Mandatory medical insurance

[guywithashovel]

I admit that I don't know too much about socialized medicine, but I do agree with DesignFox about all the red tape and hoop-jumping with private insurers. I honestly don't see what's so different than if the government ran things

I'm still a little out to lunch on how I feel about universal health care. However, the above-quoted remarks highlight something that I find very interesting about the conservatives in this country. And by "conservative," I mean the red state, Republican-voting crowd.

They are dead set against the government providing health care, protecting the environment, or managing the economy in any way, because that's "big government."

Okay, if that's their opinion, then fair enough. But ask them how they feel about making our police departments bigger. Most of them will say, "Yes, absolutely!" If you ask them if we are spending enough money on the military, they'll probably say, "Heck no! We need to increase defense spending." On top of this, many of them want laws that restrict certain people from getting married, as well as laws that restrict what people can and can't look at on our TVs and computers (bans on pornography) and laws that dictate how we can make some of our medical decisions.

So basically, they want more police, a military that is never big enough, laws that keep some people from getting married, laws telling us what we can and can't look at on our TVs and computers, and laws that creep their ways into our medical decisions, and somehow they come out with a "small government."

It seems to me that any kind of government entity or action that allows them to exert power and control over other people is something that they are all for. Huge police departments help them control private citizens. A huge military helps them exert power over the rest of the world. Laws about marriage and entertainment help them control people's social lives. And so on.

But when it comes to things like universal healthcare that involve the government actually providing a service to the people, they are deadset against it because "that's socialism."

[ladyneeva]

You would think some of them would welcome this then -- universal health care would give them one more way to try to impose their idea of right and wrong on others. How long do you think it will be before anyone over a certain BMI is denied treatment unless they consent to having their body mutilated (weight loss surgery/bariatric surgery) in pursuit of an unattainable ideal body size?

The sad thing is... I know that will happen, and I know I will be materially affected in a negative way when it does... and I am *still* for universal health care. And I can't really articulate why... just that there is a lot of suffering in the world that this would fix, and really since I can't get treated for anything anyway even with health coverage it won't change a whole lot. Ask anyone who is higher than BMI 25 or so, no matter WHAT we go to the doctor for we're brushed off with a lecture on losing weight and how whatever is wrong with us is just because we're fat. I actually got that speech once when I went in to get antibiotics for a case of strep throat!

Not sure how being fat caused strep throat, but meh whatever. Apparently it does heh.

[Boozy]

How long do you think it will be before anyone over a certain BMI is denied treatment unless they consent to having their body mutilated (weight loss surgery/bariatric surgery) in pursuit of an unattainable ideal body size?

This hasn't happened in any country that has universal health care yet, so I can't see why it would happen in the U.S.

[AdminAssistant]

Not sure how being fat caused strep throat, but meh whatever. Apparently it does heh.

Causes migraines, too.

Although if they started requiring certain BMI's for coverage, I would personally make the argument that then they needed to limit the number of pregnancies women can go through and also ban smoking and drinking and illicit drug use, since that's just as bad. Not to mention that 'fad' dieting/'extreme' dieting is just as bad on the body as being overweight.

[ladyneeva]

I don't know how the situation is in other countries, but in the US you can't have a discussion about universal health care without someone at some point bringing up how horrible it is that the horrible fat people with their horrible greedy lazy lifestyles are burdening the system.

Even this thread... the question about about people cheating the system by living unhealthy lifestyles because the government pays totally came across as "the fatties burdening the system and stubbornly refusing to just diet already". Unhealthy lifestyle in my experience has never been anything but code speak for people who the writer feels eat too much and exercise too little. Perhaps the writer was referring to some other form of unhealthy lifestyle, but it would surprise me.

And face it... the US has a distressing track record with regards to the majority attempting (and occasionally succeeding in that attempt) to deny people's freedoms based on their own opinions of how others should live. See gay marriage, womens rights, racial tension, immigration, religious freedom, etc.

So no, it completely would not surprise me if mandatory weight checks, forced dieting, and denial of coverage if you don't lose weight or consent to WLS to 'fix' your weight problem were seriously considered as part of whatever health care reform is eventually attempted.

[AFPheonix]

Besides, why not just do it the Canadian way, instead? Make regular health insurance covered by the government, such as broken limbs, doctor's visits, etc. and the companies cover prescriptions, vision, and dental.

There's too much money in the insurance lobby for that to ever happen, unfortunately. That, and anytime Canadian coverage is brought up in US discussion, inevitably someone in north-buttfuck Seskatchewan is brought forward to whine that they had to wait for a doctor's appointment. Well yeah, because there's no freaking doctors up there, duh. The guy rides a circuit. Hell, I hear about that pretty much non-stop from my extremely conservative family in Canada, even as they casually mention the benefits that they've gotten without issue in the same sentence. They seriously don't understand why their system is inherently better than the untenable one we have.

While I think this bill is a good first step in ensuring that everyone gets coverage, and I'm glad to see that government is going to make insurance companies cover people with pre-existing conditions with no penalty, I would like to see government set up an alternative plan to private available to anyone who wants to join. I would also like to see them provide vouchers to people like Design Fox mentioned who can't make room in their budget for coverage. I would like to see this plan provide decent reimbursement to doctors.
I would like to see a DECENT plan too, not some crappy high-deductible nonsense.

[Boozy]

That, and anytime Canadian coverage is brought up in US discussion, inevitably someone in north-buttfuck Seskatchewan is brought forward to whine that they had to wait for a doctor's appointment. Well yeah, because there's no freaking doctors up there, duh.

Thank you for pointing this out. Many people don't realize that universal health care doesn't mean that we force doctors to live in remote towns across the country. Some communities just don't have enough people to support a physician. It also doesn't make sense to have state-of-the-art MRI machines and other diagnostic equipment scattered across the arctic just in case someone from northern Manitoba needs it. These resources are focussed in more highly populated areas -- just as they are in the U.S.

[Nyoibo]

I don't know how the situation is in other countries, but in the US you can't have a discussion about universal health care without someone at some point bringing up how horrible it is that the horrible fat people with their horrible greedy lazy lifestyles are burdening the system.

Well I don't just blame the fatties, I blame the smokers and druggies and boozers too.