Don’t all of those insurance company employees get some of the profit? I kept waiting for the punch line. My father has government-run health care– it’s called the VA. It’s horrible. So why not add 50 million or so to the government tit.
I’ve been a long time reader, but this is my first comment, and I just had to comment on this one.
I would be all for this if only the legal, tax paying citizens were allowed to take advantage of it. The system doesn’t work when illegal aliens are going to take advantage of it without contributing to the pot. It’s just going to make taxes higher for those of us that pay our taxes (and speak English).
Ah, why didn’t he include the list of government programs that are failing? Maybe they won’t fail because they will just raise our taxes to keep them going. They will do the same for ObamaCare.
National health care isn’t about profit, but it is about keeping costs down (to keep taxes low). That’s essentially the same thing. Keeping taxes low is analogous to paying off share holders. With Medicare, to keep costs down the government dictates how much they will pay for procedures. Hospitals have basically no choice but to accept the lower than average rates that Medicare demands. They make up the difference from people with private insurance or those paying out of pocket.
The fear is that with national health care, private insurance will phase out as it is unable to compete with a government subsidized system. The medical insurance business would turn into a one provider system over time. As the only provider, the government will drive down the cost of medical care until there is no profit in medicine. The result would be few people becoming doctors and nurses, a decrease in the quality of care, and little incentive for investing in R&D to create new drugs, new instruments, or develop new procedures.
On top of this, there is concern that by providing 50 million new people insurance tomorrow, the medical system would be overwhelmed, unable to absorb the increased load. This would result in a decrease in quality of care for those who are currently insured.
Sure, some aspects of nationalized health care sounds great, but for the 85% of people with health insurance already they do not want it at the expense of their own quality of care.
Note: My points haven’t been clearly defined in terms of the problems of national health care vs. universal health care thus muddying the argument a little bit, but most of the bills proposed so far have been some combination of both, so I hope you will forgive this.
In reforming the health insurance problems in the US, tort reform would seem to be a logical early step. But of course, it’s not in the bill. And yesterday, ex-Dem head Screamin Howard Dean admitted that it’s because Obama and the Democratic congress are in bed with the trial lawyers…
Asked by an audience member why the legislation does nothing to cap medical malpractice class-action lawsuits against doctors and medical institutions (aka “Tort reform”), Dean responded by saying: “This is the answer from a doctor and a politician. Here’s why tort reform is not in the bill. When you go to pass a really enormous bill like that, the more stuff you put in it, the more enemies you make, right? And the reason that tort reform is not in the bill is because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers in addition to everyone else they were taking on. And that is the plain and simple truth.” http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Dean-says-Obamacare-authors-dont-want-to-challenge-trial-lawyers-55140567.html
Agreed “X”– Social Security – broke. Medicare, Medicaid – broke. Cash for clunkers broke in 9 days. A trip to the local DMV should tell you all you need to know.
One of the funny things about the video is the way he goes on comparing firefighters with fire-fighting insurance and using this as an argument for socialized medicine. This guy is an obvious idiot: firefighters are run by local governments (like cities and counties), not by the federal government. Just because a local government can run something well does NOT mean that the federal government can run something well. And with poorly-run examples such as the USPS, Medicare, Medicaid, the VA, and the “cash for clunkers” program, the federal government is far from proving they can run anything well. Heck, even the FDA is not so well run–it mostly takes drug companies’ word that a drug is good to approve it.
And if the socialized health care known as ObamaCare is so good, why is Congress exempt from it?
If the government was truly wanting to fix what is broken with health care, they would attack tort reform and other issues like what DJ mentioned.
The federal government doesn’t pay for police and fire, local governments do. Others above me stole my thunder though; USPS, Medicare, Social Security, Cash for Clunkers; all great examples of federal government programs.
The “Pool” at 1:15 show many people adding money into the “Pool” and one sick person receiving benefits. That seem to make sense, but that is how Social Security work, or should have work. The ratio changed. And health cares is so much more expensive.
At 3.:08, he listed police, fire, and water as efficient government. The police and fire may be funded by taxes, but they are not run by politicians that are owned by lobbyists.
I hope this debate does not prevent health insurance reform. I think there are a lot of things the government can do to improve the system, but they are unable to run crap.
Complete tripe! Those thinking that maybe this ONE time, we can have a government take over and run something efficiently are deluded. Not to mention this item we are talking about is 1/6 of GDP!
“Heck, even the FDA is not so well run–it mostly takes drug companies’ word that a drug is good to approve it.”
Um, that’s absolutely not true. For the FDA to approve it, a drug needs to pass a multi-phase test that ideally is non-biased. That being said, like mentioned above I sat through that waiting for the punchline. The whole thing could technically be a joke, but there was no funny 🙁 Honestly this guy’s comparisons made no sense whatsoever. I mean that “fire-fighting insurance”…what? He’s insinuating 100% of doctors and hospitals would be in for this, which sadly is what Obama is trying to mandate. That would essentially put millions of doctors out of a job, which hell, would be realistic anyway as millions would leave the industry.
He also concentrates on the consumer. Please tell me what consumer can get healed in the first place if there aren’t doctors to take care of them? Doctors will be unable to pay their loans, and likely go into different fields. Others will realize that they’re getting paid essentially nothing for the extra seven years of their lives and copious amounts of hard work, and never go into medicine in the first place. I don’t know what idiots expect doctors to be all charity workers, but just like with anything else in life, they expect hard work to be paid off. This is no exception. If you’re gonna make med school ridiculously easy to get into, and not take an extra seven years of their lives, and make the work pretty much non-existent, then it might be fair to dock their pay down to sad levels, but as it stands now doctors wouldn’t be able to pay their loans off within their lives.
This leads to a shortage of doctors. This leads to a rationing of healthcare. This leads to a much lower standard of care.
The government really does make everything needlessly more complicated, and I ask you: do you want some politician deciding on whether or not you should get a treatment based on whether or not it was cost-efficient, if it impacted your quality of life? Only people who actually go to medical school should be in charge of what options to give you.
To be honest, I’m surprised to see this kind of thing here, Jonco.
ok, so I’m Australian, we have a government run Health care – Medicare. I also pay for my own private Health insurance. Why – well, the thing is, because of Medicare I can walk into a health centre and get a FREE checkup whenever I have to. However, as I also have a few medical problems, the private health (which is non-profit run, therefore they will not knock you back for some lamo reason) means that if I need to go into a private hospital and get the procedure sooner rather than later. If I didn’t have private health, I could still get the procedure at a public hospital, but I might have to wait a little longer.
I watched Sicko by Michael Moore and was appalled at the American Health system. It isn’t about “why should we have to pay for someone else’s health problems?” its about every person having the basic human right of health care. When I pay my taxes, I don’t feel like I’m be robbed for someone I do not know to get an operation, I’m happy knowing that I live in a country that will do whatever it takes to save someone’s life, regardless of there situation, whether they are Australian or immigrant, or whether or not they have health cover or not. Because one day, I might be the person who needs to be saved.
Michael Moore is propagandist, pure and simple. He openly wishes for the demise of capitalism, you know, the system that made him rich. If you’re taking his word for anything, you’re drinking vast amounts of Kool-aid!
I’m in Canada and we have a single payer system up here. Works just fine and any politician that even thought about taking it away would get butchered. The single payer system is handled at the provincial level up here with the backing of the federal government.
Maybe government programs in the US don’t work because they’re designed to be non-functional or, equivalently, they’re designed by people that hate government and don’t think government can do anything right. Have y’all considered this possibility? You’re entire system of government might be sabotaged.
Why is it that Americans hate each other so much? If you live in New Orleans, you deserve to get flooded; if you live in Oklahoma, you deserve to get tornadoed; if you live in California, you deserve to get earth quaked; …
The pols keep yapping about coverage for the poor. Here in the Atlanta area, anybody can walk into a level three trauma center (Grady Hospital) and get whatever care is needed at no cost to them. The local taxpayers foot the bill. Maybe this helps to keep the number of uninsured at a high level. Why pay for something that is free?
No tort reform…no passage.
And while I’m on the subject, who would get health insurance at all if they were not restricted by a pre-existing condition? Just don’t get insurance until you get sick.
If what the pols are planning is so great, why don’t THEY want it for themselves? It is all politics again and we are the fools that will have to suffer the consequences. If they were serious about controlling costs, they would address malpractice reform. But why would they do that? Most of them are lawyers, including OBAMA and his misses. Not to mention the trial lawyers campaign contributions. DON’T DRINK THE COOL-AID!!
Mu, what the hell are you talking about? The morons that got flooded out REFUSED to leave, after multiple warnings. And then when the government tried to help them, they shot at Coast Guard helicopters, looted stores, fought with law enforcement officers and so on. Many of them are STILL living in government housing. We Americans don’t hate each other, we just refuse to help those who will not help themselves. The folks that got flooded in neighboring states got off their asses and saved themselves. I’m all for a hand up but not a hand out!
Hey Jonco, you sure know how to open a can of worms- thank God we live in a country where we can espouse our views without fear of retribution from the big bad government!
Where are you going with that? So how often do you use USPS to send something vs UPS. If you love UPS so much, why are you sending letters via USPS? I guarantee you that for the vast majority of Americans, USPS is utilized probably on a 1000:1 ratio over UPS/FEDEX. And it works just fine.
And remember, this universal plan is just a public option, just like the USPS is a public option. If you don’t like it, you can use your UPS if you so chose to. You basically just proved why the public option is a good thing by bring up USPS along with UPS.
And if you’re implying that the USPS is doing horribly, remember that they provide a service to others, especially businesses. As businesses go down, so does their mailings which results in less mail. That’s like blaming a Yacht Company for failing cause the economy tanked and people can’t buy yachts anymore.
And let’s not forget how DHL is no longer even delivering domestically.
Miss Cellania – I had to deal with Medicare during my mothers last years. It was interesting to interface with a system that was so ready to give away money to seniors for all kinds of treatment, as long as the doctors or hospitals did not get much of it. It was difficult to find doctors who would take Medicare because of the hassle and lack of receiving a reasonable payment. To all of the old folks who did not plan ahead, Medicare is better than nothing, but not much better.
I’ve often bashed government programs, but after being on Social Security for a year, I am satisfied with their professionalism.
Sander – “FedEx and United Parcel Service (UPS) directly compete with USPS express mail and package delivery services, making nationwide deliveries of urgent letters and packages. Due to the postal monopoly, they are not allowed to deliver non-urgent letters and may not use U.S. Mail boxes at residential and commercial destinations. These services also deliver packages which are larger and heavier than what the USPS will accept.”
The government allows no competition in letter delivery. Govt way or no way. I haven’t sent a package or large envelope USPS in decades. I don’t trust my important packages to the hung-over out-of-shape gov’t drones parked behind the mall sound asleep in their little old jeeps. Gimme high tech, fast, clean efficient any day. I’ll pay the little bit extra. I like having a choice.
A ‘public option’ ceases to be an option when private health care goes out of business due to competition from an entity that can operate at a deficit indefinitely or when it is forcibly removed by law. If I opened a lemonade stand and my mom and dad gave me all of my supplies, I could charge a nickel and it’s all profit to me because I don’t have any overhead. If you open one and have to pay for your supplies, etc. you’ll have to charge a quarter just to break even and you’ll eventually go out of business because I can undercut you at every step along the way.
MCW…Doctor rationing? If Town A has a lot of doctors, and Town B only has maybe one, can you see the government moving some out of Town A? Maybe moving them out of California, Massachusetts, Florida, NYC—and making them take up residence in Alabama, W Virginia, West Texas, North Dakota? It doesn’t seem like a very large next step, does it?
DJ – It would be easy to move doctors. “We’ll pay you 25 cents on the dollar if you stay in Florida, but the rate will be 75 cents on the dollar if you move to West Bumble, Montana.”
Yes! It’s refreshing to see things from such an “objective” point of view.
Why were money pit examples like USPS and Social Security left out of the presentation?
Private sector companies thrive in spite of “profits” where these programs will never carry their weight.
honestly, do we really believe a government health insurance will run without pork (profits) or exclusions of coverage?
And if the fire department is such a great example of a successful government program why does it have to be supplemented with volunteers?
Wake up, look around and be honest with yourself for once in your idealistic life.
Our system really works well in Canada, I wouldn’t trade it for anything. It’s fast, efficient, the care is top rate, and you never have to worry about what you can or can’t afford.
There is no rationing, no government officials ever get involved in the process, and nobody is ever denied coverage. There are no network restrictions, you can see whatever doctor you want to see. Pre-existing condition is a term that has no meaning, and we have total portability.
Anyone DOESN’T want a system like that is crazy IMO.
A simple comparison of USPS vs FedEx illustrates why this is an argument FOR Health Care (Insurance) Reform. According to USPS.COM, a 4-ounce letter could be sent out in a large envelope on Aug 31, and be received within 3 days (approximately) for about $1.39. A comparable size and weight in FedEx’s own envelope can be delivered within the same timeframe (I chose St Louis to Minneapolis as my example) for $12.94. Of course, if time’s not an issue, a simple .44 stamp can get a typical letter anywhere in the country, with door-to-door delivery.
But where the “the postal service proves that the gubmint can’t run health care” argument really falls apart is this: despite there being a low-cost alternative, UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. While the economy is hurting everyone’s bottom line, they are still posting healthy profits. The Socialized Letter Handling system (ObaMail?) hasn’t driven anyone out of business. So, if you really want to hold that up as an example, I think you’re shooting yourself in the foot.
I’m not a basher of the USPS, because I do think they do a great job within certain parameters. But they’re also in the red, constantly having to raise rates, still losing money (which has to be pumped in from somewhere), talking about closing/consolidating PO’s, and also closing another day or two per week. Additionally, as mentioned in a previous post, they’re in a monopoly position. No one else can deliver a first class letter. UPS & Fedex can’t touch a mailbox.
So…are we going to say Gov Ins is the only legal way to cover certain categories of illnesses if we’re to follow the USPS analogy? A private insurer can take care of internal organs, but only the Gov can handle external abrasions (private gets the high risk/high dollar, gov gets the high volume and routine)?
Of course not, that’s ludicrous. But we’re sitting around arguing whether one solution is better than the other, that it’s vile for a company to make a profit, and that costs are out of line.
But…what’s wrong with profit? That’s where a lot of retirement plans invest their money. Premiums are out of line and you can’t meet the costs? Do you take vacations? Play golf? Fish? Have a boat? Have other toys? If you had a choice between eating and going to a movie, which would you do? You take care of necessities. That means we should cut back and pay our premiums the same as another bill. Additionally, if insurance companies were making huge profits, this would be reflected as consistent double digit returns on their stocks. Is that happening? Can’t say I really follow the market, but I don’t think so.
Does that mean I don’t support reform? Of course not. But, there’s a huge difference between reform and a takeover. And do not delude yourself, government run healthcare will be a backdoor takeover; sort of a left-handed Sherman Antitrust bypass. When it’s no longer profitable, the insurance companies will go away. When it’s no longer profitable, physicians go away. When the physicians are gone, insurance coverage is a moot point. When the gov mandates all medical facilities provide the same types of services, the religious affiliates shut their doors.
We need to back up. Look at the problem, don’t randomly finance a solution. The problem isn’t high profits for insurance companies. Some of the problems are portability, pre-existing coverage, excessive malpractice claims, etc. Some of the solutions actually require deregulating some insurance laws to allow competition across state and regional lines, tort reform, centralized repositories of information via electronic medical records (yes, that means a central agency, probably the gov is going to house more of your personal information), etc. (BTW, no, I’m not employed by any insurance agency, law firm, or anyone that has a dog in this hunt). And don’t think that the gov in charge will result in lower costs. Sure, you won’t be writing a growing check to Healthcare Inc every month. But in it’s stead, you’ll be writing one to Uncle Sam.
We The Free and our representatives should depend on Facts Only and learn from history. No intelligent American can disagree that healthcare improvements are needed in the US. But how?
Should not those improvements start with The United States Department Of Veterans Affairs? (The VA) The VA is staffed with fine, hard working Americans which by definition, states Quality. State run programs compete for tax dollars and are often underfunded which by default leads to rationing. It’s a FACT & HISTORY has proven it. Most importantly, government limits the ability of caring Americans desiring to utilize their God given talents.
Confused Say: “One who blame business for making profit is confused”. Insurance companies employ many thousands of Americans that pay Taxes and Insurance and Taxes and Bills and Taxes. Insurance companies bet on your success. They also abide by contracts when failure occurs.
Should one be angry with their auto mechanic when he makes profit? Or Starbucks Coffee? Or Hollywood?
American Service Heroes expect sub-standard healthcare while many non-working Americans feel that healthcare expenses are a constitutional right.
Rent/Buy/Watch/Share the HBO “John Adams” special. Every American should be wise and appreciate the price paid for freedom in the USA.
Understand it! Fight for it! Preserve it for your children! Government Freedom Which is it?
U.S. Postal Service — established 1775 – 234 years to get it right but it’s broke, heavily subsidized, and can’t compete with private sector FedEx and UPS.
Social Security — established 1935 – 74 years to get it right; it’s broke.
Fannie Mae — established 1938 – 71 years to get it right; it’s broke.
Freddie Mac — established 1970 – 39 years to get it right; it’s broke. Together Fannie and Freddie pulled the entire world into the worst economic collapse in 80 years.
The War on Poverty — started in 1964 – 45 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our tax money is confiscated annually for redistribution to “the poor”; it hasn’t worked.
Medicare and Medicaid — established 1965 – 44 years to get it right; both broke; and now the government presents them as models for all US health care.
AMTRAK — established 1970 – 39 years to get it right; despite bailouts it continues to run at a loss!
The Stimulus Bill of 2009: A trillion dollars committed in this massive political show. It shows NO sign of success except to increase the size of governments across America. It has yet to create a single new private sector job. Our national debt projections (approaching $10 trillion) have increased 400% in the last six months.
“Cash for Clunkers” — established in 2009 and went broke in a matter of weeks. Most (80%) of the cars purchased were produced by foreign companies, and dealers nationwide are buried under bureaucratic paperwork demanded by a government that is not yet paying them what was promised.
Hey infidel, the video contained so many generalizations – not those pesky facts that you bring up. Socialism and communism may sound good on paper to the uninitiated, but the reality is something far different. Great comment, my man!
Everyone is quick to point out the problems with US HealthCare but no one has a solution. Current plan doesn’t work. Obama’s plan doesn’t make sense. So whats the solution?
Tiger,
The solution is to look at ALL the other industrialized countries in the world, examine their health care plans, and select the best features of each country to mold into what would then truly be the best health care system on the planet. But the pharmacy and insurance company lobbyists will never let that happen.
Spot on! All those in agreement shout “yea!”, all those who disagree move on to the next post.
Don’t all of those insurance company employees get some of the profit? I kept waiting for the punch line. My father has government-run health care– it’s called the VA. It’s horrible. So why not add 50 million or so to the government tit.
I’ve been a long time reader, but this is my first comment, and I just had to comment on this one.
I would be all for this if only the legal, tax paying citizens were allowed to take advantage of it. The system doesn’t work when illegal aliens are going to take advantage of it without contributing to the pot. It’s just going to make taxes higher for those of us that pay our taxes (and speak English).
Ah, why didn’t he include the list of government programs that are failing? Maybe they won’t fail because they will just raise our taxes to keep them going. They will do the same for ObamaCare.
Four letters for anyone who wants Government provided healthcare.
USPS
and a three-letter rebuttal
UPS
Need I say more?
Tim
National health care isn’t about profit, but it is about keeping costs down (to keep taxes low). That’s essentially the same thing. Keeping taxes low is analogous to paying off share holders. With Medicare, to keep costs down the government dictates how much they will pay for procedures. Hospitals have basically no choice but to accept the lower than average rates that Medicare demands. They make up the difference from people with private insurance or those paying out of pocket.
The fear is that with national health care, private insurance will phase out as it is unable to compete with a government subsidized system. The medical insurance business would turn into a one provider system over time. As the only provider, the government will drive down the cost of medical care until there is no profit in medicine. The result would be few people becoming doctors and nurses, a decrease in the quality of care, and little incentive for investing in R&D to create new drugs, new instruments, or develop new procedures.
On top of this, there is concern that by providing 50 million new people insurance tomorrow, the medical system would be overwhelmed, unable to absorb the increased load. This would result in a decrease in quality of care for those who are currently insured.
Sure, some aspects of nationalized health care sounds great, but for the 85% of people with health insurance already they do not want it at the expense of their own quality of care.
Note: My points haven’t been clearly defined in terms of the problems of national health care vs. universal health care thus muddying the argument a little bit, but most of the bills proposed so far have been some combination of both, so I hope you will forgive this.
In reforming the health insurance problems in the US, tort reform would seem to be a logical early step. But of course, it’s not in the bill. And yesterday, ex-Dem head Screamin Howard Dean admitted that it’s because Obama and the Democratic congress are in bed with the trial lawyers…
Asked by an audience member why the legislation does nothing to cap medical malpractice class-action lawsuits against doctors and medical institutions (aka “Tort reform”), Dean responded by saying: “This is the answer from a doctor and a politician. Here’s why tort reform is not in the bill. When you go to pass a really enormous bill like that, the more stuff you put in it, the more enemies you make, right? And the reason that tort reform is not in the bill is because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers in addition to everyone else they were taking on. And that is the plain and simple truth.”
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Dean-says-Obamacare-authors-dont-want-to-challenge-trial-lawyers-55140567.html
Cowracer – 4 letters? 3 letters? I can beat that: VA
A government that can’t even successfully run the “Cars for Clunkers” program is not an entity I want running healthcare.
Agreed “X”– Social Security – broke. Medicare, Medicaid – broke. Cash for clunkers broke in 9 days. A trip to the local DMV should tell you all you need to know.
the VA is socialized medicine, we’re talking about socialized medical insurance — apples to oranges.
That should read “Cash for Clunkers”
One of the funny things about the video is the way he goes on comparing firefighters with fire-fighting insurance and using this as an argument for socialized medicine. This guy is an obvious idiot: firefighters are run by local governments (like cities and counties), not by the federal government. Just because a local government can run something well does NOT mean that the federal government can run something well. And with poorly-run examples such as the USPS, Medicare, Medicaid, the VA, and the “cash for clunkers” program, the federal government is far from proving they can run anything well. Heck, even the FDA is not so well run–it mostly takes drug companies’ word that a drug is good to approve it.
And if the socialized health care known as ObamaCare is so good, why is Congress exempt from it?
If the government was truly wanting to fix what is broken with health care, they would attack tort reform and other issues like what DJ mentioned.
Stupid is as stupid does…
The federal government doesn’t pay for police and fire, local governments do. Others above me stole my thunder though; USPS, Medicare, Social Security, Cash for Clunkers; all great examples of federal government programs.
The “Pool” at 1:15 show many people adding money into the “Pool” and one sick person receiving benefits. That seem to make sense, but that is how Social Security work, or should have work. The ratio changed. And health cares is so much more expensive.
At 3.:08, he listed police, fire, and water as efficient government. The police and fire may be funded by taxes, but they are not run by politicians that are owned by lobbyists.
I hope this debate does not prevent health insurance reform. I think there are a lot of things the government can do to improve the system, but they are unable to run crap.
yea, lets all trade american citizens making a profit for goverment getting more power
Complete tripe! Those thinking that maybe this ONE time, we can have a government take over and run something efficiently are deluded. Not to mention this item we are talking about is 1/6 of GDP!
“Heck, even the FDA is not so well run–it mostly takes drug companies’ word that a drug is good to approve it.”
Um, that’s absolutely not true. For the FDA to approve it, a drug needs to pass a multi-phase test that ideally is non-biased. That being said, like mentioned above I sat through that waiting for the punchline. The whole thing could technically be a joke, but there was no funny 🙁 Honestly this guy’s comparisons made no sense whatsoever. I mean that “fire-fighting insurance”…what? He’s insinuating 100% of doctors and hospitals would be in for this, which sadly is what Obama is trying to mandate. That would essentially put millions of doctors out of a job, which hell, would be realistic anyway as millions would leave the industry.
He also concentrates on the consumer. Please tell me what consumer can get healed in the first place if there aren’t doctors to take care of them? Doctors will be unable to pay their loans, and likely go into different fields. Others will realize that they’re getting paid essentially nothing for the extra seven years of their lives and copious amounts of hard work, and never go into medicine in the first place. I don’t know what idiots expect doctors to be all charity workers, but just like with anything else in life, they expect hard work to be paid off. This is no exception. If you’re gonna make med school ridiculously easy to get into, and not take an extra seven years of their lives, and make the work pretty much non-existent, then it might be fair to dock their pay down to sad levels, but as it stands now doctors wouldn’t be able to pay their loans off within their lives.
This leads to a shortage of doctors. This leads to a rationing of healthcare. This leads to a much lower standard of care.
The government really does make everything needlessly more complicated, and I ask you: do you want some politician deciding on whether or not you should get a treatment based on whether or not it was cost-efficient, if it impacted your quality of life? Only people who actually go to medical school should be in charge of what options to give you.
To be honest, I’m surprised to see this kind of thing here, Jonco.
ok, so I’m Australian, we have a government run Health care – Medicare. I also pay for my own private Health insurance. Why – well, the thing is, because of Medicare I can walk into a health centre and get a FREE checkup whenever I have to. However, as I also have a few medical problems, the private health (which is non-profit run, therefore they will not knock you back for some lamo reason) means that if I need to go into a private hospital and get the procedure sooner rather than later. If I didn’t have private health, I could still get the procedure at a public hospital, but I might have to wait a little longer.
I watched Sicko by Michael Moore and was appalled at the American Health system. It isn’t about “why should we have to pay for someone else’s health problems?” its about every person having the basic human right of health care. When I pay my taxes, I don’t feel like I’m be robbed for someone I do not know to get an operation, I’m happy knowing that I live in a country that will do whatever it takes to save someone’s life, regardless of there situation, whether they are Australian or immigrant, or whether or not they have health cover or not. Because one day, I might be the person who needs to be saved.
Michael Moore is propagandist, pure and simple. He openly wishes for the demise of capitalism, you know, the system that made him rich. If you’re taking his word for anything, you’re drinking vast amounts of Kool-aid!
I’m in Canada and we have a single payer system up here. Works just fine and any politician that even thought about taking it away would get butchered. The single payer system is handled at the provincial level up here with the backing of the federal government.
Maybe government programs in the US don’t work because they’re designed to be non-functional or, equivalently, they’re designed by people that hate government and don’t think government can do anything right. Have y’all considered this possibility? You’re entire system of government might be sabotaged.
Why is it that Americans hate each other so much? If you live in New Orleans, you deserve to get flooded; if you live in Oklahoma, you deserve to get tornadoed; if you live in California, you deserve to get earth quaked; …
The pols keep yapping about coverage for the poor. Here in the Atlanta area, anybody can walk into a level three trauma center (Grady Hospital) and get whatever care is needed at no cost to them. The local taxpayers foot the bill. Maybe this helps to keep the number of uninsured at a high level. Why pay for something that is free?
No tort reform…no passage.
And while I’m on the subject, who would get health insurance at all if they were not restricted by a pre-existing condition? Just don’t get insurance until you get sick.
If what the pols are planning is so great, why don’t THEY want it for themselves? It is all politics again and we are the fools that will have to suffer the consequences. If they were serious about controlling costs, they would address malpractice reform. But why would they do that? Most of them are lawyers, including OBAMA and his misses. Not to mention the trial lawyers campaign contributions. DON’T DRINK THE COOL-AID!!
Canadian Health Officials: Our Universal Health Care Is ‘Sick,’ Private Insurance Should Be Welcomed: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,539943,00.html
Canadian Newspaper Editorial: Canadian health care is no model: http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=1902983
Do y’all really think Medicare is a failed program? Then why are the recipients defending their turf so vociferously?
Mu, what the hell are you talking about? The morons that got flooded out REFUSED to leave, after multiple warnings. And then when the government tried to help them, they shot at Coast Guard helicopters, looted stores, fought with law enforcement officers and so on. Many of them are STILL living in government housing. We Americans don’t hate each other, we just refuse to help those who will not help themselves. The folks that got flooded in neighboring states got off their asses and saved themselves. I’m all for a hand up but not a hand out!
Hey Jonco, you sure know how to open a can of worms- thank God we live in a country where we can espouse our views without fear of retribution from the big bad government!
@Cowracer with his UPS vs USPS analogy…
Where are you going with that? So how often do you use USPS to send something vs UPS. If you love UPS so much, why are you sending letters via USPS? I guarantee you that for the vast majority of Americans, USPS is utilized probably on a 1000:1 ratio over UPS/FEDEX. And it works just fine.
And remember, this universal plan is just a public option, just like the USPS is a public option. If you don’t like it, you can use your UPS if you so chose to. You basically just proved why the public option is a good thing by bring up USPS along with UPS.
And if you’re implying that the USPS is doing horribly, remember that they provide a service to others, especially businesses. As businesses go down, so does their mailings which results in less mail. That’s like blaming a Yacht Company for failing cause the economy tanked and people can’t buy yachts anymore.
And let’s not forget how DHL is no longer even delivering domestically.
Miss Cellania – I had to deal with Medicare during my mothers last years. It was interesting to interface with a system that was so ready to give away money to seniors for all kinds of treatment, as long as the doctors or hospitals did not get much of it. It was difficult to find doctors who would take Medicare because of the hassle and lack of receiving a reasonable payment. To all of the old folks who did not plan ahead, Medicare is better than nothing, but not much better.
I’ve often bashed government programs, but after being on Social Security for a year, I am satisfied with their professionalism.
Sander – You can’t use UPS or FEDEX to send first class mail or certified mail. Nor can you send any kind of package to a mailbox.
“Spot on! All those in agreement shout “yea!”, all those who disagree move on to the next post.”
This attitude is universal for supporters of big government.
Sander – “FedEx and United Parcel Service (UPS) directly compete with USPS express mail and package delivery services, making nationwide deliveries of urgent letters and packages. Due to the postal monopoly, they are not allowed to deliver non-urgent letters and may not use U.S. Mail boxes at residential and commercial destinations. These services also deliver packages which are larger and heavier than what the USPS will accept.”
The government allows no competition in letter delivery. Govt way or no way. I haven’t sent a package or large envelope USPS in decades. I don’t trust my important packages to the hung-over out-of-shape gov’t drones parked behind the mall sound asleep in their little old jeeps. Gimme high tech, fast, clean efficient any day. I’ll pay the little bit extra. I like having a choice.
A ‘public option’ ceases to be an option when private health care goes out of business due to competition from an entity that can operate at a deficit indefinitely or when it is forcibly removed by law. If I opened a lemonade stand and my mom and dad gave me all of my supplies, I could charge a nickel and it’s all profit to me because I don’t have any overhead. If you open one and have to pay for your supplies, etc. you’ll have to charge a quarter just to break even and you’ll eventually go out of business because I can undercut you at every step along the way.
Good points DJ. BTW, if we GIVE full health coverage to that many people, where are all of the extra doctors going to come from?
MCW…Doctor rationing? If Town A has a lot of doctors, and Town B only has maybe one, can you see the government moving some out of Town A? Maybe moving them out of California, Massachusetts, Florida, NYC—and making them take up residence in Alabama, W Virginia, West Texas, North Dakota? It doesn’t seem like a very large next step, does it?
DJ – It would be easy to move doctors. “We’ll pay you 25 cents on the dollar if you stay in Florida, but the rate will be 75 cents on the dollar if you move to West Bumble, Montana.”
Yes! It’s refreshing to see things from such an “objective” point of view.
Why were money pit examples like USPS and Social Security left out of the presentation?
Private sector companies thrive in spite of “profits” where these programs will never carry their weight.
honestly, do we really believe a government health insurance will run without pork (profits) or exclusions of coverage?
And if the fire department is such a great example of a successful government program why does it have to be supplemented with volunteers?
Wake up, look around and be honest with yourself for once in your idealistic life.
Our system really works well in Canada, I wouldn’t trade it for anything. It’s fast, efficient, the care is top rate, and you never have to worry about what you can or can’t afford.
There is no rationing, no government officials ever get involved in the process, and nobody is ever denied coverage. There are no network restrictions, you can see whatever doctor you want to see. Pre-existing condition is a term that has no meaning, and we have total portability.
Anyone DOESN’T want a system like that is crazy IMO.
[quote]Author=Brrr
“no government officials ever get involved”
[/quote]
You obviously have not seen the flowchart actually approved by those pushing this health care “reform”.
The government is in every other step of the process being proposed.
Here’s the link, actually hosted by “house.gov”
To clarify … every box in color is a government agency.
A simple comparison of USPS vs FedEx illustrates why this is an argument FOR Health Care (Insurance) Reform. According to USPS.COM, a 4-ounce letter could be sent out in a large envelope on Aug 31, and be received within 3 days (approximately) for about $1.39. A comparable size and weight in FedEx’s own envelope can be delivered within the same timeframe (I chose St Louis to Minneapolis as my example) for $12.94. Of course, if time’s not an issue, a simple .44 stamp can get a typical letter anywhere in the country, with door-to-door delivery.
But where the “the postal service proves that the gubmint can’t run health care” argument really falls apart is this: despite there being a low-cost alternative, UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. While the economy is hurting everyone’s bottom line, they are still posting healthy profits. The Socialized Letter Handling system (ObaMail?) hasn’t driven anyone out of business. So, if you really want to hold that up as an example, I think you’re shooting yourself in the foot.
Dave, that flow chart was introduced by a Congressman that was speaking AGAINST reform. I believe that was his own creation.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-july-23-2009/white-house-m-d-
I’m not a basher of the USPS, because I do think they do a great job within certain parameters. But they’re also in the red, constantly having to raise rates, still losing money (which has to be pumped in from somewhere), talking about closing/consolidating PO’s, and also closing another day or two per week. Additionally, as mentioned in a previous post, they’re in a monopoly position. No one else can deliver a first class letter. UPS & Fedex can’t touch a mailbox.
So…are we going to say Gov Ins is the only legal way to cover certain categories of illnesses if we’re to follow the USPS analogy? A private insurer can take care of internal organs, but only the Gov can handle external abrasions (private gets the high risk/high dollar, gov gets the high volume and routine)?
Of course not, that’s ludicrous. But we’re sitting around arguing whether one solution is better than the other, that it’s vile for a company to make a profit, and that costs are out of line.
But…what’s wrong with profit? That’s where a lot of retirement plans invest their money. Premiums are out of line and you can’t meet the costs? Do you take vacations? Play golf? Fish? Have a boat? Have other toys? If you had a choice between eating and going to a movie, which would you do? You take care of necessities. That means we should cut back and pay our premiums the same as another bill. Additionally, if insurance companies were making huge profits, this would be reflected as consistent double digit returns on their stocks. Is that happening? Can’t say I really follow the market, but I don’t think so.
Does that mean I don’t support reform? Of course not. But, there’s a huge difference between reform and a takeover. And do not delude yourself, government run healthcare will be a backdoor takeover; sort of a left-handed Sherman Antitrust bypass. When it’s no longer profitable, the insurance companies will go away. When it’s no longer profitable, physicians go away. When the physicians are gone, insurance coverage is a moot point. When the gov mandates all medical facilities provide the same types of services, the religious affiliates shut their doors.
We need to back up. Look at the problem, don’t randomly finance a solution. The problem isn’t high profits for insurance companies. Some of the problems are portability, pre-existing coverage, excessive malpractice claims, etc. Some of the solutions actually require deregulating some insurance laws to allow competition across state and regional lines, tort reform, centralized repositories of information via electronic medical records (yes, that means a central agency, probably the gov is going to house more of your personal information), etc. (BTW, no, I’m not employed by any insurance agency, law firm, or anyone that has a dog in this hunt). And don’t think that the gov in charge will result in lower costs. Sure, you won’t be writing a growing check to Healthcare Inc every month. But in it’s stead, you’ll be writing one to Uncle Sam.
We The Free and our representatives should depend on Facts Only and learn from history. No intelligent American can disagree that healthcare improvements are needed in the US. But how?
Should not those improvements start with The United States Department Of Veterans Affairs? (The VA) The VA is staffed with fine, hard working Americans which by definition, states Quality. State run programs compete for tax dollars and are often underfunded which by default leads to rationing. It’s a FACT & HISTORY has proven it. Most importantly, government limits the ability of caring Americans desiring to utilize their God given talents.
Confused Say: “One who blame business for making profit is confused”. Insurance companies employ many thousands of Americans that pay Taxes and Insurance and Taxes and Bills and Taxes. Insurance companies bet on your success. They also abide by contracts when failure occurs.
Should one be angry with their auto mechanic when he makes profit? Or Starbucks Coffee? Or Hollywood?
American Service Heroes expect sub-standard healthcare while many non-working Americans feel that healthcare expenses are a constitutional right.
Rent/Buy/Watch/Share the HBO “John Adams” special. Every American should be wise and appreciate the price paid for freedom in the USA.
Understand it! Fight for it! Preserve it for your children! Government Freedom Which is it?
revrick315,
Wow! Must of been thinking the same thing at the same time.
What has happened to America? Accountability?
U.S. Postal Service — established 1775 – 234 years to get it right but it’s broke, heavily subsidized, and can’t compete with private sector FedEx and UPS.
Social Security — established 1935 – 74 years to get it right; it’s broke.
Fannie Mae — established 1938 – 71 years to get it right; it’s broke.
Freddie Mac — established 1970 – 39 years to get it right; it’s broke. Together Fannie and Freddie pulled the entire world into the worst economic collapse in 80 years.
The War on Poverty — started in 1964 – 45 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our tax money is confiscated annually for redistribution to “the poor”; it hasn’t worked.
Medicare and Medicaid — established 1965 – 44 years to get it right; both broke; and now the government presents them as models for all US health care.
AMTRAK — established 1970 – 39 years to get it right; despite bailouts it continues to run at a loss!
The Stimulus Bill of 2009: A trillion dollars committed in this massive political show. It shows NO sign of success except to increase the size of governments across America. It has yet to create a single new private sector job. Our national debt projections (approaching $10 trillion) have increased 400% in the last six months.
“Cash for Clunkers” — established in 2009 and went broke in a matter of weeks. Most (80%) of the cars purchased were produced by foreign companies, and dealers nationwide are buried under bureaucratic paperwork demanded by a government that is not yet paying them what was promised.
Hey infidel, the video contained so many generalizations – not those pesky facts that you bring up. Socialism and communism may sound good on paper to the uninitiated, but the reality is something far different. Great comment, my man!
Everyone is quick to point out the problems with US HealthCare but no one has a solution. Current plan doesn’t work. Obama’s plan doesn’t make sense. So whats the solution?
Tiger,
The solution is to look at ALL the other industrialized countries in the world, examine their health care plans, and select the best features of each country to mold into what would then truly be the best health care system on the planet. But the pharmacy and insurance company lobbyists will never let that happen.