Universal Health Insurance (2)

[orionsbelt]

Us.

The good news is that if we are half as good as anyone else it will still be less than we are paying today, as a nation.

Do you think costs will be reduced in half while services stay the same.

Everything I write is based on the belief that with UHC services will be greatly reduce. And on top of that we will not realize cost savings as promised. But we will have plenty of politicians telling us that if we elect them. THEY will finally solve the problem of reducing the cost. Unfortunately at that point the idea of improved service won’t even be a consideration.

 

[SFTor]

Socialism - Government control of production (in this case delivery of health service). Most UHC is a form of socialism.

Look at it as a continuim from free market to socialist. And look at overall econimic systems as well as specific industries within those systems.

England is towards socialsim on many things. Overall farther than Japan but not as far as Cuba.

orionsbelt:

So England is towards socialism on many things: what does that mean exactly? Not as far as Cuba? Cuba is a Communist country for crying out loud. Your little continuum would get you an F in a poli sci class, I’m afraid.

What do you think of the U.S. Agricultural Bill, with vast subsidies going to the agricultural sector? How about the government bailing out Morgan Stanley?

Is that socialism?

 

[BamaRider]

This is where this argument always loses me. I can move to a state that DOES offer protection for me via state laws about insurance, and I will get insurance just fine. In fact, that’s what I’m going to be doing as soon as I’m healthy enough to move. We’re going to move to Washington state. There, it is illegal to discriminate against me, and this includes insurance.

I’m not sure I follow. You are making the case you are discriminated against by carriers refusing to write you insurance? And Washington has laws that say they cant’t do that under discrimination issue?

See this is a risk business. When I was in the fire dept I had companies that charged me more because of my occupation. I paid a higher premium then a bookeeper if all things were equal.

But- it was soon figured out the fire departments mandatory fitness rules, tough anti smoking regs, annual physcials cancelled out the risks of the job hazards. Meaning the bookeeper was much more subject to die of a heart attack then me on the fireground. Companies figured that out, and stepped in to write life insurance policies to guy in my line of work.

But I stll had to pass all the companies physicals and screens. I didn’t have a problem with it.

As long as some believe health care is a God Given right, then the argument not going anywhere. I disagree vehemently when Tor says the rest of the worls is better off than us.

What I do, where I go, things I have, and how I live my life, just can’t happen on my income anyplace else but Alabama and the like.

I don’t think anybody much retires in Europe at 49 and lives off my income. If they did they’re eating soup and beans. A welfare economy demands more and more of the participants.

The pyramid in this country is going upside down. The top 50% of the wage earners in this country pay 86% of ALL taxes, and the top 25% pay 96% of that. That leaves the bottom 50% to pay the remaining 15% (IRS figures, link on request) now you tell me Tor how are we gonna pay for UHC? Libs are NOT gonna tax anybody making less they 30k a year, so its gonna come to folks like me. Just plain ole folks. How much more do you think we can sustain before our backs break at holding up so much of load?

With gas at 4 dollars a gallon, and food going up, the libs are gonna com to me and jack MY taxes up, to pay for UHC for a bunch of folks that don’t wanna give up their boats and second cars,and frankly I’m tired of it.

I’m burned out on folks telling me I’m NOT doing enough. I am not gonna put up with govt in my health care, I’m just not. And thankfully most Americans feel the same way. They soundly defeated that proposal in far our left Oregon and few years ago, watcha reckon they gonna say to it in Kansas or Oklahoma or anywhere in the south, where the real political power is? It ain’t happening.

You wanna cause a ruckus go tell someone around here you gonna pull his BCBS and put him in UHC and let him wait for 2 years to get a hernia fixed. You’ll have a fight on your hands bro.

We have reps running for national office here pleding to vote against any such proposal. It ain’t gonna fly. So we best try to come up some other way to help folks like Pathia.

 

[orionsbelt]

orionsbelt:

Are you familiar with Marie Antoinette? The one who said “let them eat cake?”

You are starting to sound more and more like her. Are you sure that is a good thing?

Best,

Tor

If that’s what you are hearing then I must not be expressing myself very well.

I’m saying let’s not build a big inefficient government agency. Rather let us (you, me, anyone) use our time, talent, and treasure to start making bread (i.e. donating to charities) to help those who need it.

 

[pathia]

I’m not sure I follow. You are making the case you are discriminated against by carriers refusing to write you insurance? And Washington has laws that say they cant’t do that under discrimination issue?

We have reps running for national office here pleding to vote against any such proposal. It ain’t gonna fly. So we best try to come up some other way to help folks like Pathia.

In all those states I listed it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of gender identity. This means they cannot terminate/not cover me solely on the basis of my transsexualism. They are still free to not cover anything related to the condition, but they are not free to simply not cover me what so ever, which is what all carriers in Virginia do.

 

[orionsbelt]

orionsbelt:

So England is towards socialism on many things: what does that mean exactly? Not as far as Cuba? Cuba is a Communist country for crying out loud. Your little continuum would get you an F in a poli sci class, I’m afraid.

What do you think of the U.S. Agricultural Bill, with vast subsidies going to the agricultural sector? How about the government bailing out Morgan Stanley?

Is that socialism?

It means a good portion of English economy is socialist. High taxes (government controlled capital) are used to control many aspects of the economy.

Communism is just farther on the continum I’m sticking with the economic aspects not how it is controlled politically.

Was I advocating any of that list of government meddling in the economy in any of my posts?.

 

[SFTor]

Hmmm. What makes you think I’m not?

Let’s just say I have a pretty strong hunch.

Respectfully,

Tor

 

[SFTor]

It means a good portion of English economy is socialist. High taxes (government controlled capital) are used to control many aspects of the economy.

Communism is just farther on the continum I’m sticking with the economic aspects not how it is controlled politically.

Was I advocating any of that list of government meddling in the economy in any of my posts?.

Here’s the point, orionsbelt:

you will not find a country in this world that doesn’t use government interference in the economy. The U.S. is a shining example of such interference. The idea that England is more “socialist” is because the U.S. typically interferes on behalf of corporations, whereas our English friends probably interfere more on behalf of ordinary people.

I have a solution that might satisfy you however: would you feel better about calling U.S. government interference on behalf of corporations “fascist” instead of “socialist”?

 

[ribozyme]

With gas at 4 dollars a gallon, and food going up, the libs are gonna com to me and jack MY taxes up, to pay for UHC for a bunch of folks that don’t wanna give up their boats and second cars,and frankly I’m tired of it.

So it is now boats instead of welfare Cadillacs.

And for charity, how come charity did not solve pathia’s problems?

 

[wildleafblower]

What happens to people who have universal health insurance if they end up needing immediate medical attention in the United States? Do they pay out of their pockets the medical bill?

pathia:

No, it is paid by the UHC from their country. There’s probably a little extra paperwork involved, but it’s covered.

Thanks pathia I wonder how long it takes for the hospital to be reimbursed by the UHC. Do you know?

p.s. You already know I like to save space. See ya below. How are you feeling today?

 

[pathia]

What happens to people who have universal health insurance if they end up needing immediate medical attention in the United States? Do they pay out of their pockets the medical bill?

No, it is paid by the UHC from their country. There’s probably a little extra paperwork involved, but it’s covered.

 

[orionsbelt]

Here’s the point, orionsbelt:

you will not find a country in this world that doesn’t use government interference in the economy. The U.S. is a shining example of such interference. The idea that England is more “socialist” is because the U.S. typically interferes on behalf of corporations, whereas our English friends probably interfere more on behalf of ordinary people.

I have a solution that might satisfy you however: would you feel better about calling U.S. government interference on behalf of corporations “fascist” instead of “socialist”?

I agree, all governments will and should be involved in the economy to some degree. Most go too far.

Concerning whether the government works on behalf of the people or corporations is a matter of perspective. Incorporation is an economic mechanism for allocating capital for the production of a particular good or service. What you say really doesn’t make sense unless you somehow equate corporations and citizens.

Facism is more of a political concept where socialism is more of an economic concept. So no you cannot use them interchangably.

 

[Oscarthecat]

Guy:

As you get older, and maybe, God forbid, you get sick or injured a few times, your insurance company is going to look for reasons to cancel your coverage. Nice to know, isn’t it?

I’m unclear as to how this is not a concern in regard to government healthcare programs. There are plenty of people on medicaid, medicare, or gov’t assistance programs for prescription drugs etc. The folks I know on these programs live in a constant state of fear that the government is going to arbitrarily exclude certain medications or treatments, either on an individual basis or as a universal policy. They worry about it at every election and every budget vote.

The bottom line for UHC is that it provides a false sense of security- the government can’t give any guarantees because nothing the government “promises” is guaranteed to last past the next election cycle.

 

[Oscarthecat]

Other states that I could get insurance in too (It grows every year).

Oregon, Colorado, Iowa, New Jersey, Maine, Hawaii, Illinois, New Mexico, Rhode Island and Minnesota. Some of these happened years and years ago, I haven’t heard of a gold rush for benefits in any of these.

Pathia, aren’t you at all concerned that insurance companies might simply stop offering policies in states that tell them how to run their businesses?

 

[ribozyme]

I’m unclear as to how this is not a concern in regard to government healthcare programs. There are plenty of people on medicaid, medicare, or gov’t assistance programs for prescription drugs etc. The folks I know on these programs live in a constant state of fear that the government is going to arbitrarily exclude certain medications or treatments, either on an individual basis or as a universal policy. They worry about it at every election and every budget vote.

The bottom line for UHC is that it provides a false sense of security- the government can’t give any guarantees because nothing the government “promises” is guaranteed to last past the next election cycle.

If you have plenty of money you do not have to worry about that. But what if a private insurance company decides that it might not be worth it too? What if you are unable to afford insurance. Overall, if you have plenty of money, you do not have to worry. Money too me is important not because it buys comfort, but because it buys security.

 

[pathia]

Pathia, aren’t you at all concerned that insurance companies might simply stop offering policies in states that tell them how to run their businesses?

Some of those states have had the laws in for years, some for over a decade. If that was going to change their business model, it already would have.

You guys keep forcing me into this hole. Where I am supposed to rely on nothing but the kindness of strangers. You know what my experience with that is?

People ignoring my friend who was dying in the street, in broad daylight. People ignored her until she bled to death from the gunshot wound. They eventually got her to the hospital, but she had lost too much. No one cared, for an unknown period of time until a police officer saw her.

That is my experience with the kindness of strangers.

 

[Oscarthecat]

So it is now boats instead of welfare Cadillacs.

And for charity, how come charity did not solve pathia’s problems?

Charity didn’t solve pathia’s problem because the vast majority of people are stuck on the notion that the only solutions to our healthcare problems can be found in some combination of insurance companies and politicians. In fact, as you can see in the current election cycle, our political system thrives on fear-mongering to garner support, and give speech after speech about how the only solution to our failing system is government intervention. Consequently, people have been brainwashed into not even considering charitable (meaning individual, voluntary contributions of time and resources) efforts as a solution to the healthcare problem.

As many of you have noted, insurance companies have all but abandoned their roots as grassroots organizations that were developed by individuals who recognized a need in their communities. Insurance companies began as charitable endeavors- people who worked together, lived in the same community, went to the same church, or were otherwise connected recognized that they could, as voluntary individuals, contribute their personal resources toward a common good.Now, instead of being a community savings/investment account or a simple union managed program, health insurance companies have grown and merged into juggernauts that have the unheard of ability to set prices on both sides of their market, yet still prove unable to operate in their consumers’ best interests.

Politicians, and their lobbyists, hardly have the public interests in mind either. Politicians are interested only in what will keep them elected, and are at the disposal of lobbyists who will spend millions keeping crucial drugs from their competitors off the market just as frequently as they will spend millions to get their politician pets to endorse pushing inadequately tested drugs on the market.

The common ground of these two groups is that they know that their consumers and constituents are a captive market. Consequently, they know it is in their best interests to bludgeon the public with the message that there is no solution to healthcare outside of their involvement.

 

[cynic]

The common ground of these two groups is that they know that their consumers and constituents are a captive market. Consequently, they know it is in their best interests to bludgeon the public with the message that there is no solution to healthcare outside of their involvement.

Universal health insurance, with vountary membership, set up by the government, run to meet costs, but without profit as the main objective, would seem like a good alternative. But of course it isn’t to people like you, because government = evil.

 

[Oscarthecat]

Since skepticism about the potential for a charitable solution to the the nation’s healthcare is so rampant, I thought I’d provide some statistics about how charitable our country really is…

(source: msnbc.msn.com/id/19409188/)
(source: usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-06-25-charitable_N.htm)

The US is consistently at the top of the list of nations that give to charity- both in actual dollars, as well as as % of GDP.

In 2006, individual giving in the US (not including government contributions) totaled $295 BILLION, and only 12.72 Billion of this was from corporations. That means that when individuals in this country see a need, they can be depended upon to respond to the needs of others by pulling out their checkbooks.

For those who still don’t believe it, I should point out that "Americans give twice as much as the next most charitable country, according to a November 2006 comparison done by the Charities Aid Foundation. In philanthropic giving as a percentage of gross domestic product, the U***.S. ranked first at 1.7%. No. 2 Britain gave 0.73%, while France, with a 0.14% rate, trailed such countries as South Africa, Singapore, Turkey and Germany***.

I find it interesting that countries with UHC give so little in charity…could it be that, as I have been saying all along, once people start believing that the government is responsible for charitable giving, they stop giving to charity?

Politicians need to be needed-and so they encourage government programs that they know will distort and diminish our innate sense that we need to personally help other people. Instead of recognizing that we should help people personally and directly, we become convinced that it is better and easier to just let somebody we voted for do it.

I

 

[Oscarthecat]

Universal health insurance, with vountary membership, set up by the government, run to meet costs, but without profit as the main objective, would seem like a good alternative. But of course it isn’t to people like you, because government = evil.

Voluntary membership? It isn’t voluntary if I am forced to pay for it through my taxes.

If you’re proposing a non-profit insurance company run by the government, then why can’t non-profit insurance companies achieve that same goal without government involvement? Government bureaucrats are not very good at staying within a budget- they’ve been too conditioned to simply raise taxes every time they go over.

In any event, I would rather have the choice of one of many insurance companies that are in competition to get my business as a patient or as a healthcare provider than be subjected to a monopoly that will grant or deny services according to the last election cycle.