Why Am I for nationa healthcare?

[aspawloski4th]

mlive.com/business/west-michigan/index.ssf/2009/12/medical_bills_are_a_driving_fo.html

If our healcare system was functioning as it should be this story shouldn’t at all be possbile. But storys like this are nearly everywhere all the time. Quite frankly if I was the person having the anurysm in that first story, if I knew all that was going to happen as a result of saving my life, I’d say let me die. Better to die then to live worse than a dog.

 

[aspawloski4th]

Hmm no answers. Everyone must agree that I’m right then!

 

[St_Francis]

No, I was actually just considering the issue.

If people are being driven to bankruptcy by medical bills, and we as a nation are already heavily in debt and about to enter into a time when our governmental health care costs are going to rise very rapidly due to the entry of the Boomers into retirement, what makes you think that the government’s increasing its role won’t have an equally bad effect on our national situation?

I do think that something needs to be done, I just don’t think that the currently contemplated proposals are a good solution.

 

[wabrams]

Hmm no answers. Everyone must agree that I’m right then!

Or everyone is tired of your same old arguement: business bad, rich people evil, inept government taking over more of the country good; gimme gimme gimme.

BTW, what you failed to grasp is that in a country w/ socialized medicine, the fellow in that article would have had to wait for care and would probably have died waiting. You can’t had millions more to a system already short of docs and expect cost to go down or there to be no waits.

 

[aspawloski4th]

Or everyone is tired of your same old arguement: business bad, rich people evil, inept government taking over more of the country good; gimme gimme gimme.

BTW, what you failed to grasp is that in a country w/ socialized medicine, the fellow in that article would have had to wait for care and would probably have died waiting. You can’t had millions more to a system already short of docs and expect cost to go down or there to be no waits.

First of all you paint al socialized medicine with the same broad brush, very very naughty. To call Canada’s system comparable to Germany’s system is luneytunes. When designing our system we can make it our own way. No all governement is the same after all. In that article the first family in most other countries would at least not be homeless. That in of itself makes those other countries better than us.

 

[aspawloski4th]

No, I was actually just considering the issue.

If people are being driven to bankruptcy by medical bills, and we as a nation are already heavily in debt and about to enter into a time when our governmental health care costs are going to rise very rapidly due to the entry of the Boomers into retirement, what makes you think that the government’s increasing its role won’t have an equally bad effect on our national situation?

I do think that something needs to be done, I just don’t think that the currently contemplated proposals are a good solution.

The worst possible thing we can do is nothing.

 

[Timbothefiveth]

Why am I against it? Because it still funds abortion, and is thus still immoral. They have rejected Nelson’s pro-life amendment. I will never support it until it stops funding abotions.

 

[Corki]

The worst possible thing we can do is nothing.

That’s simply not true. A “reform” that makes healthcare unaffordable for millions isn’t better just because it is a new group of people than those who didn’t have healthcare before. A “reform” that lessens the overall quality of care overall, that drives good medical personnel away from the field or away from the country, and/or results in more lives losts that what we have now is not better. A “reform” that has no conscience is not better.

Yes, we need to reform healthcare. The current legislation or any legislation that takes a government-run approach is not real reform, it is just a grab by the nanny-state at another part of our lives.

 

[aspawloski4th]

That’s simply not true. A “reform” that makes healthcare unaffordable for millions isn’t better just because it is a new group of people than those who didn’t have healthcare before. A “reform” that lessens the overall quality of care overall, that drives good medical personnel away from the field or away from the country, and/or results in more lives losts that what we have now is not better. A “reform” that has no conscience is not better.

Yes, we need to reform healthcare. The current legislation or any legislation that takes a government-run approach is not real reform, it is just a grab by the nanny-state at another part of our lives.

Ok What should that first family in the article should of done then? Any country that allows that to happen is a failure as far as I am concerned.

 

[Fran65]

I live in the UK and have extensive experience both as a provider and a consumer of national health care.

I can state quite categorically that this poor man would not have ‘waited until he died’ in the UK. Nor would he have been bankrupted to pay for care. He would have been evaluated and if urgent, treated immediately. If it wasn’t an emergency then he would have been recalled and reviewed every 3-6 months to check his condition. The only bills he would have would have been travel costs to the clinic and, if he was working, @$9 per prescribed medicine. If it’s diabetes or thyroid treatment , that is also free at the point of collection.

WHO identified the very best health care system globally as the French. This is also a mix of *national *and private health care.

I am very proud to live in a country that cares for the sick and elderly regardless of income and provides for the poor and unemployed. That any wealthy, democratic country in the 21st century puts people on the street, denies them care and reduces them to the condition of beggars is an absolute disgrace. Just what do you think Jesus will say to those who support, maintain and implement those systems?

 

[wabrams]

I live in the UK and have extensive experience both as a provider and a consumer of national health care.

I can state quite categorically that this poor man would not have ‘waited until he died’ in the UK. Nor would he have been bankrupted to pay for care. He would have been evaluated and if urgent, treated immediately. If it wasn’t an emergency then he would have been recalled and reviewed every 3-6 months to check his condition. The only bills he would have would have been travel costs to the clinic and, if he was working, @$9 per prescribed medicine. If it’s diabetes or thyroid treatment , that is also free at the point of collection.

WHO identified the very best health care system globally as the French. This is also a mix of *national *and private health care.

I am very proud to live in a country that cares for the sick and elderly regardless of income and provides for the poor and unemployed. That any wealthy, democratic country in the 21st century puts people on the street, denies them care and reduces them to the condition of beggars is an absolute disgrace. Just what do you think Jesus will say to those who support, maintain and implement those systems?

Nevermind the fact that they leave the windows open in group homes in the winter with the hopes those interned will get pneumonia and die so they aren’t feeding on the system. Or the ambulance stacking so the wait times look good.

 

[Corki]

Ok What should that first family in the article should of done then? Any country that allows that to happen is a failure as far as I am concerned.

I would gladly sell my home to pay for life-saving medical treatment for my spouse. I will not so gladly sell my home to pay the government.

 

[monorail]

I am very proud to live in a country that cares for the sick and elderly **regardless of income **and provides for the poor and unemployed. That any wealthy, democratic country in the 21st century puts people on the street, denies them care and reduces them to the condition of beggars is an absolute disgrace. Just what do you think Jesus will say to those who support, maintain and implement those systems?

I counter that it’s wrong to not allow people to spend their income on what they want. I have health insurance, but it didn’t cover a specific palliative treatment for a chronic painful medical condition I have, at least not through the doctor I wanted it from in the time frame I needed. So I spent a lot of my own money to get it right away. I could do that because I “happen” to have contingency money that I saved away, and this was how I rationed my budget, and it was important to me to get treatment.

Under a system where elites decide who gets treatment when, “regardless of income,” I would have to stand in line behind people who want treatment but not badly enough to spend their own money on it.

Moreover, if it takes X dollars to save a life, but some government policy prevents national income from rising that amount, then it has cost a life. If a policy costs 5X to implement, you may have saved 1 life but at the cost of 5.

Wealth, and allowing a nation to grow wealthy, is one of the best ways to save lives. Specific example: earthquake-proofing and better-equipped hospitals. An earthquake that kills a few people in California could kill thousands in a third world country. A handful of people deciding national priorities for hundreds of millions by taking their income and spending it in ways they wouldn’t spend it themselves creates less wealth than a free-market system.

 

[aspawloski4th]

I counter that it’s wrong to not allow people to spend their income on what they want. I have health insurance, but it didn’t cover a specific palliative treatment for a chronic painful medical condition I have, at least not through the doctor I wanted it from in the time frame I needed. So I spent a lot of my own money to get it right away. I could do that because I “happen” to have contingency money that I saved away, and this was how I rationed my budget, and it was important to me to get treatment.

Under a system where elites decide who gets treatment when, “regardless of income,” I would have to stand in line behind people who want treatment but not badly enough to spend their own money on it.

Moreover, if it takes X dollars to save a life, but some government policy prevents national income from rising that amount, then it has cost a life. If a policy costs 5X to implement, you may have saved 1 life but at the cost of 5.

Wealth, and allowing a nation to grow wealthy, is one of the best ways to save lives. Specific example: earthquake-proofing and better-equipped hospitals. An earthquake that kills a few people in California could kill thousands in a third world country. A handful of people deciding national priorities for hundreds of millions by taking their income and spending it in ways they wouldn’t spend it themselves creates less wealth than a free-market system.

You just don’t get it. In my article I posted the link, they lost it all just for a brain anurysm. To save his life the family’s humanity was stripped of them. Even though they did everything right untill then. In places like Britain that wouldn’t of happened.

 

[michaeldaniels]

Hey…i have a crazy idea…bear with me on this…how about the people go out and get their own coverage and take some personal responsibility for their own problems and concerns, instead of the government jacking honest, hardworking citizens such as myself and the majority of Americans and using it to pay for those who do nothing to try to help themselves…Charity and helping those in need should be handled by Churches and organizations such as St. Jude…not by the government. The governments job should be to have a system of laws in place that ensures our right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness…not to hold our hands all our lives and babysit those who lack the initiative to take care of themselves. I pay for my own coverage…so can everyone else…even if I didn’t, I wouldn’t expect the government, the rich, or anyone for that matter to take care of it for me…if a medical bill causes me to go bankrupt because I didn’t have coverage, that is a personal problem…not society’s. I get sick and tired of liberals who like to take things that aren’t theirs and give them to other people.

The worst possible thing we can do is nothing.

 

[michaeldaniels]

Well…then maybe you could look into moving to Britain, since they obviously have a far superior system over there

You just don’t get it. In my article I posted the link, they lost it all just for a brain anurysm. To save his life the family’s humanity was stripped of them. Even though they did everything right untill then. In places like Britain that wouldn’t of happened.

 

[aspawloski4th]

Well…then maybe you could look into moving to Britain, since they obviously have a far superior system over there

I’m thinking of it. But I do have debt, My grandmother in the nursing home would never get to see me again, and I have a wife who won’t leave family and even though she is 45 has already bought her burial plot next to her parent’s. Moving isn’t as easy as you make it out to be. Iv’e got a better idea. Howabout the USA gets with the program and makes our healthcare more like theirs!

 

[michaeldaniels]

How about you purchase your own coverage…I also have debt like 99% of Americans and I manage to pay my monthly premium…think about it as an investment or a hedgefund…you hedging yourself against a catastrophe, which in this case would wipe you out. Grow up…it isn’t my responsibility, the governments, or any other Americans responsibility to financially support your family…if you need help, seek out a Charity or a Church…I do give those organizations my money with the expectation they provide for those who need a helping hand

I’m thinking of it. But I do have debt, My grandmother in the nursing home would never get to see me again, and I have a wife who won’t leave family and even though she is 45 has already bought her burial plot next to her parent’s. Moving isn’t as easy as you make it out to be. Iv’e got a better idea. Howabout the USA gets with the program and makes our healthcare more like theirs!

 

[St_Francis]

How about you purchase your own coverage…I also have debt like 99% of Americans and I manage to pay my monthly premium…think about it as an investment or a hedgefund…you hedging yourself against a catastrophe, which in this case would wipe you out. Grow up…it isn’t my responsibility, the governments, or any other Americans responsibility to financially support your family…if you need help, seek out a Charity or a Church…I do give those organizations my money with the expectation they provide for those who need a helping hand

Aspawloski has some medical problems which render it basically impossible to obtain insurance. Not everyone is in a position to obtain or afford insurance.

 

[aspawloski4th]

Hey…i have a crazy idea…bear with me on this…how about the people go out and get their own coverage and take some personal responsibility for their own problems and concerns, instead of the government jacking honest, hardworking citizens such as myself and the majority of Americans and using it to pay for those who do nothing to try to help themselves…Charity and helping those in need should be handled by Churches and organizations such as St. Jude…not by the government. The governments job should be to have a system of laws in place that ensures our right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness…not to hold our hands all our lives and babysit those who lack the initiative to take care of themselves. I pay for my own coverage…so can everyone else…even if I didn’t, I wouldn’t expect the government, the rich, or anyone for that matter to take care of it for me…if a medical bill causes me to go bankrupt because I didn’t have coverage, that is a personal problem…not society’s. I get sick and tired of liberals who like to take things that aren’t theirs and give them to other people.

And just where you do think the money is going to come from. Rememeber with a monatary system where money is created out of nothing, the governement can create it out of nothing for healthcare too. With no gold backing the dollar the dollar is whatever value Ben Bernacke and his corhorts determine it to be and has no connection to how many of them greenback are in circulation whatsoever.