President Reagan speaks about Socialized medicine.

[HAL 9000 96]

Why do people believe that we can insure 40-50 million people overnight without serious repercussions?

These 40-50 million people didn't become uninsured overnight.

For example, the climate act proposes to reduce US greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent by 2020,

40 percent by 2030, and by 80 percent by 2050. No-one suggested, "hey, let's do it tomorrow".

Why not take it slow - set coverage targets and gradually expand Medicare to the uninsured?

I would imagine because these people are getting treatments as things stands, just not paying for them - we the insured are and it's NOT CHEAP!!!

But we are already paying for them. Insuring everyone would not make things cheaper -

maybe 10-20 years down the road (and that's a big "maybe"), but certainly not today.

In fact, it would cost us a staggering ONE TRILLION dollars - more than the GDP of Australia!

If we're not going to see any cost savings for another 10-20 years and a huge cost upfront,

why not amortize the upfront costs over the next 10-20 years?

Future savings are important, but the best bit is that those who are currently uninsured will be, so they will have access to day to day health care, not just emergency/acute care. This will free up the emergency/acute care for those who actually have a non preventable emergency.

A healthier population will be more productive and less likely to spread disease into the general population.

So no Rage Virus?

[luckytxn 2,265]

What if... For example... I don't want to pay into health-insurance. ( i actually do, and i have coverage - beside the point) Will the government allow me to choose not to have insurance, as many of the 45 milion don't?

I mean you're talking about completely throwing out the current system, because 45 million aren't covered, when there are nearly 400million americans. Why should all of us change because 45 million aren't insured?

Playing with numbers again I see. So... most of those uninsured don't want coverage?

Actually most of them don't. Click the link and read the other articles that go with it.

Jewish World Review June 18, 2009 / 26 Sivan 5769

‘45 Million Americans’ — Who Are Those Guys?

By Larry Elder

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | About 45 million Americans lack health care insurance. Or do they?

A pro-"universal health care" television host recently cited this widely accepted "fact." The number is bogus.

Here's the skinny.

Start with the math. We have 300 million Americans. Subtract the 45 million — 15 percent of us — with no health insurance. That leaves 255 million Americans, or 85 percent, with it.

And the insurance is lousy, right? Not according to a 2006 ABC News/Kaiser Family Foundation/USA Today survey. It found that 89 percent of Americans were satisfied with the quality of their own health care.

Nearly half of the 45 million fall in the category of my 26-year-old nephew. He smokes cigarettes, dates, eats out, goes to movies and, like all young people, lives through his cell phone. With a slight change in priorities, he could afford health insurance, the cost of which at his age and health starts at about $100 a month. Take a look at a Reason Foundation video (http://reason.tv/video/show/560.html) of interviews with a bunch of non-health-insured 20-somethings.

FREE SUBSCRIPTION TO INFLUENTIAL NEWSLETTER

Every weekday NewsAndOpinion.com publishes what many in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". HUNDREDS of columnists and cartoonists regularly appear. Sign up for the daily update. It's free. Just click here.

These Gen Xers copped to dropping money on clothes, booze, nightlife, the latest tech gizmos and other things of interest to them. With a change in priorities, these young folks — far more representative of those without insurance than the forlorn husband and wife sitting on a porch swing — could both afford and qualify for health insurance. They simply consider it a low priority.

Millions more can access health care — through SCHIP (State Children's Health Insurance Program), Medicaid or other government programs. But for whatever reason, 11 million people simply refuse to take advantage of them.

Several million other Americans who want insurance do, indeed, go without it — for a time. Many are, however, between jobs, and most — at some point — will find employment that either offers health insurance or pays enough so that they can buy it. Millions more work at companies that offer health insurance, and for a few dollars out of every paycheck, they could add family members. They choose not to.

What about criminals without insurance? More than 2 million Americans — with access to health care, by the way — use jail, prison or penitentiary mailing addresses. And for every one behind bars, how many live among us who survive by theft, drug dealing, prostitution or some similar career path? Taxpayer health insurance for them, too?

So now we're down to the Americans without health insurance on a persistent, long-term basis. This is approximately 10-15 million, a big number to be sure. But does this warrant a government takeover of the entire health care system?

Lacking health care insurance is not the same as lacking health care . By law, most emergency rooms must provide health care — to both legals and illegals. Yes, they stand in line, but no health insurance does not equal no health care.

Government (aka taxpayers) already pays half of our health care dollar, with programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP and other federal and state plans. The stated goals are accessibility and affordability. Congress passed Medicare in 1965. In the 20 years before the program's inception, the cost of a day in a hospital increased threefold. In the 20 years following Medicare, a day in a hospital increased eightfold — substantially higher than inflation over that period. Because of cost controls on government plans, providers increased the cost on everybody else.

So here's the question.

Do we allow a complete government takeover of the section of health care it doesn't already run, for 10-15 million or so without health insurance on a persistent basis? Again, 255 million Americans already have it. Many millions more could get it if they wanted to. And 89 percent of Americans are satisfied with the care they now receive.

What to do? Unleash the free market. Allow greater competition among health care providers. Decrease costly regulations that increase the price tag. Enable consumers to purchase insurance plans across state lines. Allow non-government-licensed paraprofessionals and others — currently prevented by law from offering any medical services — to provide low-cost care.

What about poor care and negligence? We have laws against force and fraud, as well as a common-law duty of care. That's why God created lawyers. (Just give us "loser pays.")

What about those who cannot afford it? What about those with pre-existing illnesses whose insurance applications carriers turned down? What's wrong with charity — people helping people? America remains the most generous nation on the face of the earth. We donate more of our time and money than countries like England, Germany and Japan. During the Great Depression, before the New Deal, charitable giving skyrocketed. After the New Deal, charitable giving continued, but not at nearly the same rate. People expected government to address the problem, and taxpayers felt they gave at the office.

We can provide such "universal" coverage at a "low cost" — through rationing. That means long lines, lower quality and less innovation for services that Americans currently take for granted.

Economists call it T.A.N.S.T.A.A.F.L. There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/elder061809.php3

[Peikko 1,575]

Don't you just love it when folks pluck information out the internet via google, knowing nothing about the sources...or is Txn really jewish

[natty bumppo 297]

If there ever was a place and time for NHC do you honestly think that right now it that time to try and push this through, considering the economic state of this country

Great Britian began the NHS right after WWII, when their nation was on the verge of bankruptcy.

And after the U.S. had just forgiven them their huge debt to us.

What?

The UK made its final WWII-related payment to the US in December 2006. It was sort of a big story. It was seen as a loan w/ generous terms, but hardly debt forgiven. Where do you get your information?

From his usual source. That place you need a flashlight and mirror to see.

It was the end of 2006 when the UK transferred $84 million to the US Treasury for the final payment on debt used to finance WWII. Back in 1945 the US extended $4+ billion to the UK to prevent the UK from going into bankruptcy. It took 50years (6 of which a payment was skipped) for the UK to settle the debt. I think the loan was double the size of the UK economy at the time (maybe someone can confirm). There also appears to be debts owed to the US for WWI as well. There have been no repayments received since 1934 (due to an moratorium during the depression)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6215847.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4757181.stm

more ...

"Britain received about $30 billion of goods — just over £7 billion atthe prevailing exchange rate — during the war years, in effect giftsfrom America. But in September 1945 the US abruptly announced an end tothe Lend-Lease programme, despite the need for large-scalereconstruction and with Britain on its knees economically."

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/busi...icle1264220.ece

I can keep digging and find more information about the nature of debts between the UK and US at the end of the WWII. Can we agree the UK decided to rebuild and also institute NHC due to a generous loan/agreements with the US that gave them access to spendable funds? I don't know if this helped finance NHC or not ... I'll let others weigh in on this .

Meanwhile ... I shamelessly digressed. Back to Topic...

[HAL 9000 96]

Don't you just love it when folks pluck information out the internet via google, knowing nothing about the sources...or is Txn really jewish

No kidding. Specially those that still can't seem to explain what Socialism is.

No... there REALLY isn't a problem with health care in this country. REALLY.

[_Simpson_ 250]

proof?

who? me?

No.

At least you try to rationalize according to your beliefs. Although I did remind you that telepathy and politics don't go well- at least yet.

If you set a wheel upright on a empty street that is on a hill you don't need telepathy to know what that tire will do.

So you see a hill... interesting...

I do and it leads right into to a busy intersection. Poor tire!

That's what you get for first thinking the street is empty without considering the streets it intersects.

And in the bills thus far, the street you're on has signs that you're not reading.

Oh trust me I am reading the signs and thats why I insist on not letting my tire go down that hill.

[DIARD 1]

If things are so great in those countries that you people list for examples of wonderful socialized medicine, then why don't you move there? Go to the wonderful utopian Socialized medicine countries instead of trying to come here, or bring your SO here. 65% of us are happy with our healthcare and insurance - we won't accept changing it.

Wow, interesting you say this. Where did you get this particular number? Polls don't always tell the full picture. But if you want stats:

CNN poll taken in March of this year shows that more than 3 out of four Americans (more than 75% of us) are extremely dissatisfied with the total cost of health care in the United States. So while they may like their insurance, most people believe we are paying too much for coverage.

I happen to be one of those 75% of Americans. I am satisfied with about 80% of the medical treatment I have received. I am very unhappy with my insurance. Not only does it cost a fortune ($6000 a year) but I have to pay deductibles, co-pays and 20% co-insurance. I have a great plan (Blue Cross/Blue Shield Purdent Buyer PPO) and can take the kids to whatever doctor I want (we always chose to go in network). But last year we paid over $12,000 in medical costs - or I should say I am still paying. I think if you followed up on Americans that are happy with their insurance, you find that the majority of them have NEVER had to use it for more than an occassional doctors visit.

[DIARD 1]

If there ever was a place and time for NHC do you honestly think that right now it that time to try and push this through, considering the economic state of this country

Great Britian began the NHS right after WWII, when their nation was on the verge of bankruptcy.

And after the U.S. had just forgiven them their huge debt to us.

What?

The UK made its final WWII-related payment to the US in December 2006. It was sort of a big story. It was seen as a loan w/ generous terms, but hardly debt forgiven. Where do you get your information?

From his usual source. That place you need a flashlight and mirror to see.

It was the end of 2006 when the UK transferred $84 million to the US Treasury for the final payment on debt used to finance WWII. Back in 1945 the US extended $4+ billion to the UK to prevent the UK from going into bankruptcy. It took 50years (6 of which a payment was skipped) for the UK to settle the debt. I think the loan was double the size of the UK economy at the time (maybe someone can confirm). There also appears to be debts owed to the US for WWI as well. There have been no repayments received since 1934 (due to an moratorium during the depression)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6215847.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4757181.stm

more ...

"Britain received about $30 billion of goods — just over £7 billion atthe prevailing exchange rate — during the war years, in effect giftsfrom America. But in September 1945 the US abruptly announced an end tothe Lend-Lease programme, despite the need for large-scalereconstruction and with Britain on its knees economically."

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/busi...icle1264220.ece

I can keep digging and find more information about the nature of debts between the UK and US at the end of the WWII. Can we agree the UK decided to rebuild and also institute NHC due to a generous loan/agreements with the US that gave them access to spendable funds? I don't know if this helped finance NHC or not ... I'll let others weigh in on this .

Meanwhile ... I shamelessly digressed. Back to Topic...

If I am not mistaken, the US owes quite a bit more than this China at the moment and that debt didnt come about because of World War.

[thepizzadude 26]

Or, it will not. I tend to read what's actually written.

OK then READ THIS...It will be cheaper for employers to pay the 8% penalty than to provide their employees health care benefits. Believe me I have a business and I know how much it costs to provide so........

[_Simpson_ 250]

There isn't a single proposal out there to socialize medicine in the US. Not one. But you seem to have fun attacking strawmen. Keep at it while the rest of the country focuses on real issues.

Where do you think Obama's health care plan would lead to, theres no reason for employers to provide insurance for there workers. If we go this route it will eventually become socialized.

The horror... the horror... It might lead to a rational system enjoyed by the overwhelming majority of developed nations... The horror... the horror... the horror...

Do you even know what it was we were debating? Let me give you a hint - what this reform bill would lead to, not if it was a good/bad idea. So I think in a way you unknowingly agreed with me... interesting. Stick with me kid and I will take you places.

Edited August 14, 2009 by looking_up

[Empress of Groovy 373]

I can keep digging and find more information about the nature of debts between the UK and US at the end of the WWII. Can we agree the UK decided to rebuild and also institute NHC due to a generous loan/agreements with the US that gave them access to spendable funds? I don't know if this helped finance NHC or not ... I'll let others weigh in on this .

Meanwhile ... I shamelessly digressed. Back to Topic...

I'm not sure you can say that the NHS was established as a direct result of the US's largesse following the war. Large sections of Britain (and indeed much of Europe) was in shambles, but health care for all citizens was a major priority because it was seen as crucial to the nation's recovery.

I've yet to meet a Brit who thinks the NHS should be dismantled in favor of a U.S-style system. Complaining about the NHS is a national sport--and Lord knows the Brits are champion complainers (I mean that with fondness)--but nearly everyone is grateful for the system.

Are people who criticize the British system even aware that there is a private system there as well?

[natty bumppo 297]

If there ever was a place and time for NHC do you honestly think that right now it that time to try and push this through, considering the economic state of this country

Great Britian began the NHS right after WWII, when their nation was on the verge of bankruptcy.

And after the U.S. had just forgiven them their huge debt to us.

What?

The UK made its final WWII-related payment to the US in December 2006. It was sort of a big story. It was seen as a loan w/ generous terms, but hardly debt forgiven. Where do you get your information?

From his usual source. That place you need a flashlight and mirror to see.

It was the end of 2006 when the UK transferred $84 million to the US Treasury for the final payment on debt used to finance WWII. Back in 1945 the US extended $4+ billion to the UK to prevent the UK from going into bankruptcy. It took 50years (6 of which a payment was skipped) for the UK to settle the debt. I think the loan was double the size of the UK economy at the time (maybe someone can confirm). There also appears to be debts owed to the US for WWI as well. There have been no repayments received since 1934 (due to an moratorium during the depression)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6215847.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4757181.stm

more ...

"Britain received about $30 billion of goods — just over £7 billion atthe prevailing exchange rate — during the war years, in effect giftsfrom America. But in September 1945 the US abruptly announced an end tothe Lend-Lease programme, despite the need for large-scalereconstruction and with Britain on its knees economically."

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/busi...icle1264220.ece

I can keep digging and find more information about the nature of debts between the UK and US at the end of the WWII. Can we agree the UK decided to rebuild and also institute NHC due to a generous loan/agreements with the US that gave them access to spendable funds? I don't know if this helped finance NHC or not ... I'll let others weigh in on this .

Meanwhile ... I shamelessly digressed. Back to Topic...

forgot to highlight this tidbit from the last linked reference ... I think this is part of debt forgiveness.

"Goods already in Britain or in transit were sold to the UK government at heavily discounted prices — one-tenth of their value — the amount paid being in the form of a loan."

(I gotta cut this out ) Now once again ... BTT.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Are people who criticize the British system even aware that there is a private system there as well?

Are you aware that the private system has yet to experience a single death?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Whereas people under NHS die all the time! Happens every day!

[_Simpson_ 250]

If there ever was a place and time for NHC do you honestly think that right now it that time to try and push this through, considering the economic state of this country

Great Britian began the NHS right after WWII, when their nation was on the verge of bankruptcy.

And after the U.S. had just forgiven them their huge debt to us.

What?

The UK made its final WWII-related payment to the US in December 2006. It was sort of a big story. It was seen as a loan w/ generous terms, but hardly debt forgiven. Where do you get your information?

From his usual source. That place you need a flashlight and mirror to see.

It was the end of 2006 when the UK transferred $84 million to the US Treasury for the final payment on debt used to finance WWII. Back in 1945 the US extended $4+ billion to the UK to prevent the UK from going into bankruptcy. It took 50years (6 of which a payment was skipped) for the UK to settle the debt. I think the loan was double the size of the UK economy at the time (maybe someone can confirm). There also appears to be debts owed to the US for WWI as well. There have been no repayments received since 1934 (due to an moratorium during the depression)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6215847.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4757181.stm

more ...

"Britain received about $30 billion of goods — just over £7 billion atthe prevailing exchange rate — during the war years, in effect giftsfrom America. But in September 1945 the US abruptly announced an end tothe Lend-Lease programme, despite the need for large-scalereconstruction and with Britain on its knees economically."

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/busi...icle1264220.ece

I can keep digging and find more information about the nature of debts between the UK and US at the end of the WWII. Can we agree the UK decided to rebuild and also institute NHC due to a generous loan/agreements with the US that gave them access to spendable funds? I don't know if this helped finance NHC or not ... I'll let others weigh in on this .

Meanwhile ... I shamelessly digressed. Back to Topic...

If I am not mistaken, the US owes quite a bit more than this China at the moment and that debt didnt come about because of World War.

That has nothing to do with what were talking about, now you want to player hate on the states but can we but that aside for a moment and discuss this?