side." I think that short term ramifications of placing more tax burden on the rich would be a negative fluctuation on the market, but mostly because they are used to certain luxuries that their current net pay can afford!

I understand your logic. I get it..I do. I pull back from that specific picture and look at the larger picture. Why is it the wealthy s job to take care of those who aren't wealthy? Who is defining wealth? The government? God..that's scary isn't it? What happens when wealth is determined to be your measly 90 grand a year? Will you feel the same way? What if your partner/wife/husband makes the same as you? Man..there's no running from the tax man then...as a two income family you'll be the governments poster child for the 'new' rich. How does that make you feel? Makes me darn mad. You went to school...did the hard time...worked hard...why should you have to take care of someone like me? (disabled/chronic terminal) It's not fair to those who work hard..it's un-American for gods sake!

Like I said..I must be nuts right?..as I would fall into the category of who would be helped. I don't want help...I can do it on my own if I'm very careful. That's the way it should be..it's the way the cookie crumbles as it where. I can live with that. I can hold my head up high that I'm at least self sufficient. God..at least let me have that last bit of respect...not to be a burden upon my fellow countrymen.

Is $500,000 alot of money for you to live on?

omg yes its allot for me to live on! Holy cow...wanna go to Cancun? lol

Well, upper class people in NY city apparently cannot live on less than that! http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/02/poor_little_rich_boys.php

But that has more to do with the economics of the area..price of living verses wages.

Glut at the top distorts prices to the effect that social stratification worsens at the bottom due to the inflation. True, the wasteful spending of the rich could supply people at the bottom with jobs or boons, but there is only so much leeway we can provide to the rich. Also, what if they decide to SAVE their income or invest it ELSEWHERE!?

It's there money to do with as they wish. They can give to charity or spend it all on themselves in lavish lifestyle of the rich and famous. Why should they be punished for having more? See, this is where I get really enraged that the government would even think to punish and demand the wealthy give more just cuz they have it. Makes no sense to me at all. Fair tax..everyone pays 10%...that I can go along with. That's fair. What is being proposed currently is unfair in my opinion.

I'm no economist, but I see a problem with placing trust in ANY social class for the expansion of our economy. MODERATION is a missing element in economics these days...

and I agree with that.

~Mysty

[King Cantona]

Hate to tell ya King..but some of your own countries government officials seem to agree that socialized health care IS the nightmare we think it will be. They are warning us not to follow in their footsteps.

Why...well maybe the link below can fill in the blanks?

http://www.angelfire.com/pa/sergeman/issues/healthcare/socialized.html

Truth hurts buddy. America may have a flawed (and what system isn't?)and expensive system (you get what you pay for)..within medical science and care itself..we are the best of the best of the best Sir! Why do you think other countries dignitaries, officials and VIP's come here instead of being treated in their own country's? With so many horror stories about socialized health care in other country's..do you really blame them for wanting the best treatment available?

~Mysty

There are a lot of Americans who have NO healthcare, there is no one in Britain who is without healthcare....

If you live in Britain you can go private you know, there is a kind of two tier system whereby you can use private healthcare instead of roughing it with the plebs...;)...

But I think you know I'm cheap so I don't go that route besides you meet a better class of people on the NHS......;).......

I'm certainly not going to criticise the level of care in the US because I have had experience of it and can't praise it highly enough but I'm just critical of the fact that I saw someone's house get reposessed in order to pay for their healthcare...

I saw this happen and it is something that could never EVER happen in this country....

[mysticbeauty_nbeast]

There are a lot of Americans who have NO healthcare, there is no one in Britain who is without healthcare....

If you live in Britain you can go private you know, there is a kind of two tier system whereby you can use private healthcare instead of roughing it with the plebs...;)...

But I think you know I'm cheap so I don't go that route besides you meet a better class of people on the NHS......;).......

I'm certainly not going to criticise the level of care in the US because I have had experience of it and can't praise it highly enough but I'm just critical of the fact that someone's house got reposessed in order to pay for it...

I saw this happen and it is something that could never EVER happen in this country....

No One in America goes without health care. No One. :shhh: I'm positive of this as I worked one of this states most busy ER's. :shhh: Regardless what you have or don't have...you will be seen and treated in an ER..and through that..no one goes without health care.

The cost of that type of care...astounding. Using an ER room as your personal doctors office is hurting and hiking up the price of health care in America..true..all true. But no one is left on the street to die in this country. No one is told 'oh well, you have no insurance..so your screwed'. :eh: Doesn't happen without a huge lawsuit and media coverage..that I can assure you.

Now on a personal note...my own condition has brought the financial burden and near breaking point for my own family. Stuff happens. I can't be insured due to my condition...that's just the way it is. Do I still see my doctor once a month...yup. do I receive great care? ...yup. :dance: Can they cure me? nope...Did I have to file bankruptcy? No..no I did not. could I have?...sure. But why? No reason. I pay what I owe. :shhh:

The stories of families loosing their homes...loosing everything they worked hard for...here's the real back story to that..they were living above their means. Hard truth..but there it is. These people bought more home then they could afford, lived off credit cards and drive newer cars...and never once thought a medical tragedy could befall them; and in that, did not invest in what is the most important thing to purchases...medical and life insurance. That's just ignorance at it's best to think one doesn't need it due to age or current health. It's sad...and true..I feel bad for those that have to learn the hard way...

All the sob stories in the world won't convince me that taxing the hell outta the supposed wealthy and doling out substandard care to those who won't or can';t afford insurance is the way to go.

~Mysty

[DRF]

I know that if I say the British system is better you'll provide links to show the bad parts of it as if they're the norm... ...

You are right, here you go. http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/secondhandsmoke/2009/07/21/most-cancer-survival-rates-in-usa-better-than-europe-and-canada/ (http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/secondhandsmoke/2009/07/21/most-cancer-survival-rates-in-usa-better-than-europe-and-canada/)

The cancer survival rates in the US are better than in Europe. How long do you wait to see a specialist? Our wait, a few days, could be less depending on the urgency We don't have the government rationing our care. Individuals and their doctors make important healthcare decisions. And if you don't like one doctor's opinion, you are free to see another... and another. Where do people from all over the world go when they have an ailment that no one else seems able to treat? Our healthcare system may not be perfect but I believe it is the best in the world. I have also heard that the British Goverment Healthcare system is going bankrupt. Is that true?

I would say that a system that requires people to be insured in order to receive healthcare is bound to be flawed. A mate of mine who lives in the US has a girlfriend who is a waitress, the trouble is that her employer won't give her enough hours so he doesn't have to pay for her healthcare...

Perhaps she would qualify for Medicare/Medicade. As Misty said in another post, NO ONE in the USA is denied care ever.

We don't have a healthcare crisis. We have a healthcare system that needs some improvement and a president who likes to label everything as a crisis... as his administration has been quoted as saying "a crisis is a terrible thing to waste." If he says we are in a crisis enough times he hopes enough people will believe it. However, 80-90% of Americans her satisfied with their current healthcare and do not wish to make a change.

Our healthcare system ran much better about 20 years ago, before the introduction of HMO's.

Unfortunatly America has a huge problem with illegals crossing the Mexican border. They create a huge financial burden to the rest of the citizens in many ways, healthcare being just one. And now we have a president who wants to reward their illegal behavior with more entitlements, like healthcare, so that they will vote for him in the next election. According to the current health care plan being debated, individuals will be charged a penalty for not having health insurance. Illegals are not being made to pay their medical bills, how will the governmnet track them down to pay a penatly? No, they will continue to receive free healthcare on the backs of legal citizens.

And one last note - our goverment has yet to run any successful program. Social Security is expected to be bankrupt, Medicare is fading fast, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac..why would anyone give the goverment the chance to run their healthcare.

[King Cantona]

The stories of families loosing their homes...loosing everything they worked hard for...here's the real back story to that..they were living above their means. Hard truth..but there it is. These people bought more home then they could afford, lived off credit cards and drive newer cars...and never once thought a medical tragedy could befall them; and in that, did not invest in what is the most important thing to purchases...medical and life insurance. That's just ignorance at it's best to think one doesn't need it due to age or current health. It's sad...and true..I feel bad for those that have to learn the hard way...


I really don't believe that the old man I met in hospital was living above his means, he had payed off his mortgage and was going to bequeath his house to his son...

The trouble is that his wife got alzheimers, that is what messed up things for him, I'm not sure he even had a car. When my brother and I dropped his son off at the house one day there was no car outside, that's as far as I can remember but I had been in a coma a couple of weeks before that so I can't be trusted to be accurate...

Anyway even if they did live above their means, no one in Britain would lose their house, I'm glad that you're happy with your system because I'm happy with ours...

[King Cantona]

Our healthcare system may not be perfect but I believe it is the best in the world. I have also heard that the British Goverment Healthcare system is going bankrupt. Is that true?



It costs an awful lot of money, that's true and I think this whole country is in debt to a massive degree. One thing that needles a hell of a lot of people, not just me is that we bailed out the banks and they're paying the bosses million pound bonuses with it....:mad:...

Add to that the expenses scandal and I've got steam coming out of my ears...

[DRF]

I really don't believe that the old man I met in hospital was living above his means, he had payed off his mortgage and was going to bequeath his house to his son...

The trouble is that his wife got alzheimers, that is what messed up things for him, I'm not sure he even had a car. When my brother and I dropped his son off at the house one day there was no car outside, that's as far as I can remember but I had been in a coma a couple of weeks before that so I can't be trusted to be accurate...

Anyway even if they did live above their means, no one in Britain would lose their house, I'm glad that you're happy with your system because I'm happy with ours...

It does not sound like the couple you are speaking of was looking for treatment for alzheimers, they were looking for a facility to take care of her, for her to live in, that would take care of her for the rest of her life. This is not an average health care situation. This is long term care. My grandparents went through this. My grandmother's memory was gone and she needed 24 hour supervision and care, something my grandfather was not able to provide. So in exchange for half of their combined assets (her share) a facilty tool her in and cared for her for the rest of her life. The "work around" is as you get older to put your house and anything big in your child's or another family member's name years before you get in this situation.

[DRF]

One thing that needles a hell of a lot of people, not just me is that we bailed out the banks and they're paying the bosses million pound bonuses with it....:mad:...

Add to that the expenses scandal and I've got steam coming out of my ears...

Sounds a lot like the $1,000,000,000 "stiumuls" package Obama pushed through that makes steam come out of my ears :). It too is being mismanaged..... which just adds to the arguement why would anyone give this government the task to manage their healtcare? They can't manage anything without huge amounts of waste and then eventually running it into the ground.

I think what we really need is private health insurance that individuls can purchase much like they purchase auto insurance. I think the competition of free markets would help keep the costs down. I would also like to see some torte reform. Obama says that doctors prescribe unncessary tests as a way to make money. I think that's wrong, as most often the doctor sends you to another doctor or a lab for the test. I think sometimes doctors order many tests to avoid a law suit should something go wrong.