Universal health insurance

[rtconstant]

You are just setting up a strawman, but I’ll answer anyway. Please read my whole post and I’ll explain why they’re not the same.

Laws against abortion would protect unborn children from an elective and unjust attack by an aggressor intent on killing them.

Such a law is designed to **prohibit ** a specific, direct behaviour intended to cause harm to another.

On the other hand someone who is pro-choice would say that you are in fact inforcing morality that others do not want and that can potentially cause harm. While I would disagree with that argument I do so because I believe the Christian position on abortion is morally right and universally true.

However, in our soceity many even possibly most people also believe that upholding a women’s choice in this is morally correct. Does this mean that we should stop trying to get abortion laws changed since we’re essentially impossing our view of right and wrong on others? Of course not. I would hope that all citizens vote and hope to turn our soceity into a just one. Don’t get me wrong I realize you want the same thing I just offering a different view point.

On the other side, laws mandating universal health care are not designed to protect individuals from elective and unjust attacks by other citizens. Instead, they are compulsory laws which require citizens to engage in specific behaviours which may or may not directly benefit them.

When we support pro-Life legislation we support laws that some see as attacks on their liberty and their physical bodies. We all still support the pro-life movement though because it is right. I’m curious though where and how you see UHC as an attack and enforcement of specific behavior?

Prohibitive laws are easy to defend on moral grounds because they generally prohibit one person from engaging in a behaviour which is directly and specifically harmful to another.

OK, I’m with you.

Compulsory laws are not as easy to defend on moral grounds because you have to prove that what you are compelling the individual to do is both morally acceptable in itself, is not violating the individual rights of the individual being compelled, and is demonstrably the best way to achieve the good objective sought.

True, and that has to be judged on a case by case basis it doesn’t mean though that those criteria cannot be met. Is good affordable healthcare for all citizens morally good? Yes. Is the availability of good healthcare to all citizens a violation of their or anyone’s rights? I don’t really see how. Is it demonstrabily the best way to achieve the good objective sought? Well, there are other proposals that might in theory work, however, UHC is demonstrably the best way that we currently have real world observation of. However, I’m open to other ideas as long as it offers health care to everyone who needs it in a manner that is affordable to them.

Let me give you an example.
We don’t have laws mandating people to donate blood. Why? Because that would be a compulsory law which, in the eyes of some, is a violation of indiviual rights, and because, as demonstrated by successful blood donation programs, mandating blood draws is not the best or only way to achieve the goal of maintaining an emergency blood supply.

Well, right now we do manage to more or less keep supplies up though we do often run dangerously low. If we were at a point where we were having a real crisis of lack of blood for almost half of our hospitalized patients even after all the volunteers have been tapped then we may actually have to resort to that.

With this argument though I’m curious. Do you think that it is wrong that we all have to pay for public schools, libraries, police and the fire department?

In the same way, mandating people to pay into a government health care system is not the best or only way to make health care affordable and accessible to all who need it.

In theory that might be true however, it is the best real world system that we’ve actually seen in action.

 

[anthony022071]

catholic.net/rcc/Periodicals/Igpress/2001-05/spclrept.html
< In the early 1990s, two-thirds of all health plans provided coverage for abortion and 86 percent paid for sterilizations, according to a 1993 survey by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit research organization in New York City named for a former president of Planned Parenthood. >

christusmedicus.com/HCRC/assault/assault.htm
< Catholic hospitals treat 80 million patients each year and make up 11% of all community hospitals. As abortion advocates are quick to point out, Catholic hospitals are often the only hospitals in rural communities. This is so because they operate not out of a profit motive but out of charity. In 1998, for example, the nation’s 637 Catholic hospitals’ service to the poor resulted in a $2.8 billion financial loss. On average, Catholic hospitals provide a wider range of services than other hospitals: nutrition programs, natural family planning classes, geriatric services and HIV/AIDS treatment. >

Today this legacy and this mission are being undermined by abortion advocates. For decades they have attempted to force Catholic hospitals to provide abortions or go out of business. In recent years their tactics have become more subtle, and the campaign to deny Catholic health care providers their rights of conscience has met with some success. >

< Should pro-abortion forces succeed, they will be responsible for shutting down the Catholic health care ministry. As Cardinal George so movingly testified against the AMA proposal to requiring all hospitals to provide all “reproductive health services”: “Catholic hospitals cannot comply. Effectively, the American Medical Association is being asked to help abolish Catholic health care in this country.” >

 

[vern_humphrey]

< Should pro-abortion forces succeed, they will be responsible for shutting down the Catholic health care ministry. As Cardinal George so movingly testified against the AMA proposal to requiring all hospitals to provide all “reproductive health services”: “Catholic hospitals cannot comply. Effectively, the American Medical Association is being asked to help abolish Catholic health care in this country.” >

Cardinal George should tell the AMA, “We do provide all reproductive health services. We don’t commit murder.”

 

[He_Man]

Is it fair that I can’t afford food, clothing or housing because of my medical bills that insurance won’t cover? Is it fair that I have lived out of my car, and in homeless shelters because I couldn’t afford rent for my medical bills?

All I have is my health, and it is exceedingly poor. Health comes first for me, even before shelter and food, because if I’m not healthy, I can’t live, I can’t keep anything down, or even eat.

How is it right that an insurance company denies me surgery to fix an infected part of my body? The only way they would cover it is if I let it deteriorate to the point I got sepsis or gangrene from it, how insane is that?

This isn’t about little things that are ‘optional’. These are conditions that can and will eventually KILL me, and they deny them, consistently. I shouldn’t have to rely on charity to just be ALIVE. That’s insane.

Of course it isn’t fair, but neither was Jesus being hung on a cross.

Life isn’t always fair, but fairness isn’t our goal. God never promised us fairness (quite the contrary), but he promised us eternal salvation should we serve His will.

Why would you expect fairness?

 

[pathia]

Of course it isn’t fair, but neither was Jesus being hung on a cross.

Life isn’t always fair, but fairness isn’t our goal. God never promised us fairness (quite the contrary), but he promised us eternal salvation should we serve His will.

Why would you expect fairness?

This isn’t about God, this is about government promoting equity amongst its citizens. Life isn’t fair, no, but does that mean we must do NOTHING as a society to help the odds of the unlucky?

 

[vern_humphrey]

This isn’t about God, this is about government promoting equity amongst its citizens. Life isn’t fair, no, but does that mean we must do NOTHING as a society to help the odds of the unlucky?

Except that glovernment is inherent inequitable. The few rule the many, and even in democracies, the average man cannot take his business elsewhere.

 

[ribozyme]

Except that glovernment is inherent inequitable. The few rule the many, and even in democracies, the average man cannot take his business elsewhere.

Sweden is an example of a “big government” nation and it has a low gini coefficient. “Big government” does not mean inequitable outcomes.

 

[whatevergirl]

This isn’t about God, this is about government promoting equity amongst its citizens. Life isn’t fair, no, but does that mean we must do NOTHING as a society to help the odds of the unlucky?

That would require the government to RUN the healthcare system completely though. The government as it stands, cannot and should not get involved with private business. Largely why they can’t put a price cap on oil prices right now. The government governs the insurance industry, from a fraud and premium setting standpoint, but the government shouldn’t get in the business of becoming insurance actuaries and underwriters. Insurance companies discriminate all of the time, for lack of a better word. They deny people coverage for homeowners insurance if they have violent dogs, for example, or in some cases charge a very high premium to smokers or people who have history of mental illness, for example. These are just a few examples of how insurances companies try to serve everyone, as best as they can…there has to be a cap on what they accept. The government cannot control that–unless the government starts to become an insurer, which again–if we think healthcare is poor now, let the government get its hand into the underwriting and claims paying business.

Pathia…I hear you, believe me I do. But, the government taking over the entire program is not the answer. They could manage the process better, but they will not be allowed, I don’t think, to tell private companies who to cover. I just don’t see that as being what universal healthcare will come down to.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Sweden is an example of a “big government” nation and it has a low gini coefficient. “Big government” does not mean inequitable outcomes.

Aren’t you supposed to be out starting a business, so you can astonish the rest of us with your managerial skills and economic wisdom?

 

[pathia]

That would require the government to RUN the healthcare system completely though. The government as it stands, cannot and should not get involved with private business. Largely why they can’t put a price cap on oil prices right now. The government governs the insurance industry, from a fraud and premium setting standpoint, but the government shouldn’t get in the business of becoming insurance actuaries and underwriters. Insurance companies discriminate all of the time, for lack of a better word. They deny people coverage for homeowners insurance if they have violent dogs, for example, or in some cases charge a very high premium to smokers or people who have history of mental illness, for example. These are just a few examples of how insurances companies try to serve everyone, as best as they can…there has to be a cap on what they accept. The government cannot control that–unless the government starts to become an insurer, which again–if we think healthcare is poor now, let the government get its hand into the underwriting and claims paying business.

Pathia…I hear you, believe me I do. But, the government taking over the entire program is not the answer. They could manage the process better, but they will not be allowed, I don’t think, to tell private companies who to cover. I just don’t see that as being what universal healthcare will come down to.

Then exactly what am I supposed to do? It is not my fault I was born unhealthy, blame God, or original sin. Why should my entire life be a complete ruin of debt, bankruptcies and never being able to save a cent? I run in the red about a thousand dollars a month right now, without fail.

I live off of ramen noodles, mac and cheese and my main meat is bologna, I don’t have a home, I live on a treasured friend’s couch. I don’t have a cell phone, or a car. I don’t have a TV, I don’t have cable, I don’t have any bills to cut, or things to sell. I rarely ever have more than five changes of clothing.

It’s not like I’m asking for much. I’d just like to have enough money to save, maybe even god forbid actually be able to enjoy life from time to time. The only reason I have internet, or a computer to be able to talk here is because my work provides it to me to do my job.

The ONLY thing that drives my poverty this low is my medical bills, medical bills that insurance companies refuse to cover, and the government refuses to assist, because my income is too high. I spend my income on NOTHING but my health.

 

[Oscarthecat]

This isn’t about God, this is about government promoting equity amongst its citizens. Life isn’t fair, no, but does that mean we must do NOTHING as a society to help the odds of the unlucky?

people can act without involving the government. People voluntarily worked to serve the poor and the sick long before the government got involved.

 

[pathia]

people can act without involving the government. People voluntarily worked to serve the poor and the sick long before the government got involved.

Or just shunned them out of the city and had them form their own colonies like in Jesus’ time. That worked right good, didn’t it?

 

[whatevergirl]

Then exactly what am I supposed to do? It is not my fault I was born unhealthy, blame God, or original sin. Why should my entire life be a complete ruin of debt, bankruptcies and never being able to save a cent? I run in the red about a thousand dollars a month right now, without fail.

I live off of ramen noodles, mac and cheese and my main meat is bologna, I don’t have a home, I live on a treasured friend’s couch. I don’t have a cell phone, or a car. I don’t have a TV, I don’t have cable, I don’t have any bills to cut, or things to sell. I rarely ever have more than five changes of clothing.

It’s not like I’m asking for much. I’d just like to have enough money to save, maybe even god forbid actually be able to enjoy life from time to time. The only reason I have internet, or a computer to be able to talk here is because my work provides it to me to do my job.

The ONLY thing that drives my poverty this low is my medical bills, medical bills that insurance companies refuse to cover, and the government refuses to assist, because my income is too high. I spend my income on NOTHING but my health.

I know that it is horrible if an insurance company won’t pay…your claims are not the only ones not being covered. People who have different claims issues, are denied, also. I have been denied for stupid things, nowhere near the bills you are talking about, and I know that there has to be a better way. I would possibly seek out groups like GENDA, and see if they have a list of carriers who cover your claims. If they have a way to point you in the right direction…it’s at least a start. If they know of people with the same claims issues, and how are they handling it? I am also in the process of searching for you, on my end, as I work in insurance, and maybe someone knows of carriers who write and cover people who have illnesses not covered in the admitted market. I will try my best for you, pathia, and I’m praying for you that things get better.

I just don’t see the government becoming an insurer…I actually think that would be worse for the country as a whole. There is a better way…I also think that there needs to be legislation created stating that no carrier can deny someone coverage, no matter what their sexual identity or orientation.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Or just shunned them out of the city and had them form their own colonies like in Jesus’ time. That worked right good, didn’t it?

That’s not what happened – transmittable diseases, especially leprosy – were grounds for excluding people. In those days it was the only way society could protect itself from such diseases. Nowadays we call it Quarentine.

 

[pathia]

I know that it is horrible if an insurance company won’t pay…your claims are not the only ones not being covered. People who have different claims issues, are denied, also. I have been denied for stupid things, nowhere near the bills you are talking about, and I know that there has to be a better way. I would possibly seek out groups like GENDA, and see if they have a list of carriers who cover your claims. If they have a way to point you in the right direction…it’s at least a start. If they know of people with the same claims issues, and how are they handling it? I am also in the process of searching for you, on my end, as I work in insurance, and maybe someone knows of carriers who write and cover people who have illnesses not covered in the admitted market. I will try my best for you, pathia, and I’m praying for you that things get better.

I just don’t see the government becoming an insurer…I actually think that would be worse for the country as a whole. There is a better way…I also think that there needs to be legislation created stating that no carrier can deny someone coverage, no matter what their sexual identity or orientation.

GENDA is not a group, it is a proposed federal law that has a zero chance of passing. Bush has vowed a veto, and it doesn’t have the votes to pass even in a democratic congress. The only group with GENDA in its name I can find are in New York. I am not in New York, I am in Virginia.

 

[pathia]

That’s not what happened – transmittable diseases, especially leprosy – were grounds for excluding people. In those days it was the only way society could protect itself from such diseases. Nowadays we call it Quarentine.

True, though the spread of leprosy is still not fully understood. However, I have been screamed, yelled and ranted at that I should be in a quarantine for my ‘lifestyle’ by someone who’s job was to SELL insurance.

 

[Oscarthecat]

Pathia- you said before that only three states passed legislation to treat problems such as yours. I think that people in your situation, with illnesses that are disregarded in one way or another, should be very suspicious of universal Heath care or single payer systems.

Yes, right now insurers are unlikely to cover you- but there is absolutely no guarantee that the government would either. Under UHC, decisions to allow certain treatments would be made by the government, which means politicians catering to special interest groups. If only three states force insurers to cover your condition, how likely is it that legislators in the other 47 states are going to decide to allow it under UHC?

At least in our current system there is room for private doctors and private hospitals to choose for themselves what they will or will not cover. While that is not working to you favor right now, at you have the option to move to
a state where you can get treated. Under UHC those decisions would be made universally for everyone everywhere.

It would literally take an act of congress to get treatment for something not covered under UHC.

 

[pathia]

Pathia- you said before that only three states passed legislation to treat problems such as yours. I think that people in your situation, with illnesses that are disregarded in one way or another, should be very suspicious of universal Heath care or single payer systems.

Yes, right now insurers are unlikely to cover you- but there is absolutely no guarantee that the government would either. Under UHC, decisions to allow certain treatments would be made by the government, which means politicians catering to special interest groups. If only three states force insurers to cover your condition, how likely is it that legislators in the other 47 states are going to decide to allow it under UHC?

It’s covered in every single country in the world that has a UHC or single payer system. Which is why my long term plan is simply to emigrate to canada. That’s why Washington is my first move. This country has showed me almost nothing but hatred, discrimination, violence, even an attempted rape. I have no loyalty towards it anymore. The only time I get solace or sympathy outside of my circle of friends is anonymously online by people like those here.

 

[vern_humphrey]

True, though the spread of leprosy is still not fully understood. However, I have been screamed, yelled and ranted at that I should be in a quarantine for my ‘lifestyle’ by someone who’s job was to SELL insurance.

There are hate-filled people everywhere – you should read some of the things posted about conservatives.

 

[Ted_in_Charlott]

Here is a listing of good/bad faith insurance companies:

badfaithinsurance.org/