Universal Health Care

[nancit]

Nancit, Varc & everyone else:

Because WE don’t TITHE, and haven’t been taking care of our fellow Christians, we’ve tried to “palm it off” on the government, on unbelievers. This isn’t the Government’s job. it’s OUR job. It’s our job in our Extended Families, our Churches and our Local Communities to take care of the needs of our neighbors who can’t take of themselves. Except for schools, emergency services, libraries, parks and other Community Services and necessary government regulation, Government shouldn’t need to get involved in helping individuals unless local and community resources simply can’t do the job.

I think our failure to Tithe has forced us to make unacceptable moral compromises, to accept government funded health care that would pay not only for Contraception and Artificial Insemination but for Abortion and Euthanasia. We will rue the day we made these compromises, because the “Conscience Clause” exemptions will prove to be a “Fig-Leave” easily removed at the whim of a capricious government that will never recognize the concept of a “God-Given Right”.

Your Brother and Servant in Christ, Michael

Indeed Michael…but sadly, all many see is that they will be able to get “free” healthcare insurance…sigh…

And we all know nothing is for free…so as you point out, euthanasia, abortion on demand and a whole litnany of other atrocious medical practices and “research” will be conducted and performed and society will continue to further spiral into immorality.

But just wait, those who demand this “free healthcare” will be sorry when they find they have been diagnosed with cancer, but are being put on a waiting list for more than a year before they can receive treatment. Or when they are told their mother “is too old to receive the surgery she needs, so we will just let her die” or when they are told…“sorry, but you have had your quota of children, we are going to remove your ovaries now” and on and on…sigh…

 

[nancit]

There are many things that we have to do in life whether we want to or not. Contributing to Social Security is one of them. Social Security is for the greater good of the people. It helps supplement an eldery person’s income, as pension alone is not enough.

There are many countries where the government does not provide for the general welfare of its people. Their governments are generally corrupt and their people are oppressed. That is why people from those countries like to immigrate here, if given the opportunity.

I think it is our government’s responsibility to not only promote but to provide to its citizens and to help look out for their general welfare. It is the right and Christianly thing to do.

Jean

Umm…sorry Jean, but you couldn’t be more wrong if you tried. First off, the monies collected supposedly for Social Security and our “future” retirement…is NOT being used as such. It is collected and then used for a whole variety of programs, departments, funding of various policies, etc.

So…today, those who put into social security their entire working lives, are receiving LITTLE of what is left. In fact, most do not even receive enough to actually live off of, as intended…I know…because I support my mom. She is 72 and her only form of income is the social security she receives…the whopping $1100/mo…that wouldn’t even pay RENT, let alone provide her a decent living.

However, if she was able, all those years she was paying social security, to invest or save her own money…she would be able to live much more comfortable today. Instead, she has the government dictating what she can and can’t do…because she has so little left.

It is our government’s duty to provide an ENVIRONMENT where everyone can flourish…that is all. So many forget, that without the people, the government has NOTHING to “give” to the people. But you can’t give until you take away…and that is why so many are against governmental programs.

You can’t honestly look at programs like Social Security, Medicare, FEMA, etc., and say the government does a better job then individuals. All three of those programs are massive failures that cost ALL OF US…billions of dollars.

Heck…just think about it for a second…when the current administration took over, they told us that there were 9 million families currently facing foreclosure. Guess what? The government could have given each one of those families a million dollars, bailed them all out easily and then saved the rest of us trillions. But instead…they have added programs and funding for all sorts of ridiculous projects, hurting each of us dramatically.

And the further regulations they are looking to impose on business is going to continue to perpetuate increasing unemployment rates…causing more and more to get into trouble…with our only “hope” being our government…its a vicious circle. The more dependence they “allow” the more dependence is required.

 

[cynic]

So…today, those who put into social security their entire working lives, are receiving LITTLE of what is left. In fact, most do not even receive enough to actually live off of, as intended…I know…because I support my mom. She is 72 and her only form of income is the social security she receives…the whopping $1100/mo…that wouldn’t even pay RENT, let alone provide her a decent living.

However, if she was able, all those years she was paying social security, to invest or save her own money…she would be able to live much more comfortable today. Instead, she has the government dictating what she can and can’t do…because she has so little left.

So what happens to those who worked in low paying jobs for most of their lives, and couldn’t save/invest enough for retirement? They should just die apparently. That’s the problem with private savings plans, only those earning above x amount can benefit.
Opposition to social security is ussually based on the fact that it’s redistributive, rather than waste or poor management.

 

[srlucado]

So what happens to those who worked in low paying jobs for most of their lives, and couldn’t save/invest enough for retirement? They should just die apparently.

No, they’d live with family, which is what people did for millenia–and what people will be doing again once Social Security goes bankrupt.

Besides, when Social Security was started, life expectancy was short–you retired at 65 and died at 66 or 67. Now people start collecting at 65 and live another 20 years.

What we have now is an intractible problem; there just isn’t enough money to pay all the people who are “depending” on Social Security (though anyone under 40 foolish enough to think they’ll ever see a nickel of that money is delusional).

All the good intentions in the world can’t make up for the simple economic fact that the government has promised way, way more than it can deliver. Add universal health care to the equation and all you do is accelerate the destruction of the economy. Who exactly benefits from that?

 

[cynic]

No, they’d live with family, which is what people did for millenia–and what people will be doing again once Social Security goes bankrupt.

And if they have no family, or what children there are can’t support them? ,

What we have now is an intractible problem; there just isn’t enough money to pay all the people who are “depending” on Social Security (though anyone under 40 foolish enough to think they’ll ever see a nickel of that money is delusional).

This goes the “says you” basket until it can backed up. The pention - as seperate from social security - can be means-tested, and the age of retirement raised again. Both are reasonable. But that doesn’t get to the real issue ; one individuals tax dollars and/or savings subsidizing anothers retirement. So why not be honest?

 

[apromisemade]

People do have a responsiblity to take care of themselves and look after their own health. Too many people end up terribly sick because they just weren’t diligent and didn’t make informed decisions about what to eat and how to take care of themselves. Lots of people just say “I can’t afford it” or “I don’t have the time,” with regards to eating right or working out without appreciating the terrible danger they could be putting themselves in.

That having been said, I think there is definately a line that needs to be drawn as far as what is left up to the individual. When a pregnant mother dies of complications because she couldn’t afford a $100 dollar check up, then it becomes a moral question. You can’t just expect the doctors to foot the bill out of charity. They need to provide for themselves and sustain the hospital so they can treat other patients.

It also becomes a question of what is practical economically. When that same mother I referenced was airlifted to the emergency room, hundreds of thousands of dollars was spent on an ultimately fruitless attempt to save her from what initially could’ve costed a mere 100 dollars.

 

[uther]

What happened to the “seamless garment of life” and “whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers?”

So when did the majority of Americans become Catholic? Any nationalized, socialized health-care plan by definition includes everyone, even the non-Catholics wouldn’t you say? Are our Catholic moral definitions suddenly the substance of government policy? Nevermind what happened to separation of Church and State, when do we get rid of abortion?

No, this is the old socialist scam to play on the conscience of Catholics. We can do much to and for the least of our brothers without forcing everyone into lockstep. How do you suppose all of the hospitals across the nation with Catholic names came about? The history of Catholic charity in America and across the world is un-paralleled.

 

[champam]

HEALTH CARE.
vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm

2288 Life and physical health are precious gifts entrusted to us by God. We must take reasonable care of them, taking into account the needs of others and the common good.

Concern for the health of its citizens requires that society help in the attainment of living-conditions that allow them to grow and reach maturity: food and clothing, housing, health care, basic education, employment, and social assistance.

You americans pay more in Medicaid and Medicare(which combined are utterly useless) per capita than we Canadians do on a decent health care system available to all.

 

[srlucado]

And if they have no family, or what children there are can’t support them?

Then I hope they have a lot of friends, or otherwise life sucks for them.

'Cause I guess I missed the part of life that guarantees happiness and plenty for everybody.

This goes the “says you” basket until it can backed up. The pention - as seperate from social security - can be means-tested, and the age of retirement raised again. Both are reasonable. But that doesn’t get to the real issue ; one individuals tax dollars and/or savings subsidizing anothers retirement. So why not be honest?

Well, maybe the demographics are different in New Zealand, but anyone with an actuarial table can tell you that Social Security is going to the boneyard, and in a hurry. And it’s not just a “says you” statement; even Social Security’s own website says they’ll be paying more than they take in starting in 2018, only nine years from now (socialsecurity.gov/OACT/TR/TR03/II_project.html). That means they’ll have to start collecting on their “trust fund”–and who holds that? Gee, that would be the Federal Government–you know, the one that’s already trillions in debt and sinking faster every day. I guess they’ll have to raise the retirement age to 90.

As for pensions, they’re an employer-employee contractual obligation. You’re suggesting that companies simply alter the rules after the game, to pay more to some and less–or nothing–to others? Isn’t that called “stealing”? (I guess that answers my earlier question about this still being a country of laws.) Besides, leaving out government, pensions are a dinosaur; few companies in the private sector even offer them anymore, turnover being what it is.

In any country with an aging population, it means that there are more people taking money out of the economy and fewer people are putting money in. That simply cannot have a happy ending, and that’s what we’re facing. No legislation can alter that fact. Japan and even China are in the same boat, as is most of western Europe.

By the way, dictionary.com is a useful website.

 

[Erich]

You americans pay more in Medicaid and Medicare(which combined are utterly useless) per capita

No argument from me, there.

than we Canadians do on a decent health care system available to all.

“Access to a waiting list is not access to health care,” as two Canadian Supreme Court justices wrote in a 2005 decision striking down a Quebec law that prohibited people from buying private health insurance to cover procedures already offered by the public system.

Wait times for the following procedures are known issues in Canada:
cancer
heart
diagnostic imaging
joint replacement
sight restoration services
children’s mental health
cataract surgery
general surgery
hip/knee replacements
MRI scanning

From Uh-oh, Canada

If Canada’s national health-care system is so dang wonderful, why are so many Canadians coming to America to pay for their own medical care?

Why is the hip replacement center of Canada in Ohio – at the Cleveland Clinic, where 10 percent of its international patients are Canadians?

Why is the Brain and Spine Clinic in Buffalo serving about 10 border-crossing Canadians a week? Why did a Calgary woman recently have to drive several hundred miles to Great Falls, Mont., to give birth to her quadruplets?

It’s simple. As the market-oriented Fraser Institute in Vancouver, B.C., can tell you, Canada’s vaunted “free” government health-care system cannot or deliberately will not provide its 33 million citizens with the nonemergency health care they want and need when they need or want it.

Courtesy of the institute, here are some unflattering facts about Canada’s sickly system:

Number of Canadians on waiting lists for referrals to specialists or for medical services – 875,000.

Average wait from time of referral to treatment by a specialist – 17.8 weeks. Shortest waiting time – oncology, 4.9 weeks. Longest waiting times – orthopedic surgery, 40.3 weeks. Average wait to get an MRI – 10.3 weeks nationally but 28 weeks in Newfoundland.

Average wait time for a surgery considered “elective,” like a hip replacement – four or more months.

SO, if the USA implements universal health care, where will the Canadians go

 

[soma]

We have the least efficient Health Care system of the developed countries. Most of the money we spend goes to Corporations and very little of the money we spend goes directly to help the patient.

 

[srlucado]

We have the least efficient Health Care system of the developed countries. Most of the money we spend goes to Corporations and very little of the money we spend goes directly to help the patient.

I guess that explains why people keep living longer.

If I had to blame one group for the high costs of health care, I’d point the finger at lawyers, who drive up the cost of everything in the country.

 

[Matthew91]

To anyone who says the US has a bad healthcare system, I really cannot see what you are basing this on. There is a reason why people come to the U.S. for treatment, because they know that here they can receive the best treatment in the world, it may cost more, but then again how much would you pay to save your life? or the life of a loved one?

The reason why people come to the U.S. for healthcare is because we have a competitive system, where companies compete to invent new life saving drugs, which get them money, and give these drugs out to the world. Once the government gets involved the competition fades away, and pharmaceutical companies don’t have the drive to spend the money on new research if there is not a significant profit. it is a sensible business decision, if something is not yielding a good profit, don’t do that particular thing. and you cannot blame these companies for not continuing their research once the health care system is nationalized.

And I am sure most of you have no taken this into account, but you do realize that a nationalized health care system will most assuredly be paying for abortions, contraceptives, embryonic stem cell research, and other intrinsically evil things.

I don’t want my future career to be burdened by heavy taxes, where 50% or more of what I make is taken by the government. I prefer to retain the right to take care of my own body, I don’t want my health care records funneled through a federal bureaucracy. The government has no right to go through your health care records without your consent or warrant, and they have no right to deny you the right to take care of your own health.

Im tired of handing over my rights the federal government, all it does is take more and more of our liberty.

 

[apromisemade]

To anyone who says the US has a bad healthcare system, I really cannot see what you are basing this on. There is a reason why people come to the U.S. for treatment, because they know that here they can receive the best treatment in the world, it may cost more, but then again how much would you pay to save your life? or the life of a loved one?

How much would you pay!?!?!?

Do you even* know *how much it costs to have an organ transplant, or reattach a finger? It ain’t chump change. I’d like to see you try to pay for that out of pocket.

It’s not the healthcare in of itself thats bad, it’s the fact that the full benefits of it are available to so few.

Try the people that have died who could’ve been saved soley because they didn’t have the money to pay for it or *because their insurance companies flat out refused to cover it. *

Just the other day I heard a story about a couple who had their baby daughter undergo numerous surgeries to try to save her from a birth defect. All of which the insurance company agreed to cover. She ultimately died. And during the following week, they got a letter from their agency telling them the coverage for the childs surgeries had been withdrawn, leaving the couple not only to grieve the death of their first child but with over a half million dollars in medical bills they were being left to pay for on their own. Money nobody exactly has lying around.

 

[cynic]

it seems as if my post was deleted…

 

[Toughguy]

So what happens to those who worked in low paying jobs for most of their lives, and couldn’t save/invest enough for retirement? They should just die apparently. That’s the problem with private savings plans, only those earning above x amount can benefit.
Opposition to social security is ussually based on the fact that it’s redistributive, rather than waste or poor management.

Where does the government get the money from in the first place? Our checks! Rather than have the government have that money, it could be invested by it’s rightful owners, and make more money. So $1100 a month could end up being $2000 a month.

Even people with low paying jobs have SS taken out.

 

[Toughguy]

cynic;

This goes the “says you” basket until it can backed up. The pention - as seperate from social security - can be means-tested, and the age of retirement raised again. Both are reasonable. But that doesn’t get to the real issue ; one individuals tax dollars and/or savings subsidizing anothers retirement. So why not be honest?

Ok, I’ll be honest. Why the hell should I have to 1) work longer than the person getting SS had to and 2) Why the hell should I pay more taxes because some politician didn’t plan right? And let’s not even get into the Constitutionality of Social Security. Let’s be honest?? Let’s be Constitutional! I know many love to blow off the Constitution and spit in the face of the Revolutionary War soldiers who died for the Constitution, but where do we draw the line?

And yes, I absolutely plan to take SS, if it is there. Hypocrite? No. I paid for it. It’s mine. I have it coming. Did I have a choice to pay SS or not? Yes. Either I paid it or I went into a federal prison. Some choice in the land of the free, huh?

 

[cynic]

Where does the government get the money from in the first place? Our checks! Rather than have the government have that money, it could be invested by it’s rightful owners, and make more money. So $1100 a month could end up being $2000 a month.

So what might happen to those who earn less and can’t save that much…?

This:

Then I hope they have a lot of friends, or otherwise life sucks for them.

'Cause I guess I missed the part of life that guarantees happiness and plenty for everybody.
.

You seem to have missed the point. You have been honest with your reasons for objecting to a compulsory retirement savings scheme. Well okay then.

 

[billg3436]

Just some questions:

The 2004 Census figured there to be about 1 doctor per 300 persons in the US population. Let’s image that the population of the US is 903 people with 3 doctors among them. Also, imagine that specialization is not a relevant issue. Those three doctors can treat any disease or condition that afflicts any of the 900 non-doctors. Let’s also say that, unlike the US, the healthcare system among our population is a purely free-market enterprise. The doctors charge fees for service and treat those who can afford to pay. Being that this is a free market system, 1 or 2 of the doctors also freely dispose of a small portion their services in free and low cost clinics clinics. Also, some of the better off members of this population freely donate some portion of their resources to pay for the healthcare of the less fortunate. Let’s say with this situation the three doctors are able to adequately care for 70% of the population. The remaining 30% suffer untreated maladies of varying degrees of seriousness. The doctors are still working at full capacity. Even if everyone in this population was rich, the 3 doctors would still have no additional capacity to treat that remaining 30%.

Here are the questions: If one day the government of these 900 announces “universal healthcare!”, how does that increase the capacity of doctors to deliver heathcare? Is it more just to have the government decree who gets a kidney transplant rather than the free market? How so? Do you think that the price setting that must inevitably be a component in any “universal” healthcare system will encourage more people or fewer people to enter the medical profession? Do you think the situation will improve if the ratio of doctors to non-doctors drops to 2 to 1 in 300? Do you think this might have something to do with why more and more people in nations with “universal” healthcare are applying for treatment in nations without “universal” healthcare? Do the good intentions of those who desire the government to decree “universal” healthcare mitigate their culpability (sin?) for bringing about a worse situation than existed before?

BillG

 

[Toughguy]

cynic;

So what might happen to those who earn less and can’t save that much…?

They didn’t have that money in hand to begin with, the gov with held it. But if you mean in general, then get a different job, learn new skills, start a business, etc. Immigrants come here all the time and flourish. There IS opportunity here, but it is up to the individual to decide whether to find the opportunity or not. If they do not, then that is their problem. This is not the 1930’s. Granted, times are tough now, but they weren’t for the last 25 years.

For example, my fiance and I are both out of work. So, we have decided to open a pizzaria! We aren’t begging for money from the Gov, we are going to make our own way. This time last year, neither one of us thought we would be where we are today. But, we are, and we are going to make our own future. We see an opportunity. We aren’t at the welfare office. If this pays off for us, why should I have to pay my employees $10.00 with benefits? Why should I have to pay more in taxes? Why? Because we worked harder and took a chance??? I don’t think so.