Health Care reform from a Doctors perspective

[St_Francis]

It still seems very basic. In one hour you can explain that what you eat effects your health. After that you can read cook books and other references which are very available at no cost. If someone can’t figur the rest out on their own then they need supervision. Further most everyone else gets several semesters of health classes, has parrents who have a responsibility to teach them, and mass media pushing a health lifestyle. There is no reason to undermine the entire American medical system because a few people refuse to eat right.

I am against the proposed health insurance changes.

However, I am *also *against people being so ungrateful for the *gifts *they have been given and acting like everyone should be able to do what they have done, and judging others for not having done so.

 

[royal_archer]

I am against the proposed health insurance changes.

However, I am *also *against people being so ungrateful for the *gifts *they have been given and acting like everyone should be able to do what they have done, and judging others for not having done so.

This does not have anything to do with judging people. However there are certain things that most people can be expected to take care of for themselves. If they can nto do that the answer is not to throw money at them but to provide assistance to keep them from making the bad decisions. Instead of addressing the problem we are just trying to cover up the symptoms while the underlying problem is getting worse.

 

[St_Francis]

This does not have anything to do with judging people. However there are certain things that most people can be expected to take care of for themselves. If they can nto do that the answer is not to throw money at them but to provide assistance to keep them from making the bad decisions. Instead of addressing the problem we are just trying to cover up the symptoms while the underlying problem is getting worse.

Yes, but you weren’t talking about assistance and solving underlying problems. You were talking about people who do not have it all together getting it all together, just a simplistic, well, they ought to know this and that, and if they just did this and that, all *our *problems would be solved. And if they really can’t get it together, then they should be “overseen.”

 

[royal_archer]

Yes, but you weren’t talking about assistance and solving underlying problems. You were talking about people who do not have it all together getting it all together, just a simplistic, well, they ought to know this and that, and if they just did this and that, all *our *problems would be solved. And if they really can’t get it together, then they should be “overseen.”

I assume you are talking about “our problems” in the collective because when these problems are not addressed they impact society as a whole. For the most part people either have the capability of making good decisions and should be held accountable for those decisions or they are not capable and need to have soomeone watching over them and teaching them until they are capable of making decisions and are ready to be held accountable for them.

 

[cynic]

With gas taxes going to the roads, and property taxes going to the fire and police departments they are essentially user pay systems.

those who own more properties or live in better areas end up subsidising the service more than others.

 

[St_Francis]

I assume you are talking about “our problems” in the collective because when these problems are not addressed they impact society as a whole.

I meant it more sardonically. Basically, I see you coming off as seeing that there is a problem, but that it is caused by these people who in your eyes don’t have their acts as together as people like, well, you. What I was saying is that you think that we need to oversee these people because the decisions they are making are causing “our” problem.

This to me is not at all a Catholic point of view.

For the most part people either have the capability of making good decisions and should be held accountable for those decisions or they are not capable and need to have soomeone watching over them and teaching them until they are capable of making decisions and are ready to be held accountable for them.

And who will judge the quality of their decisions, and on what grounds?

 

[Arwen037]

If you are incapable of understanding that chips aren’t good for your health and apples are, then you probably do need supervision. If you are incapable of understanding that you need to spend less than you earn, then you probably need supervision. And these are the people we are talking about. We are not talking about every single case you can come up with of people who need help. Some people genuinely need help, despite doing everything right. But that is not most cases. Most cases are failures somewhere along the line to behave in a responsible manner. Eating chips and ice cream every night that leads to a heart attack and therefore heart surgery that you can’t pay for isn’t just bad luck. It is circumstances of your own making. Buying a $300,000 house when you make $50,000 a year and then being unable to make payment when you have a health problem isn’t bad luck, it’s a problem you brought on yourself.

 

[St_Francis]

If you are incapable of understanding that chips aren’t good for your health and apples are, then you probably do need supervision. If you are incapable of understanding that you need to spend less than you earn, then you probably need supervision. And these are the people we are talking about. We are not talking about every single case you can come up with of people who need help. Some people genuinely need help, despite doing everything right. But that is not most cases. Most cases are failures somewhere along the line to behave in a responsible manner. Eating chips and ice cream every night that leads to a heart attack and therefore heart surgery that you can’t pay for isn’t just bad luck. It is circumstances of your own making. Buying a $300,000 house when you make $50,000 a year and then being unable to make payment when you have a health problem isn’t bad luck, it’s a problem you brought on yourself.

You and Royal Archer do not seem to understand what I am saying, which is that we treat people kindly instead of talking about them like we think they have the brains of a brick. We do not talk as if “acting responsibly” were the end-all and be-all because as Catholics we know that *holiness *is the end-all and be-all. We do not act as if we pulling people out of the hole they dug themselves; we act as if “There but for the grace of God go I.”

We do not know how we would have acted had we been in those people’s shoes all their lives. To whom much is given, much is expected.

 

[Arwen037]

But much is expected from those who are given less. And again, we are talking legally here. You think that people should be allowed to be as irresponsible as they please and that everyone else should just pick up their slack.

If I buy a house for $300,000 and in 6mo I can’t pay my morgage, so the governmetn steps in to help, are you okay with that? If I quit (or get my job to let me go so I can get unemployment) and just go on government aid, is that okay? Are you okay with giving me food stamps? Are you okay with me being on medicare or medicaid, whichever it is? Is I use my food stamps to eat ice cream, friend chicken, mac 'n cheese, chips, and other unhealthy foods is that okay? When all these leads to type II diabetes, heart disease, disability, acid reflux, respiratory problems, strokes, vascular disorders, and all those other fun results of poor eating, do you have any problems with paying all of my bills?

I want a real answer, not dodging it. Is all of that okay with you?

 

[St_Francis]

But much is expected from those who are given less. And again, we are talking legally here. You think that people should be allowed to be as irresponsible as they please and that everyone else should just pick up their slack.

If I buy a house for $300,000 and in 6mo I can’t pay my morgage, so the governmetn steps in to help, are you okay with that? If I quit (or get my job to let me go so I can get unemployment) and just go on government aid, is that okay? Are you okay with giving me food stamps? Are you okay with me being on medicare or medicaid, whichever it is? Is I use my food stamps to eat ice cream, friend chicken, mac 'n cheese, chips, and other unhealthy foods is that okay? When all these leads to type II diabetes, heart disease, disability, acid reflux, respiratory problems, strokes, vascular disorders, and all those other fun results of poor eating, do you have any problems with paying all of my bills?

I want a real answer, not dodging it. Is all of that okay with you?

I feel like I am repeating myself over and over and over.

I do not think that Catholics should speak of others with a dismissive disrespect, especially one which indicates that we hold “personal responsibility” in the material realm over holiness.

I do not think that Catholics should speak of others with a dismissive disrespect, especially one which indicates that we hold “personal responsibility” in the material realm over holiness.

I do not think that Catholics should speak of others with a dismissive disrespect, especially one which indicates that we hold “personal responsibility” in the material realm over holiness.

 

[St_Francis]

Arwen,
I have no idea how you got from my request for a more charitable attitude towards those who find themselves in difficulties to my being a bleeding-heart, tax-borrow-and-spend liberal. I hope you never find yourself at the other end of comments such as those made by Royal Archer, whose comments I was originally addressing, or yours, which you have included among his.

Because you seem unable to comprehend that one can agree that the current government direction is the wrong one *and *not want to vilify people in trouble, I have taken the time to also answer your questions.

But much is expected from those who are given less. And again, we are talking legally here. You think that people should be allowed to be as irresponsible as they please and that everyone else should just pick up their slack.

I don’t know where you got that idea considering that what I am suggesting is that, especially as Catholics, we should speak respectfully of others rather than in such a denigrating manner. (Also, I was referring to RA’s comments, but if you want to include your own comments in there, that’s fine by me.)

If I buy a house for $300,000 and in 6mo I can’t pay my morgage, so the governmetn steps in to help, are you okay with that? If I quit (or get my job to let me go so I can get unemployment) and just go on government aid, is that okay? Are you okay with giving me food stamps? Are you okay with me being on medicare or medicaid, whichever it is?

Currently, one of the players in our society is the institution which is supposed to be the umpire (the government). I have a problem with that, but I’m not in charge, so I can’t really change things around to be the way I would like them to be.

Given the rules in place, which have been set up by the government, things happen which are beyond people’s control. For example, one of the rules is that businesses can be owned by a multiplicity of people and thus there is no one person who is responsible for the morality of the company. Money rules. This to me really throws society out of balance because too much business is then run only on profit-making lines and the corporate decision-makers do not take into account the fact that actual real people are involved.

Another example would be what happened with the mortgages, which is that some concern arose that African Americans were not getting mortgages at the same rate as Caucasians. The government then imposed certain rules which were to encourage home ownership among African Americans, a higher percentage of whom are poor, so the end result is that people in the real estate and mortgage business were pushing houses. Some of these people were more interested in their own profit than they were in the good of their customers. Result? Lots of people ended up being over-extended while others made vast amounts of money.

So, you are lucky. You have a reasonably good head on your shoulders, you have been taught habits of self-control, etc. Not everyone has had it that good. Some people when shown on paper how they “could afford” this and that went for it, because they saw someone they loved really happy about the idea; because they thought it would be a good investment for the future; whatever. OK, so you wouldn’t make that mistake. That doesn’t mean that those who did make that mistake should be lumped in with those whom you disdain.

If I use my food stamps to eat ice cream, friend chicken, mac 'n cheese, chips, and other unhealthy foods is that okay? When all these leads to type II diabetes, heart disease, disability, acid reflux, respiratory problems, strokes, vascular disorders, and all those other fun results of poor eating, do you have any problems with paying all of my bills?

I do not think that the government should be paying for most of what it pays for. And I do think that if charitable enterprises were in charge of charity, that the roots of the problems would be addressed.

Given the fact that we each live in a place in history, and the fact that we did not really have anything to do with the making of that place, and that this is what that place is: far away from a Catholic society based on Catholic morals and ways of thinking; with an education system and other social and governmental institutions which actively indoctrinate people *away *from Catholic morals and ways of thinking, I do not think that there is a solution to be found on either end of the current political spectrum.

In the 1960s, Senator Patrick Moynihan warned what would happen as the result of our then-current welfare policies. Most of what he predicted has come to pass.

In the 1960s, the Pope warned what would happen as the result of our embracing artificial birth control. Most of what he predicted has come to pass.

Because our nation continued down a certain path, we find ourselves in a certain position. I am not against helping those who find themselves in an even worse situation than I find myself as a result of their not being able to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, having received inadequate help in the past.

However, I am against the current proposals to “fix” our health insurance “problem.” I am also against putting my children and grandchildren into an incredible amount of debt to “fix” the economic problems brought about by the insanity which has been created in this non-Catholic culture.

I want a real answer, not dodging it. Is all of that okay with you?

I hope that that has qualified as real answers.

 

[Timbothefiveth]

Until they completely cut out abortion funding from the healthcare bill, we can’t pass it. When that happens, I may not like the bill, but I’ll support it if the USCCB supports it.

 

[Arwen037]

St Francis, I’m sorry if I misunderstood you. It just sounds like a lot of people on here want to say it’s not these people’s fault, that there’s nothing they could have done; that they are all just victims. But there is more to it than that. Like I keep saying not everyone is covered by what I discussed, but there are way too many people who are. I don’t like irresponsibility being excused because “it’s not their fault.” It’s what leads us even further into trouble. We don’t correct anyone, we just enable. I’m not even saying that we shouldn’t help people who bring problems on themselves, but we shouldn’t be required to.

The way some people, not necessarily you, are defending these people’s poor choices sometimes makes it hard to express the proper attitude when responding and the irritation at the poster comes through as irritation at the people.

 

[St_Francis]

St Francis, I’m sorry if I misunderstood you. It just sounds like a lot of people on here want to say it’s not these people’s fault, that there’s nothing they could have done; that they are all just victims. But there is more to it than that. Like I keep saying not everyone is covered by what I discussed, but there are way too many people who are. I don’t like irresponsibility being excused because “it’s not their fault.” It’s what leads us even further into trouble. We don’t correct anyone, we just enable. I’m not even saying that we shouldn’t help people who bring problems on themselves, but we shouldn’t be required to.

The way some people, not necessarily you, are defending these people’s poor choices sometimes makes it hard to express the proper attitude when responding and the irritation at the poster comes through as irritation at the people.

It can be very difficult, I know, and I myself have done that.

There are a lot of people out there who have acted irresponsibly, but so many more who when you talk with them, it turns out that there were mitigating factors.

I started off as quite Republican, but now have moved over into the “if it ain’t Catholic, it ain’t gonna work anyway” category, so I vote to contain the damage more than in the hopes that anything will change for the better.

 

[pathia]

The way some people, not necessarily you, are defending these people’s poor choices sometimes makes it hard to express the proper attitude when responding and the irritation at the poster comes through as irritation at the people.

What was my poor choice then? Being born? I haven’t been able to get reliable insurance after I turned 18, my parents couldn’t even keep me insured easily as they would drop me by rescission. What could I have done to get insurance, what ‘mistake’ did I make? Being born is the only one I can figure out or refusing to go on disability and actually WORK.

 

[Arwen037]

pathia, read the entire post before getting all offended.

“Like I keep saying not everyone is covered by what I discussed”
“We are not talking about every single case you can come up with of people who need help. Some people genuinely need help, despite doing everything right.”
“Yes, some people get a bad break”

I think that’s plenty of examples from this thread. You take everything personally. I am talking about cases in general, with the understanding that there are exceptions. But exceptions like your’s are not the rule.

 

[royal_archer]

those who own more properties or live in better areas end up subsidising the service more than others.

but they have more property to protect. While it is not a perfect allocation of costs it is a good balance of cost allocation and efficiency of billing.

 

[royal_archer]

I meant it more sardonically. Basically, I see you coming off as seeing that there is a problem, but that it is caused by these people who in your eyes don’t have their acts as together as people like, well, you. What I was saying is that you think that we need to oversee these people because the decisions they are making are causing “our” problem.

This to me is not at all a Catholic point of view.

And who will judge the quality of their decisions, and on what grounds?

The quality of their decisions is also causing them problems. People should make that decisions themselves. Everyone should be allowed to try to stand on their own two feet untill they realize they need help. That help should not be mearly opening the “faucet” to an unrelenting stream of resources, it should also be in the form of oversight, mentoring, etc.

 

[royal_archer]

You and Royal Archer do not seem to understand what I am saying, which is that we treat people kindly instead of talking about them like we think they have the brains of a brick. We do not talk as if “acting responsibly” were the end-all and be-all because as Catholics we know that *holiness *is the end-all and be-all. We do not act as if we pulling people out of the hole they dug themselves; we act as if “There but for the grace of God go I.”

We do not know how we would have acted had we been in those people’s shoes all their lives. To whom much is given, much is expected.

Do you set expectations for your children? Do you let them know when theyare not acting in a responsible manner? Do you look out for them and provide oversight when they engage in self destructive behavior? Do you do all that out of anything other than love?

 

[St_Francis]

The quality of their decisions is also causing them problems. People should make that decisions themselves. Everyone should be allowed to try to stand on their own two feet untill they realize they need help. That help should not be mearly opening the “faucet” to an unrelenting stream of resources, it should also be in the form of oversight, mentoring, etc.

Perhaps I made the same mistake with you that Arwen made with me!

It seems from your wording that you are talking about a friendly or loving situation as you suggest in your post which I quoted below, which is quite different from what I had gathered before from your posts.

I think that charitable organisations, having more flexibility than the government could allow itself, would be more able to help those in need in a wholistic manner. They would be able to sort through the full needs. For example, a woman I know who is very poor and caring for her sister could be better helped by the addition of some basic home ec information and also some help with minor repairs around the house. She’s not going to get that from the government, and she would probably resent some sort of government-imposed “oversight.”

I also think that charities would be independent of certain types of goals imposed from without (as long as we really do keep government out of their hair).

Do you set expectations for your children? Do you let them know when theyare not acting in a responsible manner? Do you look out for them and provide oversight when they engage in self destructive behavior? Do you do all that out of anything other than love?