Originally Posted By SpokkerJones "And what evidence do you, do any of us have that the government would do a better job?" UK, Japan, Germany, Taiwan and Switzerland Not perfect, but they do a hell of a lot better than we do. <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/etc/graphs.html" target="_blank">http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/...phs.html</a>
Originally Posted By queenbee Well, DAR, the statistics from WHO that someone posted appear to be evidence. Evidence that many countries who have public insurance come out way ahead of the US in several measures of healthcare quality. Are you saying the US is incapable of what Canada and the UK are already doing?
Originally Posted By mawnck UK unites in calling BS - now THIS is bipartisanship: <a href="http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23731752-details/NHS+drawn+into+US+health+care+debate/article.do" target="_blank">http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/...ticle.do</a>
Originally Posted By TomSawyer DAR, we also have Medicare that insures about 45 million people with an administrative overhead of less than 5%. For comparison private health insurers typically have an administrative overhead of 15%. Canada's health system has an overhead of 1.5%
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy I think DAR is probably too familiar with the overhead in the insurance industry. Maybe that's his main concern -- he's a beneficiary of all that overhead.
Originally Posted By DAR I work in the life insurance industry. What if one day the government decided that everyone should have a life insurance policy thus elminating the idea of private industry. That's what's going to happen with the private health care insurers there's going to be a lot of people out of jobs.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << That's what's going to happen with the private health care insurers there's going to be a lot of people out of jobs. >> Or, perhaps, if health coverage becomes affordable then the cost structure for employers will become more favorable to hire more people across all industries?
Originally Posted By TomSawyer There'll still be plenty of work for people to manage whatever insurance is out there.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy The inefficiency of the insurance industry is ridiculous anyway. How many Geico ads are necessary to be run on every TV network simultaneously? I wonder how much of every Geico bill goes to advertising instead of insurance coverage? I know they claim to be a low cost provider, but it makes no sense that they could have a low cost structure with the amount of ads they run on TV. It's crazy.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>That's what's going to happen with the private health care insurers there's going to be a lot of people out of jobs.<< On the contrary - if everybody is insured, then there should be *more* people employed in the insurance industry. If it's single payer, then they'll be employed by the government.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer Or, if it is like Medicare they'll be employed by the insurance companies that administer the plan.
Originally Posted By ecdc DAR, we also have the example of U.S. soldiers, who get government provided healthcare. They report being very happy with it.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer You mean the Veterans Administration... Doesn't sound like Veteran's Groups like it... <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/24/va-medical-shambles-veterans-groups-say/" target="_blank">http://www.foxnews.com/politic...ups-say/</a> >>Amid growing controversy over procedures that exposed 10,000 veterans to the AIDS and hepatitis viruses, the Department of Veterans Affairs is now bracing against news that one of its facilities in Pennsylvania gave botched radiation treatments to nearly 100 cancer patients. Veterans groups and lawmakers say VA hospitals have permitted these violations because federal regulations allow doctors to work with little outside scrutiny. They say the VA health system, with its under-funded hospitals and overworked doctors, is showing signs of an "institutional breakdown," in the words of one congressman. An official with the American Legion who visits and inspects VA health centers said complacency, poor funding and little oversight led to the violations that failed the cancer patients in Philadelphia and possibly infected 53 veterans with hepatitis and HIV from unsterilized equipment at three VA health centers in Florida, Tennessee and Georgia. "Lack of inspections, lack of transparency" were likely to blame, said Joe Wilson, deputy director of the Veterans Affairs and Rehabilitation Commission for the American Legion, who testified before Congress this month on transparency problems in a budgeting arm of the VA. Wilson said the American Legion is investigating the case of the VA Medical Center in Philadelphia, where doctors gave 92 veterans incorrect radiation doses for treatment of prostate cancer during a six-year span when no peer review or proper oversight measures were in place, the New York Times reported. Those doctors, whose continuous errors were finally detected last year, were immediately fired from their work at the VA center, but not before putting the lives of the 92 veterans at risk. That news came on the heels of months of investigations into medical lapses that permitted endoscopic procedures like colonoscopies to be performed improperly for years. Wilson told FOXNews.com that poor funding has aggravated problems, and that money is often misspent on repairs for old facilities and equipment to help manage a construction backlog that has put the VA years behind. He said the aging facilities are incapable of handling or properly operating new technology and equipment. "The average age of VA facilities is about 49 years," he said. "That's too old. In the private sector the average age of facilities is about 12 years."<< And if we get ObamaCare, what is the motivation to upgrade and improve facilites???? Or let's look at the Indian Health Services, another government run Health Care system... <a href="http://www.dailyyonder.com/painkillers-lieu-indian-health-care/2009/08/12/2282" target="_blank">http://www.dailyyonder.com/pai.../12/2282</a> >>In defense of IHS, it is a chronically underfunded agency. Part of the Federal Health and Human Services department, IHS has been funded with about half of what it needs to provide quality health care to the 2 million American Indians in the 36 states that it serves. The result is that health care is rationed to American Indians, especially those in rural areas. IHS patients are classed based on the urgency of their ailments. People with chronic back, knee, and hip problems can wait for weeks for an appointment and months for surgery. These folks and kids with problems like chronic ear infections are classed as seeking “elective treatment for disease.” The result is that patients wait, and to help them live with the pain while they wait, the doctors do the best they can within the system. They prescribe pain medication. American Indians make the top of the list for many health problems in the United States. In comparison to white Americans, Indians and Alaska Natives show • 40 percent higher rate of infant mortality; • 60 percent higher rate of stroke; • 30 percent higher rate of hypertension; • 20 percent higher rate of heart disease; • 100 percent higher rate of diabetes; • 150 percent higher rate of unintentional injuries; • 100 percent higher rate of homicide; • 70 percent higher rate of suicide. Here’s what Congress has said about the most important funding legislation for the Indian Health service, The Indian Health Care Improvement Act. Federal health services to maintain and improve the health of the Indians are consonant with and required by the Federal government’s historical and unique legal relationship with, and resulting responsibility to, the American Indian people. Amazingly, the Indian Health Care Improvement Act, which would address many of the problems underpinning the need to prescribe painkillers in lieu of surgery, has not been reauthorized since 1992. The FY 2011 Tribal Budget recommends a $2.1 billion increase toward the $21.8 billion needed to bring parity in health care for American Indians and Alaskan Natives. Secretary of Health and Human Services has publicly admitted to the deplorable state of health care available for American Indians and promised to increase the number of doctors sent to reservations through the U. S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps, according to a story in the Cape Cod Times.<< You know, they are plenty of private colleges, along with religious based colleges that do quite well... <a href="http://www.accunet.org/files/public/College_University_Website_Complete_List.htm" target="_blank">http://www.accunet.org/files/p...List.htm</a> They work with their students, and if they are truly in need of assistance, they have programs and scholorships that help students attend. Not everything has to have a government solution.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Remember the idiot American newspaper writer who claimed "People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn't have a chance in the UK," which I believed somebody duly copied and pasted here? Hawking himself - a lifelong British citizen, of course, who apparently had more than just a "chance" living in the UK - replies. <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6017878/Stephen-Hawking-I-would-not-be-alive-without-the-NHS.html" target="_blank">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...NHS.html</a> "The British physisist spoke out after Republican politicians lambasted the NHS as "evil" in their effort to stop President Barack Obama's reforms of US health care which will widen availability of treatment but at a cost to higher earners who will pay higher insurance premiums. "I wouldn't be here today if it were not for the NHS," he said. "I have received a large amount of high-quality treatment without which I would not have survived." " (snip) "He received emergency treatment in April at Addenbrooke's hospital in Cambridge. An American newspaper subsequently used Prof Hawking as an example of the deficiencies of the NHS. "People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn't have a chance in the UK, where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless," it claimed. A Twitter campaign defending the NHS emerged to give an outlet for protests against the controversy that arose out of Mr Obama's drive to reform American healthcare. Users of the micro-blogging service have been posting messages in support of the British health care system. "
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Here's the story of a 17 year old girl who was denied coverage of a liver transplant by a death panel. The death panel was her for-profit insurance company. The girl died. There are many, many stories like that. Where's the outcry from those that thing there's no need for healthcare reform? Why do so many people vote against the best interests of their own families? <a href="http://elfninosmom.wordpress.com/2007/12/23/dying-for-insurance/" target="_blank">http://elfninosmom.wordpress.c...surance/</a>
Originally Posted By TomSawyer It's okay if people die in the name of increased shareholder return. It isn't okay if they die and no one makes any money because of if.
Originally Posted By DAR There's a need for reform but if the government assumes complete control(and don't tell me they won't) then will be in this same boat again. And while that's a sad story, but people do have to work somewhere and health insurance company is one such place. I guarantee you that the person who probably did the majority of that paper work is just somebody trying to keep a roof of their head and food on the table. They're not some evil person.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>There's a need for reform but if the government assumes complete control(and don't tell me they won't) then will be in this same boat again. << Prove it. Give us some evidence. Real stuff, not the Fix News talking point of the week. And don't give me that "oh government ALWAYS messes stuff like this up" because that's just more noise machine BS. >> I guarantee you that the person who probably did the majority of that paper work is just somebody trying to keep a roof of their head and food on the table. They're not some evil person.<< And the dead teenager is still dead. If this perfectly decent person is in a position where they're forced to essentially kill a teenager to maintain shareholder value, than that's the best argument FOR socialized medicine you can possibly make.
Originally Posted By DAR <<Prove it. Give us some evidence. Real stuff, not the Fix News talking point of the week. And don't give me that "oh government ALWAYS messes stuff like this up" because that's just more noise machine BS.>> Well let's see they messed up Katrina. Waiting at the DMV is always a pain. Oh and remember that plane in MN that was stuck for nine hours. Well besides that being the fault of Continental(worst airline out there) the National Transportation and Safety Board wouldn't let people off the plane because everyone went home. You're right government will do just fine. I'm not saying the current system is perfect, but you are so friken naive if you think it's going to be better. Everyone will have health care great. Is it going to cut down on wait times at the doctor's office. Will I not get the care I need because someone's got a cold and they weren't insured before so I guess they get to skip me. And you know for a fact that people are going to abuse the living crap out of this driving up costs even more.
