18 Jun 09
Originally posted by StTitothat all sounds good . The generlizations of the elective.It does not all include plastic surgery.For instance hep c. it is at epidemic proportions in north america. with universal health care your not getting it treated when you see fit but by the guide lines the "state" has set. And usually by that time its too late because you got liver cancer.You really think it will be an improvement having some beaurocrat [sic] telling you when you are sick enough to get treatment?!
I can't buy anything! wait for an elective, oh the injustice! Oh the horror! Where is my drive through rhinoplasty? Where is my on demand stomach staple? Rich people will always get the "medical" procedures they want, I'm talking about getting BASIC health care for every citizen.
18 Jun 09
Originally posted by StTitoThat's not the point. Just because you think a procedure isn't important doesn't mean we should sacrifice people's ability to get timely treatment. I'm certainly not rich. My employer pays for my mediocre HMO. But if I break my hip and am told to come back for surgery 7 months from Tuesday, because, while my insurance covers the procedure, some bureaucrat decided my procedure wasn't important enough and so it got backlogged, you can bet I'll be mad as Hell. And, if you're up front with the American people about that being an effect of whatever plan you're proposing, you wouldn't have a snowball's chance in Key West of getting it through Congress.
I can't buy anything! wait for an elective, oh the injustice! Oh the horror! Where is my drive through rhinoplasty? Where is my on demand stomach staple? Rich people will always get the "medical" procedures they want, I'm talking about getting BASIC health care for every citizen.
18 Jun 09
Originally posted by sh76I'm not buying that argument from either of you. So under our current system we have a private for profit insurance firm determining if we are covered or can get a procedure done. They are reluctant to let procedures happen that don't maximize their profit. And it is not a buyers market for health care. If you are poor you get crap ins. My Mother has been waiting 6 months for a back surgery as is another friend of mine( 3months), both in the lower middle class. You get what you pay for comes to mind, except you can't shop around for anything better. Uther, you were in the military right? how is your government run ins?I don't get me wrong I love Capitalism, so far I can't complain about much in my 34 years, except my experience with insurance companies(and the creditors after that). Again I don't think health care works with capitalism. When you are sick, you don't shop and compare. If your poor you can't budget and penny pinch. Sorry it don't work like that.
That's not the point. Just because you think a procedure isn't important doesn't mean we should sacrifice people's ability to get timely treatment. I'm certainly not rich. My employer pays for my mediocre HMO. But if I break my hip and am told to come back for surgery 7 months from Tuesday, because, while my insurance covers the procedure, some bureaucrat decid ...[text shortened]... ng, you wouldn't have a snowball's chance in Key West of getting it through Congress.
18 Jun 09
Originally posted by no1marauderRelax. I wasn't picking on your point. I just meant that it's plainly obvious to me, at least, that emergency rooms SHOULD turn people away who don't have emergencies. If emergency rooms are busy giving Advil to people who come in with a headache (and even that takes a long time because of all the bureaucratic nonsense they have to go through), they can't treat people who really need it.
Your sarcasm is stupid, since many right wingers (including an ex-President and a couple of posters in this thread) seem to be unaware of this fact.
It's like those people who call 911 to report a double parked car or a loud stereo.
18 Jun 09
Originally posted by sh76Go private.
Well, I'm sorry, but that sucks. I don't want to have to wait for elective procedures. If I need knee or hip surgery to correct a non-life threatening problem that makes it difficult for me to walk; I want to do it NOW! Well, maybe I'll settle for a few weeks from now, but not 6 months from now.
The US healthcare system has problems. Granted. Maybe more soci ...[text shortened]... ystem where we're going to wait many months for elective procedures. We're not buying it.
You propose that 10s of millions of hard working American families should go without any kind of affordable basic health care (enough with the 'there'salways the ER' answer) because you are impatient about getting elective hip surgery ?
Just go private. Pay your taxes, and then do whatever you want to do.
19 Jun 09
Originally posted by FMFWhat do the private clinics and hospitals cost?
Go private.
You propose that 10s of millions of hard working American families should go without any kind of affordable basic health care (enough with the 'there'salways the ER' answer) because you are impatient about getting elective hip surgery ?
Just go private. Pay your taxes, and then do whatever you want to do.
If they're affordable, then yes, I have no problem with a dual system.
19 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76The rate is set by the market. One wouldn't champion the rational free market and then question the prices of things, surely? The question about the 'dual' system is this: if you opt for the private services, are you willing to pay - with your taxes - for the comprehensive health care of the people who opt for the "free" service, whether they be rich or poor?
What do the private clinics and hospitals cost?
19 Jun 09
Originally posted by utherpendragonAs far as I know, Canada has a true single payer system. but I think most European countries have government healthcare (e.g., NHS) and a private option. I don't think the US would tolerate a complete single payer system like they have in Canada.
Obamas goal is not a dual system but a single payer plan. It will start out dual but will lead to single. He said it himself in 2003
19 Jun 09
2 edits
Originally posted by FMFBut this is not a true free market. The more comprehensive the government sponsored system is, the more expensive the private care will be.
The rate is set by the market. One wouldn't champion the rational free market and then question the prices of things, surely?
19 Jun 09
Originally posted by utherpendragonMaybe he was lying.
Obamas goal is not a dual system but a single payer plan. It will start out dual but will lead to single. He said it himself in 2003
If the U.S. ever does have a universal health care system it will be a dual system. The private health care industry is not going to be eliminated because of a comment made by somebody 6 years ago.
19 Jun 09
Originally posted by FMFthere is no way they can compete. within 10- 15 yrs tops they will be no more.
Maybe he was lying.
If the U.S. ever does have a universal health care system it will be a dual system. The private health care industry is not going to be eliminated because of a comment made by somebody 6 years ago.
19 Jun 09
Originally posted by utherpendragonIsn't that what the free market does? If you can't compete then you go out of business.
there is no way they can compete. within 10- 15 yrs tops they will be no more.
If the service is at least as good and cheaper than the insurance companies can provide then maybe they should go out of business.
If the service isn't as good then people will opt to pay more for the higher value in the private company.
Or the private companies will start providing extra insurance such as what aflac does or provide other more innovative products.