The *Problem* with socialized healthcare.

[Fashion Lad!]

Secondly, if you can't afford basic health care, what the hell is the government doing spending billions on a couple of wars? Is that more beneficial to the country than the health of it's citizens back home??

Well, one war was because these people *did* attack us. Quite amazing, maybe you missed it. Two towers, two planes... one Pentagon, one plane... one field, one plane... not ringing a bell? I give up.

The other war, I don't know why the hell we're over there. You say that statement as if I support that notion. Like I've said before, "less government." I want smaller government. I don't even want government in our schools, but apparently, that's something I'll never win. I'm a true conservative. I want less government and more individual responsibility. A lot of places that are low income places tend to have treatment centers for that cause.

Once again, less government. When has the government really ever done anything good? Or, when has the government really done anything well?

[IDrinkaRum]

What I'm saying is that the United States doesn't need a Univeral Healthcare system. Why? Because we have government funded medical "insurance" already. Just because people don't utilize it, that isn't my concern. If they were serious about wanting medical coverage, they'd get it, but they don't. Plus, Blue Cross/Blue Shield and even Kaiser Permanente sell coverage to individual people/families on a sliding scale - just like automobile insurance, etc. We're not debating about whether or not we need Universal Automobile Insurance, are we? How about Universal Renters/Owners Insurance while we're at it? Oh, I know ... How about the government just tell us what insurance we do and do not need, on an individual basis, and hope to God the beaurucrats are correct 'cos they "know everything about us anyways".<--sarcasm on that last line in case no one could guess that.

As Americans, we have choices. Just because there are those who choose not go with those choices, I shouldn't be held accountable for it.

[Fashion Lad!]

FL, I read two basic arguments in your posts. I hope I've got these right.

1. Government = bad.

2. I don't care about other people, and don't want them to care about me.

I know I stated those fairly bluntly, but that's how it reads to me. The second one first.

The redeeming concept of socialized health care, to me, is that if someone, through no fault of their own, is in dire need of high level care, even with insurance, you can still be required to pay tens of thousands of dollars for your care. I'd rather pay a bit of money each year not just against the fact that it may be me in that position someday, but that it may be someone I know, or someone I'd like to know. And since the cost is distributed across the entire population, it's not prohibitively priced. It's a simple matter of world perspective. You seem to be saying "My money is more important than your life." I say "Life is more important, no matter whose." As for wait times, my grandparents never had to wait when they needed life saving surgery, I didn't need to wait when I needed leg surgery. Transplants and such have waiting lists due to not enough donors, and some procedures have waiting lists just because we don't have the population to support more doctors, thus there's simply not enough personnel. From what I've heard of the US, if you take out the population factor, your system's no better.

The first argument about "government = bad" is purely your opinion, and strictly based on your limited (as in only your own) interaction with government. As Seshat pointed out, it's not like politicians go in and say "Sorry, you can't run that MRI, because you've exceeded your allotment of tracer for this month." In Canada, everything's done by regional health boards, which are comprised of people who are actually trained in medical care for the most part, and then bureaucrats from the government are a minority, and mostly act as the representatives to the politicians when it comes time to assign budgets.

Government doesn't solve problems. They are the reason for a large majority of our problems. I do care about other people. At the same time, when 66% of the country thinks that the rich, who have earned their money (typically fair and square) should have to pay more in taxes so they can go to the doctor for every shittin' little sniffle they have, that pisses me off and it's wrong. I know people who go to the doctor for EVERYTHING. Do or die. My parents came from nothing and now are considered "rich" and will have to pay more in taxes due to Obama's plan. And unfortuantly, will be part of the group that will be footing the bill for all of this. I'm not rich. And I still don't agree with this stuff. I don't agree that I should be forced to help out anyone. If I want to, and I do help people, then that should be ok. 15% of my annual salary goes towards chartiable causes. 15%. How much of your salary goes towards charitable causes? Don't fucking tell me that I don't care about anyone other than myself. I just don't think I should have to foot the bill for this stuff and neither should my parents.

There are insurers that will, but guess what, you'll be paying an arm and a leg for poorer coverage with high deductibles.

And ha ha ha, you'd rather a company that is making money based on your care sticking their nose in your hospital? Would you like to know what happens then? You have to jump through a ton of "step therapy" hoops to get to the therapy that actually does something for you. You end up spending more and wasting time just because some insurance company pinches their pennies like nobody's business.
The pre-authorization system takes flippin' forever, too. It's rare that I can get a claim to go through in a week. At best it's several weeks, sometimes even for important shit like Procrit.

This is after they've cut nursing hours down low enough that it's borderline dangerous just so they save money for bonuses.
I invite all of you who think everyone should pull themselves up by their bootstraps to volunteer at a free or low cost health clinic. I can guarantee you'll change your mind in a hurry. I'd recommend doing it now, because you'll be sure to meet a helluva lot of people who've lost their coverage through no fault of their own, and they face the choice of food on the table for themselves and their kids or health care. I know, I've met them both at my volunteer position and in my job.

I've never had a problem getting the healthcare I need. I had surgery on my shoulder last summer. My insurance didn't as much as flinch when it came to footing the bill. I have my insurance through the Mayo Clinic, last time I checked, they're highering nurses like it's going out of style. They are not-for-profit clinic. And they do see people and treat people without insurance for free.

Think about that when you start getting your first grey hair. Panic about it when you get your first grey pube.

If you need to borrow some to get the experience, I've got plenty of grey.

Rapscallion

I've had grey hair on my head since I was 22. I'm not worried. I take care of myself. What happenes, happens. But, I don't have a history of making a lot of claims on my insurance. I buy my glasses and contacts outright. I pay for my own eye care. Why? Because it's not expensive.

The best thing at all, I know doctors. And they do not want socialized health care. Why? Because they say it reduces the quality of care overall. These doctors do travel the world to help out where they can.

I'll pay to make sure children are covered. Adults, they need to do what they can to take care of themselves. But, don't tell me I only care about myself because that's flat-out wrong, Boozy.

I take care of myself and help out when I can. I want others to do the same. Stop relying on the government to hold your hand, baby you from cradle to casket.

[AdminAssistant]

Eye care is not expensive? Well, that's good to know, because the last time I went, it was $450 for the exam, new lenses, and frames. That may not seem like a lot to some people, but that's almost an entire paycheck for me (I get paid every two weeks). I have tension headaches that may be aggravated by eye strain, but I can't afford to go to the optometrist. I can go to the health clinic to get medicine for the headache, but the University in its infinite wisdom does not include eyes or dental in its student insurance.

I understand what you're saying about charity, but at this point I do not trust American society to 'do the right thing'. If you would like a current example of that, may I turn your attention to California, where the majority recently voted in favor of discrimination and the removal of basic civil rights.

There is one concern I have about the government getting involved in healthcare (I mean, more than they are) and that's abortion rights. I'm afraid the neo-cons are going to throw a big hissy and insist that if healthcare reform is to pass, then women's rights are going to be taken away. And that scares the hell out of me, and it could easily happen.

Healthcare reform IS coming. It's happening. I think President Obama has a very smart plan, bringing together all different groups to work out the ideas, holding regional town halls and all that. What the Republican Party has to realize is that compromise does not include banging fists on the table and whining that you can't get your way. It means finding a SOLUTION.

[Amethyst Hunter]

I've been insurance-less for more than ten years. Ditto my family. My parents only just recently managed to get some insurance from my mom's job (which doesn't treat their employees very well to begin with) and that's just barely enough to take care of the both of them.

I'm also unemployed and pretty much unemployable, due to my physical and mental health issues (very few of which are my fault). When I can get employed, it's always part-time, because that's all I can handle. Part-timers rarely get insurance, and if they do, it's always chintzy stuff that doesn't hardly pay for peanuts.

In fact, I have a dental appointment this coming week to deal with a very likely cavity that's probably been festering for some time. I haven't had a dental checkup in *years* because - surprise - I can't afford it. I've only gone to have fillings replaced when one occasionally fell out. Doing that easily costs $150 or better.

I recently was able, thanks to very generous family members, get new glasses. Those cost over $200, and that's *without* any fancy extras like special tinting (like those kinds that change color when you go inside/outside). I have to change prescriptions, on average, about every 3 - 4 years depending on how bad my sight is (and it's pretty bad). I avoid choosing expensive designer frames - I rebuffed the salesperson who tried to get me to go with a nearly $200 set of frames and instead went with one that cost $38.

My prescription medication (birth control for wonky cycle) costs $60 out of pocket. For one month's supply. We won't even touch what my antidepressants used to cost when I was still on those.

My dad requires blood pressure and diabetes medications on a *regular* basis. Sans insurance, those would cost over $400 a *month*. My mom suffered a work-related back injury last year that would have cost thousands of dollars in therapy alone if she'd had to pay for it herself.

I don't qualify for current social aid programs because I live at home. And don't have kids. And am not married.

Frankly, I'd fucking kill for some nice socialized healthcare right now. And people who think people like me and my family should just be able to "pull ourselves up by our own bootstraps" or do without can just fuck right off as far as I'm concerned.

Conservative mouthhorns in the media love to wave around the socialism boogeyman, but the fact is that the type of socialism practiced by other countries today is nowhere near the Cold War-era type of fascism that was so feared back then. Done properly, with special restrictions and checks in place (like some of those already mentioned in this thread), it won't turn into that. If government is OMG SO EVIL, then how come we've seen some pretty bloody amazing reforms in this century in spite of all the bad stuff? This is why I reject the conservatism I've seen mutate over the years. I used to buy the myth that "all government is evil." Some politicians suck, true. Too damn many of them, for sure. But if all of them sucked, then how did we manage to get to where we are today, bad stuff excepted? America isn't completely in the toilet *yet*, and whatever else Obama may be or not be, at least he's making an honest effort to try and fix the problem, so for that he deserves some credit at least. (And no, I don't expect him to work instant miracles.)

And it just stuns me the utter *contempt* that some people have for the poorer of us in this country. How the fuck are the poorer citizens supposed to use their bootstraps if they can't fucking afford any in the first place (and it sure as hell isn't from lack of trying in the majority of cases)?

[AFPheonix]

What I'm saying is that the United States doesn't need a Univeral Healthcare system. Why? Because we have government funded medical "insurance" already. Just because people don't utilize it, that isn't my concern. If they were serious about wanting medical coverage, they'd get it, but they don't. Plus, Blue Cross/Blue Shield and even Kaiser Permanente sell coverage to individual people/families on a sliding scale - just like automobile insurance, etc. We're not debating about whether or not we need Universal Automobile Insurance, are we?

Medicaid and Medicare are not universal plans, nor is veterans benefits or Tricare.
Further, those individual plans rarely offer that great of a deal to individuals. They're usually high deductible if-the-shit-hits-the-fan coverage. Oh, and did you miss the whole thing I posted where many people I have personally encountered are having to choose between eating and health insurance right now?
Lastly, Kaiser sucks on just about everything except preventative maintenance and maternity stuff. You couldn't pay me to be insured through them.
As for auto insurance, we ARE mandated to get insurance, so you could consider that universal coverage amongst the auto-owning public, if you will. The difference between that and your health is that you can choose to not drive if you can't afford the insurance. You can't choose to not get sick, injured, or otherwise debilitated.

I've never had a problem getting the healthcare I need. I had surgery on my shoulder last summer. My insurance didn't as much as flinch when it came to footing the bill. I have my insurance through the Mayo Clinic, last time I checked, they're highering nurses like it's going out of style. They are not-for-profit clinic. And they do see people and treat people without insurance for free.

Yay for a sample size of one.
I can tell you right now that not everyone has your experience with health care. I'd hazard to say about 50% of middle class people I encounter daily don't get to have the experience you have had. And these are people with coverage. I am getting more and more uninsured people everyday, more and more COBRA coverage every day (something you have to pay an arm and a leg for just to keep what you already had.)
The statistics are undeniable. We pay far more and get less care per dollar than any other country with a universal plan, even countries that don't pay into their national plan as well as others. People use Canada constantly as an example here, and if you look at the numbers, they are not as invested in their NHC as, say Britain or Germany.

[bigred]

I also had surgery on my shoulder, twice, and 6 months of physio. There was no cost to me. I could have probably paid for it, but I have no idea of the cost. But because I earn enough to pay makes me more deserving of it? Both my grandmothers broke their hips, one on an old age pension without private insurance, the other on a pension based on her dead husbands job (cop) but also with private insurance. Both aged about 90 at the time of the break. Should one have received assistance and the other not? Both received assistance under 'socialised health', as would anyone else.

I wear glasses and have since I was 8. I get my glasses under my private insurance but could buy them outright. But what about people for whom the $500+ mine cost would put them in difficulties? When I was a kid the prescription changed a couple of times a year.

[Fashion Lad!]

There is no right to healthcare

The United States was founded with the declaration that all men have the right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” The Founders recognized that all men have a moral right to be free from the coercion of others, as long as they allow others the same freedom. They believed that rights do not impose a positive obligation on others, but only the negative obligation to restrain from the initiation of force.

The claim that there is a “right to healthcare” violates the principle of individual rights because it requires that the liberty of doctors and the property of taxpayers be violated to provide for others. When the New Deal and Great Society programs forced doctors and taxpayers to become sacrificial offerings to the “common good”, the current “healthcare crisis” was born.

Everytime the government steps in and tries to save something, the area that is being "saved" realizes this and ups the cost. Education is one fine example. Everytime the government offers more government assistance for tuition, the cost of tuition goes up. It is going up much faster than the rate of inflation. A lot of families cannot afford to send their kids through school without getting loans. But these are loans that need to be paid back.

I'm against giving anyone anything for free unwillingly. I have no problem with a lot of education assistance programs because that is debt that needs to be repaid. Right now, there are a lot of Americans that do not pay taxes because they get everything back, plus they get an Earned Income Credit, so the government gives them some of the taxes that me and everyother American pays in for free. And these would be the people needing socialized healthcare, but they wouldn't be paying anything into the system. I'm not responsible for you, and you're not responsible for me.

I'll pay to have children covered and that's it. Children have absolutely no ability to get their own coverage.

When I was 19-22, I worked at Sears part-time. They offered part-timers the same insurance that they offered the full-timers. Same as when I worked at Best Buy. Same as where I work now at Hitachi.

And I know you all are thinking I'm an uncaring asshole. But the truth of the matter is I do care. But socialized healthcare is not the answer to solving this problem. Not in America. Not with what we're founded on. You guys are looking for the quickest fix, I want the most sustainable fix. We cannot be writing blank checks for me (24 years old) my children and their children to foot the bill. We can't afford what we're doing now. China owns us. I'm all for health care reform to get costs down, but I do not want the government taxing us, and giving us "free" healthcare like they do in a lot of other countries.

But you can twist what I say. I'm uncaring, selfish, whatever.

[Boozy]

But, don't tell me I only care about myself because that's flat-out wrong, Boozy.

I believe that the post to which you're referring is Broomjockey's.

[Sylvia727]

When I turned 18, I was dropped from my mother's insurance. I immediately applied for Medicaid. I was rejected, because to be eligible for Medicaid you must have been uninsured for six months. So I went uninsured. It wasn't a choice. My mom was broke, and I wasn't earning enough money to cover Cobra. During the six months while I waited to reapply, I was struck by a car. The hospital flew in a specialist to perform the surgery. The doctors told my family to make their peace, because there was an 8 in 10 chance I would die on the operating table. I spent weeks in the hospital, months in a wheelchair, months on a walker and in physical therapy. I still can't sit with my legs under my body for too long, or my muscles will seize up and I won't be able to walk. I can't carry anything on a staircase because if my knees stop working I need my hands free to catch my fall.

The total amount of my hospital bills exceeds one hundred thousand dollars. One hundred thousand dollars. If I get a decent job after school, it will take me four years to earn that much money, and I'll need some money to live off of. How long will it take me to pay that debt off? Ten years? Fifteen? Obviously I'm a teeny bit biased. But I don't think even one person should be in my situation. Even one person is too much. America is supposed to be better than that, more civilized than that.

I tell my friends that debt is better than death, but if medical bills counted against my credit score, ruining my chances to rent an apartment or buy a car or get a credit card, would I be so flip? People have commited suicide over that amount of debt, and I understand why.

[Fashion Lad!]

I'm sorry, Boozy. My bad. I apologize

[Fashion Lad!]

I know I've beat this to death... but, we cannot afford socialized healthcare.

America's Federal Debt is Beyond Comprehension

Walker figures $53 trillion will cost the average American household $455,000. Since the average family income is $50,000, that is an implicit mortgage of over nine times their yearly income.

This is the first year that the baby boomer's are eligible to retire. And for the next 20 years, they will continue to retire. Our country will go bankrupt, and things will become a lot worse. This isn't speculation, this is true. I for one, am fearful for what the next 10-20 years has in store for me.

The $34 trillion problem. Medicare is poised to wreak havoc on the economy. And our presidential candidates are avoiding the issue.

Medicare provides a wide range of services and subsidies to more than 40 million old and disabled Americans. As the country ages, Medicare and Medicaid (for those of any age with low incomes) will devour growing chunks of U.S. economic output. So will Social Security, but its cut of gross domestic product (GDP) should stop increasing around 2030, says Fortune:

David Walker interview about the economy

WALKER: Well, let's talk about today, okay? I mean, you know, you would end up having to increase taxes about $11,000 per household immediately in order to deal with this problem. Stated differently, you would end up having to -- we would end up having to tax, rather than at about 18 1/2% of the economy, which is what we're doing now, about 30% of the economy over the next 15 to 20 years and continuing to rise. And those taxes would be borne primarily in all likelihood either based upon income taxes or some type of consumption tax because payroll taxes are already burdening too many Americans.

I understand that people are worried about their health. I understand this. I have health insurance now, but when I was a kid my family and I lived in low-income housing. My parents big treat to themselves was a case of pop every week. My parents had to put children's shoes on lay-away to afford them. I've been down that road. My dad works 80-90 hours a week to make the type of money that would consider him rich, and would make him a prime target for the tax increases. My mom works 40 hours a week at the Mayo Clinic. That's how we have the health insurance we have.

I work full-time and I go to school full-time. I save my money. Any money left-over really, I put in my Ing Direct savings account and let it accrue interest.

Honestly, the the financial state that I'm looking as I get older scares the hell out of me. It absolutely terrifies me. The $34,000,000,000,000 problem, is a problem with interest. Each year our government spends more money, is another year we don't take care of this problem. It's another year that interest accrues. And this is why I don't want the government doing stuff. They don't do it right. They won't make the tough call to help us in the future because it'll make them unpopular now.

Medicare and Medicade are pretty much why we are where we are. Our government's fiscal irresponsibility is why it's easy to say that we are in big, big trouble in the coming decades. I'm talking 2-5 decads. We'll feel a lot more pain than what we feel now. No one will have health insurance.

Cutting programs is for the greater good. There will be growing pains. If you aren't worried about the 34 trillion dollar problem, I'm worried about you.

[Seshat]

I'll pay to have children covered and that's it. Children have absolutely no ability to get their own coverage.

Neither do the disabled-and-unemployable, the disabled who are unable to work full time (most part-time jobs do not carry health care, and most that do carry only partial health care). Both are on very low incomes, and pensions are barely enough to pay rent, feed yourself basic food, and clothe yourself at charity shops.

Nor can the unemployable, whether they are simply in the wrong place to find work, or unemployable for reasons of illiteracy, innumeracy, or some other 'fault'. Employability programs help, but they're unable to get coverage in the meantime.

And the majority of disability, in my experience, is sheer bad luck.

I know I've beat this to death... but, we cannot afford socialized healthcare.

I can't see how you can afford NOT to have it. Your future problems would be eased by increasing your useful workforce, and treating your disabled and currently-unemployable would do just that; while relieving your welfare burden.

My dad works 80-90 hours a week to make the type of money that would consider him rich, and would make him a prime target for the tax increases. My mom works 40 hours a week at the Mayo Clinic. That's how we have the health insurance we have.

I work full-time and I go to school full-time. I save my money. Any money left-over really, I put in my Ing Direct savings account and let it accrue interest.

So all three of you are employable. Good for you.

I 'work' all day every day to look after my stupid body, my best friend's broken brain, and try to make myself employable. So does she. Our carer also works all day every day, either tending to us or trying to bring in extra income.

If society paid people based on sheer effort, we'd be rolling in it. I honestly can't see how your family deserves more than mine based on effort. (Admittedly, our effort ends up largely inward-focused: most employed people are able to increase the society's wealth.)

But please don't use effort to justify your family's wealth. Poor people put effort in too.

They won't make the tough call to help us in the future because it'll make them unpopular now.

You mean the tough call of increasing your social productivity? Apparently not, not if you were in charge.

Cutting programs is for the greater good. There will be growing pains. If you aren't worried about the 34 trillion dollar problem, I'm worried about you.

'Bad debt' is debt which will not improve the society's effectiveness in the long term.
'Good debt' is debt which will improve the society's effectiveness in the long term.

Improving public health, public sanitation, public education, transport (to a point) and public safety improve social effectiveness.
Improving housing to the point where the public is housed in clean homes, spaced far enough apart to prevent overcrowding health problems, improves social effectiveness.

I have my own ideas about what the US government is doing that's 'bad debt'. I'm sure that if I described them, you (Fashion Lad) would deem them 'liberal hippy nonsense'.


A society has two ultimate forms of wealth: its people (preferably skilled) and its resources. A skilled society can get away with purchasing resources, improving their value, and onselling the finished product. But a society which forgets the rule, will go into debt and crash.

Protect the people. Protect the resources. All else is excess.

[Slytovhand]

A simple question for those against socialised (pretty much anything). Why is it so bad for the US to do this, and send their economy spinning out of control, yet it's ok in other countries? What's the relevant significant difference??

Also, what's really the difference between paying for roads, military, overseas charity, public service, education, social security, etc, but not health? (again, relevantly significant differences?)

Other than just getting government out of things. I presume we're talking about an idealised healthcare system, rather than just government irresponsibility or general crappiness.

[Rapscallion]

15% of my annual salary goes towards chartiable causes. 15%. How much of your salary goes towards charitable causes? Don't fucking tell me that I don't care about anyone other than myself. I just don't think I should have to foot the bill for this stuff and neither should my parents.

Problem is, it does sound like you only care for you and yours.

Which charitable causes? Churches over here are charities, and I suspect the same for over in the US. If it's to a church and ringfenced for feeding the impoverished etc, fine, but charity would also count for donations to the upkeep of your church. If it's not relgious, have a look at the accounts for the charities you support. Some of them over here spend nearly 80% of their income on 'administration'.

I've had grey hair on my head since I was 22. I'm not worried. I take care of myself. What happenes, happens. But, I don't have a history of making a lot of claims on my insurance. I buy my glasses and contacts outright. I pay for my own eye care. Why? Because it's not expensive.

I was using grey hair as a measure of age. I'm knocking on the door of forty and things have already started to creak. That sort of thing does tend to concentrate your thoughts. As you get older, bits start wanting to drop off. The problem isn't that you can afford it now, but can you manage to afford it when you'll really need it?

I take care of myself and help out when I can. I want others to do the same. Stop relying on the government to hold your hand, baby you from cradle to casket.

What of those who are incapable? When I was in retail, one customer was a high court judge. His son has Down's Syndrome (or similar - never really asked). The father loves his son and has an income and life that allows him to look after and try and get his son to be at least somewhat independent. Who looks after him when his parents are old, feeble, and eventually dead?

Where I live, it's not exactly impoverished, but there are many families on the social or living on one income. If they have such a problem, what do they do? Go back to exposing them on hillsides? Give up work and live on other benefits?

Someone on a low-paid job who gets injured and can't afford medical care may be out of action permenantly, yet with free treatment then they could be a productive worker once more. I know you say the doctors you know do voluntary work, but that's not all doctors, and that's effectively the same system via another means. Every economy takes money from your pocket - it just calls it different things.

The NHS in the UK is our largest employer, last I heard. Debt to give people jobs results in more economic stimulus.

Rapscallion