Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Don't get me wrong - I don't believe in total socialism by any stretch. But this idea that government can't do anythng right is a myth." Thank you. My wife and I are both government employees. The department I work for supplies a service sorely needed by the people we serve. No entity is perfect, but I guarantee you no agency reacts faster to fix a problem than mine.
Originally Posted By dsnykid "There's no doubt the system needs to be fixed, but you can expect to go through more red tape if the government gets a hold of health care. Sorry those are just the facts. Remember the government works best when they stay out of the way of the people." the fact is I have government health care.. the fact is the only red tape I go through is showing my Health Care card to my doctor once a year and having my monthly payment of $44 taken directly out of my chequing account.' The fact is that for a 4 month outpatient hospital stay the only "Red Tape" I had was a phone call from my doctor to the hospital and a three page patient intake form. The fact is that for any emergency room visit I have had here I have shown my health care card, signed a form and that is all. Oh, once I had to pay 10 for the materials for my cast because I chose to go with fibreglass instead of plaster. That is the reality of the majority of Government Health care systems. Yes for some procedures there are more forms to fill and perhaps one or two referrals needed, but more red tape? I assure you that is not the case.
Originally Posted By DAR <<Don't get me wrong - I don't believe in total socialism by any stretch. But this idea that government can't do anythng right is a myth>> I never said they wouldn't get it right. They just wouldn't do much better. Who knows, in the short term maybe the government will do better. It's the long term effects that worry me. For Like welfare I can see it being abused thus hurting everyone else in the long run.
Originally Posted By dsnykid Yes DAR, I am from Canada, but I've also lived in the US. I've been on both sides of the coin, and I am saying that in my experience, the gov't system has much less red tape for the patient than the current American system and at a much more affordable cost. You stated that it was a fact that there would be more red tape, and did not provide any evidence to back that statement up. I live with government health care and am providing you with the facts that say it is not always so. I'm not trying to belittle your view or opinion, I'm just providing you with my experiences of no red tape in a socialized health care system.
Originally Posted By Mrs ElderP I am an American citizen totally for a national health care system. For one thing, it it totally immoral the way we let a majority of americans suffer, wither substandard care, because they can't afford better. OR with the constant worry that something is going to happen and they aren't going to be able to take care of their families. I also think that a national health care system will over all be more efficient than a multiple provider system. That said, it seems to me that the American system has one major advantage over all the other socialized systems in the world: we are more inovative than anyone else. 5 of the top 10 drug manufacturers are located here in the United States. Lets face it, breaking ground in medicine is NOT cheap. Here in the US companies are allowed to recover extreme R&D costs by charging extreme amounts for new treatments. In my opinion that means that our system provides constantly improving care for the small percentage of people who can afford the latest in care with out going bankrupt at a moderate cost for the bulk of us (high insurance costs) and an extreme cost for the one third or so of this country that is uninssured or underinsured. What are labor disputes about, more often than not in this country: health care costs, and especially health care for the retiree. We, as a nation have already decided to provide a VERY basic level of care for the elderly, the most expensive part of the population to care for. We should all get in the pool and lower our average costs. The above post was not meant to imply that there is no inovation in socialized medicine, or that if the US system became socialized inovation would stop. I do think it would slow though, and we would never know what would have been developed.
Originally Posted By DAR <<We, as a nation have already decided to provide a VERY basic level of care for the elderly>> See I have no problem if it's for the elderly or younger kids. But this system will be taken advantage of by others.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<But this system will be taken advantage of by others.>> How and why? Yes, it might seem pretty desirable to sit on your duff at home and collect a welfare check. But how will this health care thing be abused? Most people (me included) do NOT LIKE going to the doctor. Many of us will put it off as long as we can... frequently too long to be good for our health. I just don't see Joe Sponge getting up in the morning and saying "Damn... I don't have anything to do today. Guess I'll head over to the local clinic and tell them I've got abdominal pains."
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "But this system will be taken advantage of by others." You keep making these absolute statements. Back up something you say with some proof.
Originally Posted By mele <<I just don't see Joe Sponge getting up in the morning and saying "Damn... I don't have anything to do today. Guess I'll head over to the local clinic and tell them I've got abdominal pains.">> LOL!
Originally Posted By DAR Okay here's the best way to handle this. Instead of giving national healthcare across the board, let's do it as a pilot program instead. This is what they do where I work when a new system comes into play. They slowly implement and fix the various problems along the way. This would be the perfect solution for the health problem. Pick about 100,000 citizens. Find out what works what doesn't. Then go from there. Work on the problems, again it neeeds to be a joint effort from the government and private companies. That's the best way to make it work.
Originally Posted By DAR <<You keep making these absolute statements. Back up something you say with so>> Our welfare system was taken advantage of by people just having kids to get more assistance.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Our welfare system was taken advantage of by people just having kids to get more assistance." And the rules were tightened to that there's a cap to it now. The current way we do health care is broken. It's criminal in a lot of instances. Maybe it's time the government DID step in.
Originally Posted By DlandJB I recently visted with a friend of mine who has a form of lymphoma. She has been in a clinical trial for two years that will come to an end next May. At that time she will have to find a way to pay $5,000 a month for her medication. She is on disability and only makes $17,000 a year. She ownes her apartment condo, but will likely have to sell it to be able to afford the medicine. Because of the disability pay, she also has medicare, which doesn't cover her cancer drugs and she doesn't qualify for any programs available to people without insurance because since she has medicare, that is considered insurance. She is in the process of selling her furniture down to the bare necessities. She is terrified and truly believes it will be the cold bureaucracy is what will kill her before the disease does. I was heartbroken for her. This is simply not right.
Originally Posted By DAR No it's not right. But there has to be a way to do this without increasing the tax burden. In Wisconsin, we already have one of the highest tax burdens in the nation. Plus let's take a look at which employers will be able to afford this. It's only going to be you're larger corpoorations and not you're ten man operations.
Originally Posted By ecdc Yeah, I wouldn't want those poor Wisconsinites to pay more money to save a woman dying of cancer. That would suck.
Originally Posted By DAR That's pretty typical from you. And let us also not forget that there are those out there choosing not to have health care. Tell me how many 18-25 year olds think they need it. You thin you're invincible at that age. We should pay for them too.
Originally Posted By DAR And if it were up to me I'd let me people choose what they pay they're taxes for. It would have to be at a minimum two things, for me it would be keeping our military strong and vital. The second would be to constantly improve our schools.
Originally Posted By Mrs ElderP DAR: no roads for you? and no police, sheriff, ect.? no FDA? no parks and rec? no libraries? (though those may be in your great schools!) No FBI or CIA? I agree that the federal disaster relief people do a pretty inefficient job. Fundamentally if you want few or no public services you can move to Mexico, where the rich get out of paying taxes, for the most part, and the provide their own services. There is a police force, but it's mostly corrupt. The rich pay for their own private security arround their houses, priviate school for their children, pay more for food from fancy retailers who assure quality, and so. Also, as an added bonus, under a system of extremely ineffectual government the rich tend to get richer and the poor poorer. Once again, this is a great system if you are rich!
