|
Um, the NHS is probably the most "left-wing" health care system in the world. The fears that privatization will turn it in to an "American" system are stupid and unfounded. Many countries manage just fine with a government-funded, privatized system. In fact, some get remarkably better results. Like, oh, France.
|
On June 22 2011 08:56 acker wrote:I've always been kind of amused by the disconnect between the American right wing and the rest of the first world when it comes to universal health care. Right Wing: "Universal health care by government decree is wracked by moral hazard, wait lists, and skyrocketing costs. We need to deregulate and privatize health care even further in order to reach the free market solution." Rest if the World: "Err...we live it, and it works. Call us healthcare socialists." Rest of the World's Right Wing: http://www.latimes.com/health/la-fg-britain-health-care-20110613,0,1237142.story
Yea.... except where do you think all the medical innovation is coming from that makes these universal healthcare systems better? Where do you think Canada gets all its drugs from?
|
I knew I was forgetting a right-wing talking point somewhere. Let me correct myself, and thanks for reminding me:
I've always been kind of amused by the disconnect between the American right wing and the rest of the first world when it comes to universal health care.
Right Wing: "Universal health care by government decree is wracked by moral hazard, wait lists, innovative atrophy, and skyrocketing costs. We need to deregulate and privatize health care even further in order to reach the free market solution."
Rest if the World: "Err...we live it, and it works. Call us healthcare socialists."
Rest of the World's Right Wing: http://www.latimes.com/health/la-fg-britain-health-care-20110613,0,1237142.story
domovoi: the point sailed over your head. Here's another link:
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canadavotes2006/national/2005/12/02/elxn-harper-healthcare.html
|
On June 22 2011 09:04 RJGooner wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2011 08:56 acker wrote:I've always been kind of amused by the disconnect between the American right wing and the rest of the first world when it comes to universal health care. Right Wing: "Universal health care by government decree is wracked by moral hazard, wait lists, and skyrocketing costs. We need to deregulate and privatize health care even further in order to reach the free market solution." Rest if the World: "Err...we live it, and it works. Call us healthcare socialists." Rest of the World's Right Wing: http://www.latimes.com/health/la-fg-britain-health-care-20110613,0,1237142.story Yea.... except where do you think all the medical innovation is coming from that makes these universal healthcare systems better? Where do you think Canada gets all its drugs from?
Is this supposed to be a valid argument? It's great that some medical innovations are developed here, that doesn't do the average Joe any good if he can't afford it. They're separate issues.
|
No, I understood your point perfectly fine. But if you're going to use an example of how the rest of the world has more "left-wing" healthcare systems than the US (actually, they don't), then picking the NHS and Canada's system is pretty silly given that they are the most left-wing systems on the spectrum of successful healthcare systems.
Labeling this debate as if it's between left-wing and right-wing, or capitalist and socialist, is ignorant, unproductive and generally leads to shit-flinging instead of reasoned discussion.
|
On June 22 2011 08:56 acker wrote:I've always been kind of amused by the disconnect between the American right wing and the rest of the first world when it comes to universal health care. Right Wing: "Universal health care by government decree is wracked by moral hazard, wait lists, and skyrocketing costs. We need to deregulate and privatize health care even further in order to reach the free market solution." Rest if the World: "Err...we live it, and it works. Call us healthcare socialists." Rest of the World's Right Wing: http://www.latimes.com/health/la-fg-britain-health-care-20110613,0,1237142.story
The article you linked portrays it best:
To each other, Britons love to complain about the NHS, retailing gruesome tales of substandard care, of long waiting lists for simple operations like hip replacements, of snotty surgeons and naughty nurses. But when Americans began citing the NHS as the epitome of socialized medicine gone wrong, people here bristled.
Hardly "we live it and it works." Healthcare reform wouldn't be an issue in other countries right now if their systems were so perfect..
|
On June 22 2011 09:08 TOloseGT wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2011 09:04 RJGooner wrote:On June 22 2011 08:56 acker wrote:I've always been kind of amused by the disconnect between the American right wing and the rest of the first world when it comes to universal health care. Right Wing: "Universal health care by government decree is wracked by moral hazard, wait lists, and skyrocketing costs. We need to deregulate and privatize health care even further in order to reach the free market solution." Rest if the World: "Err...we live it, and it works. Call us healthcare socialists." Rest of the World's Right Wing: http://www.latimes.com/health/la-fg-britain-health-care-20110613,0,1237142.story Yea.... except where do you think all the medical innovation is coming from that makes these universal healthcare systems better? Where do you think Canada gets all its drugs from? Is this supposed to be a valid argument? It's great that some medical innovations are developed here, that doesn't do the average Joe any good if he can't afford it. They're separate issues.
These innovations, while expensive at the start start getting cheaper because of competition, that's how the system works.
Look I'm not saying that the system is perfect or anywhere close to good, but to say that universal healthcare systems are far and away better is being dishonest.
|
On June 22 2011 09:07 acker wrote:I knew I was forgetting a right-wing talking point somewhere. Let me correct myself, and thanks for reminding me: I've always been kind of amused by the disconnect between the American right wing and the rest of the first world when it comes to universal health care. Right Wing: "Universal health care by government decree is wracked by moral hazard, wait lists, innovative atrophy, and skyrocketing costs. We need to deregulate and privatize health care even further in order to reach the free market solution." Rest if the World: "Err...we live it, and it works. Call us healthcare socialists." Rest of the World's Right Wing: http://www.latimes.com/health/la-fg-britain-health-care-20110613,0,1237142.storydomovoi: the point sailed over your head. Here's another link: http://www.cbc.ca/story/canadavotes2006/national/2005/12/02/elxn-harper-healthcare.html
I love how you just repeated what I said and didn't respond to it. Are you going to contend that that's not the case? If so, evidence?
|
The fact that I know many people who are afraid of socialized medicines because of long wait times for operations/death panels etc is hilarious when I look at 'pre-existing condition' clauses when looking for health insurance.
|
On June 22 2011 09:04 RJGooner wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2011 08:56 acker wrote:I've always been kind of amused by the disconnect between the American right wing and the rest of the first world when it comes to universal health care. Right Wing: "Universal health care by government decree is wracked by moral hazard, wait lists, and skyrocketing costs. We need to deregulate and privatize health care even further in order to reach the free market solution." Rest if the World: "Err...we live it, and it works. Call us healthcare socialists." Rest of the World's Right Wing: http://www.latimes.com/health/la-fg-britain-health-care-20110613,0,1237142.story Yea.... except where do you think all the medical innovation is coming from that makes these universal healthcare systems better? Where do you think Canada gets all its drugs from?
Healthcare systems, and medical research aren't all that related. One is usually a corporate affair, while the other requires legislative action.
|
Could afford a condominium but not health insurance?
Yo man what you in for? Healthcare
|
On June 22 2011 09:22 Playguuu wrote:
Could afford a condominium but not health insurance?
Yo man what you in for? Healthcare
He knew he was sick, had growths etc so it would be a prexisting condition so insurance wouldn't provide full coverage, so if it was anything remotely serious, he was fucked.
|
On June 22 2011 09:24 schmeebs wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2011 09:22 Playguuu wrote:
Could afford a condominium but not health insurance?
Yo man what you in for? Healthcare He knew he was sick, had growths etc so it would be a prexisting condition so insurance wouldn't provide full coverage, so if it was anything remotely serious, he was fucked.
So the solution is to go spend 10 years in prison? Lmao
|
USA has a lot of money allocated in military. Troops stationed all over the world and this actually led to those countries getting free healthcare, why spend on military if you are allied with the US and they have troops stationed in your country?
Problem is this won't last forever. Spending $1,000,000~ to eliminate an enemy that just spent maybe $50 on their ak47 or homemade explosives doesn't add up to be cost effective (well it does because it's the safest way to fight a war but the US obviously doesn't have an unlimited amount of money) very much apparent now with all the budget cuts EVERYWHERE else to keep the military going. US economy was great because of it's military power but it will also deteriorate because of it as well. Not saying the US will collapse or anything but they can't run like this forever. Also countries with free healthcare and such might have to spend more on military if thats the case but who knows 
|
On June 22 2011 09:22 Playguuu wrote:
Could afford a condominium but not health insurance?
Yo man what you in for? Healthcare
Just read the article....
He is hoping for a three-year sentence. He would then be able to collect Social Security when he got out and said he would head for the beach.
|
On June 22 2011 09:26 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2011 09:22 Playguuu wrote:
Could afford a condominium but not health insurance?
Yo man what you in for? Healthcare Just read the article.... Show nested quote +He is hoping for a three-year sentence. He would then be able to collect Social Security when he got out and said he would head for the beach.
Yet again putting burden on the social system. How much does his prison stay cost? Should have to work in prison to get medical imo. With a gun I'll be shocked if he does 3.
|
On June 22 2011 05:49 dogabutila wrote:
Someone explain to me why I should WANT global healthcare coverage? Realistically speaking, I see no reason why I should WANT to pay for joe smith's medical bills. I have plenty of bills to pay for on my own.
Take the US for example, each person of 300 millions people give 1 cent per day to cure sick people. That's 3 million dollars a day, and cost you what? 30 cent/month, or 3,4$ a year? There's no harm to cut 1 hamburger a year for sick people, you know? Of course the problem is not that easy, but you get my point.
|
On June 22 2011 05:53 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2011 05:49 dogabutila wrote:
Someone explain to me why I should WANT global healthcare coverage? Realistically speaking, I see no reason why I should WANT to pay for joe smith's medical bills. I have plenty of bills to pay for on my own. Because if you get into a seriously bad accident/get a terrible ailment, society-at-large will have your back and get you back on your feet, with no immediate or enormous cost/debt expected from you. If you went into a non-socialized healthcare system, didn't pay for enough insurance, and had the same horrific accident/ailment, you're now in massive debt for the rest of your life, and your future prospects are now basically over.
You didn't answer my question. I'm fully aware of how insurance works. I'm asking why I should want a mandated, forced, global healthcare system.
If you are really sickly and stuff, of course you support it because you get other people to pay for your illnesses, but if you are really healthy then you are forced into paying for other people. Sure, some healthy people might decide the safety net is worth it but the failing of an individual mandate is that it removes the ability of people to choose. If I think that I could better prepare for health related costs on my own by setting aside money for the future then why should I not be able to do that? Why is more government the answer to everything?
On June 22 2011 05:51 Nightfly wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2011 05:49 dogabutila wrote:
Someone explain to me why I should WANT global healthcare coverage? Realistically speaking, I see no reason why I should WANT to pay for joe smith's medical bills. I have plenty of bills to pay for on my own. Realistically speaking, it's probably not Joe Smith's medical bills you will be paying. 
Realistically speaking, I am. If I were part of a universal health insurance racket then I would be subsidizing those at higher risks then me.
On June 22 2011 09:28 canikizu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2011 05:49 dogabutila wrote:
Someone explain to me why I should WANT global healthcare coverage? Realistically speaking, I see no reason why I should WANT to pay for joe smith's medical bills. I have plenty of bills to pay for on my own. Take the US for example, each person of 300 millions people give 1 cent per day to cure sick people. That's 3 million dollars a day, and cost you what? 30 cent/month, or $3.65 a year? There's no harm to cut 1 hamburger a year for sick people, you know? Of course the problem is not that easy, but you get my point.
365 days in a year. So, not $3.40. Yea yea, I know it's an example, but we can still discuss things accurately right?
So again, why would I want to be forced into helping them? If I wanted insurance I could get it. If I wanted to be responsible for my own medical costs then why can't I just take a dollar out of my paycheck and save it myself?
|
On June 22 2011 09:26 ahbeez wrote:USA has a lot of money allocated in military. Troops stationed all over the world and this actually led to those countries getting free healthcare, why spend on military if you are allied with the US and they have troops stationed in your country? Problem is this won't last forever. Spending $1,000,000~ to eliminate an enemy that just spent maybe $50 on their ak47 or homemade explosives doesn't add up to be cost effective (well it does because it's the safest way to fight a war but the US obviously doesn't have an unlimited amount of money) very much apparent now with all the budget cuts EVERYWHERE else to keep the military going. US economy was great because of it's military power but it will also deteriorate because of it as well. Not saying the US will collapse or anything but they can't run like this forever. Also countries with free healthcare and such might have to spend more on military if thats the case but who knows
Sorry, but from your post we get the feeling that countries with free healthcare receive major help from the US military, wich is pretty off.
|
He didnt hurt anyone hopefully
I think he was just trying to make a point, that you need to go to extremes just to get healthcare.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
