Universal Health Care

[Pooky 3,876]

The insurance industry needs to be overhauled but I will never be in favor of single payer or universal health care. Make insurance more affordable, make it portable from job to job, cut out "pre-exsiting condition" clauses even let the government assist low income people to get health insurance. Spout all the polls and stats you want. I will never be in favor of the government taking over the nations health care.

So even if it could be proven to you that a UHC system, however it was established, would cost you less (possible), deal with you more fairly (guaranteed), and provide you with an equal or bette rlevel of care (again possible), you would still reject it out of hand on the basis of personal dogma?

P

[mawilson 2,133]

Oh yea, no one WANTS TO GIVE ME HEALTH INSURANCE.

One thing the government should definitely do is make it illegal for insurance companies

to deny insurance based on pre-existing conditions.

Sweet apostles, Ma Wilson, now you're talking sense!

Well, Agnes - I do believe that the insurance industry needs to be regulated and forced to

provide affordable and available coverage. Beyond that, I agree with GaryC - healthcare

is not a "right". If someone needs insurance, they can buy it. If a person is young and

healthy and doesn't want to spend his or her money on health insurance, it's their right not

to do so, and it's my right not to have to pay for their coverage with my taxes.

[Pooky 3,876]

I'm NOT a Republican. I just hate this mindless judgement about motivations that people do not understand.

I think you will find that most people do understand the motivation (singular) at work here .......... money.

What they have an overabundance of is focus on who to blame for the problem. Don't just target the Republicans, broaden the sweep to include politicians in general and you will be nearer the mark.

P

This is off topic, but I just have to say that again, this is an assumption about people's motivation. The comment you quoted above was in response to an "ad" that suggested that Republicans, (not the politicians but the voters) are Republicans because they don't care. I agree that the problem exists in every party and among most polititians, but it is not only money that motivates people. Insurance companies? YES! Other aspects of society? YES. Many polititians, perhaps most of them? Probably so. But everyone? NO!

I never said all of them, just politicians in general. Call in a pan-political argument. There will be politicians from each side that don't subscribe to the ovverriding view, but my comment was intended to broaden people's attention from just the Republican party. Democrats are sinners in this game, too.

P

Edited April 16, 2008 by Pooky

[GaryC 7]

The insurance industry needs to be overhauled but I will never be in favor of single payer or universal health care. Make insurance more affordable, make it portable from job to job, cut out "pre-exsiting condition" clauses even let the government assist low income people to get health insurance. Spout all the polls and stats you want. I will never be in favor of the government taking over the nations health care.

So even if it could be proven to you that a UHC system, however it was established, would cost you less (possible), deal with you more fairly (guaranteed), and provide you with an equal or bette rlevel of care (again possible), you would still reject it out of hand on the basis of personal dogma?

P

First of all, it will never be "proven" that UHC will cost less. It will never be more "fair" and it will not give a better level of care. Your premise cannot ever be proven. The US government royally screws up everything it touches. If it got it's hands on our health care it will be more expensive and the quality of care will go down. Your right about one thing though. It will be equally fair. Equally unfair to everyone that is.

[Dan J 277]

Oh yea, no one WANTS TO GIVE ME HEALTH INSURANCE.

One thing the government should definitely do is make it illegal for insurance companies

to deny insurance based on pre-existing conditions.

Sweet apostles, Ma Wilson, now you're talking sense!

Well, Agnes - I do believe that the insurance industry needs to be regulated and forced to

provide affordable and available coverage. Beyond that, I agree with GaryC - healthcare

is not a "right". If someone needs insurance, they can buy it. If a person is young and

healthy and doesn't want to spend his or her money on health insurance, it's their right not

to do so, and it's my right not to have to pay for their coverage with my taxes.

If you want the right to refuse insurance, than on top of that, bankruptcy law should be changed so that you cannot wipe away medical debt.

Otherwise a you could get into an accident, and walk away with everyone else paying your bills.

[Pooky 3,876]

The insurance industry needs to be overhauled but I will never be in favor of single payer or universal health care. Make insurance more affordable, make it portable from job to job, cut out "pre-exsiting condition" clauses even let the government assist low income people to get health insurance. Spout all the polls and stats you want. I will never be in favor of the government taking over the nations health care.

So even if it could be proven to you that a UHC system, however it was established, would cost you less (possible), deal with you more fairly (guaranteed), and provide you with an equal or bette rlevel of care (again possible), you would still reject it out of hand on the basis of personal dogma?

P

First of all, it will never be "proven" that UHC will cost less. It will never be more "fair" and it will not give a better level of care. Your premise cannot ever be proven. The US government royally screws up everything it touches. If it got it's hands on our health care it will be more expensive and the quality of care will go down. Your right about one thing though. It will be equally fair. Equally unfair to everyone that is.

Refusal to consider a hypothesis because you don't agree with its premise does not a good argument make.

P

[SaadBell 0]

Well, Agnes - I do believe that the insurance industry needs to be regulated and forced to

provide affordable and available coverage. Beyond that, I agree with GaryC - healthcare

is not a "right". If someone needs insurance, they can buy it. If a person is young and

healthy and doesn't want to spend his or her money on health insurance, it's their right not

to do so, and it's my right not to have to pay for their coverage with my taxes.

[Marilyn. 340]

we are up to our eyeballs right now in medical bills.. last year hubby's company went from covering everything 100% to only covering 90% .... now I know 10 percent doesn't seem like much but it adds up...

[GaryC 7]

The insurance industry needs to be overhauled but I will never be in favor of single payer or universal health care. Make insurance more affordable, make it portable from job to job, cut out "pre-exsiting condition" clauses even let the government assist low income people to get health insurance. Spout all the polls and stats you want. I will never be in favor of the government taking over the nations health care.

So even if it could be proven to you that a UHC system, however it was established, would cost you less (possible), deal with you more fairly (guaranteed), and provide you with an equal or bette rlevel of care (again possible), you would still reject it out of hand on the basis of personal dogma?

P

First of all, it will never be "proven" that UHC will cost less. It will never be more "fair" and it will not give a better level of care. Your premise cannot ever be proven. The US government royally screws up everything it touches. If it got it's hands on our health care it will be more expensive and the quality of care will go down. Your right about one thing though. It will be equally fair. Equally unfair to everyone that is.

Refusal to consider a hypothesis because you don't agree with its premise does not a good argument make.

P

You said, "So even if it could be proven to you that a UHC system, however it was established, would cost you less (possible), deal with you more fairly (guaranteed), and provide you with an equal or bette rlevel of care (again possible), you would still reject it out of hand on the basis of personal dogma?"

I submitt that it cannot be proven. I can prove that every government program ever made has always cost more that advertised and provided less than it was designed to give. US history is on my side.

[britty 1]

There is no god given right to healthcare. Why do people think there is? A socialized healthcare system will not provide adequately for those it is intended to serve. Nobody will receive an adequate standard of care as treatment will be rationed due to costs. All those people who can pay for healthcare will switch to the "free" system to avoid paying for private care, thus sending costs soaring. Hospitals in the US cannot refuse care to someone who comes through their doors so emergency treatment is always available. I personally do not want the Government to oversee my healthcare. I experienced this in the UK, and the healthcare system there is nothing short of a disaster. When I contracted cancer, I was treated quickly, effectively, and by a doctor known to be one of the best in the US. Thank god I wasn't being treated in the UK - I would probably be dead by now.

[Ban Hammer 14,293]

free medical care here

[mawilson 2,133]

free medical care here

Also here.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Oh yea, no one WANTS TO GIVE ME HEALTH INSURANCE.

One thing the government should definitely do is make it illegal for insurance companies

to deny insurance based on pre-existing conditions.

Sweet apostles, Ma Wilson, now you're talking sense!

Well, Agnes - I do believe that the insurance industry needs to be regulated and forced to

provide affordable and available coverage. Beyond that, I agree with GaryC - healthcare

is not a "right". If someone needs insurance, they can buy it. If a person is young and

healthy and doesn't want to spend his or her money on health insurance, it's their right not

to do so, and it's my right not to have to pay for their coverage with my taxes.

But it is a right or we treat as such in that a dying man on the street will never be left to die because of his inability to pay. Critical situations will be treated regardless of whether the person has insurance or not. If you go rushing into the emergency room with a gunshot wound in the chest, they don't first ask you for your insurance card. That type of medical care for all comes at a price and there is compelling argument that the money that it costs you and I for caring for those people could be better spent on preventive care rather than critical care. There's really no escaping that we do in fact have a right to care, it's just that right now, we only get that kind of care without any pre-qualifying if we have a grave medical condition.

Edited April 16, 2008 by Jabberwocky

[SaadBell 0]

Been there and done that, also my ex husband was in the military, so I have been a solider and a wife of a naval officer. The health care was at lest free, now, I just don't go to the doctors, the co-payments are very costly. I have stopped a lot drug therapy for my MS, and just pray that I don't get too sick. That is my reality everyday.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

There is no god given right to healthcare. Why do people think there is?

Many, if not all, hospitals have a sign posted that says no one will be denied medical attention because of inability to pay. In fact, if you go to the emergency room with a medical emergency, the hospital cannot turn you away without facing legal consequences. Now unless you are advocating that hospitals should start turning people away if they don't have insurance or can't pay, then yes, we do have a right to medical care, under certain circumstances.