Universal health care would be a good thing

[Storm]

You do raise an interesting point, Alceste, that we can do a rough poll right here. RFer's:
1. What country do you live in?

USA

2. Does that country have any form of universal health care?

No. However, my state has the Oregon Health Plan which provides coverage for low-income people like myself, and I don't know what I'd do without it.

It's also directly responsible for saving my son's life TWICE during his infancy.

3. How satisfied are you and the people around you with their health care system?

USA, deeply discontent. OHP, I'd rate 9 out of 10.

4. Would you want your government to change from a universal to non-universal system, or vice versa, as the case may be?

Yes, we should have universal health care.

I'd compromise by instituting an OHP-like system nation-wide.

 

[Willamena]

1. What country do you live in?

Canada

2. Does that country have any form of universal health care?

Yes, provincial.

3. How satisfied are you and the people around you with their health care system?

I hear few complaints. There's also no praise, but then if it's done well there should be no reason to expect anything less than the best service.

4. Would you want your government to change from a universal to non-universal system, or vice versa, as the case may be?

No. I think having private health service as an option is adequate.

 

[McBell]

Like any other government run program, it would be full of abuse, waste, and unproductive practices. We would be controlled by cost, I doubt we would enjoy any benefits of cheap medicine which is an oxymoron.

Oh, so it would be absolutely no different then as it is for me now.

1. What country do you live in?

USA

2. Does that country have any form of universal health care?

Non that I am aware of

3. How satisfied are you and the people around you with their health care system?

Personally I think it sucks arse.
Most of those around me agree.
In fact, the only ones who disagree that is sucks arse are the ones with the money to pay $250 a pill for scripts.

4. Would you want your government to change from a universal to non-universal system, or vice versa, as the case may be?

I doubt that my opinion would be much help.
I would support any program that would provide me medical coverage that did not cost almost half of what my wife and I make to cover only 80%.

Currently I have no medical coverage.
Why?
because I have to choose between a place to live and medical coverage.
Interesting it is that the cheapest medical in these parts is only $47.87 less than all my bills (house payment, electric, gas, phone, internet, trash, water, house insurance, car insurance) combined.

 

[Starfish]

As a Canadian I think Americans who don't support socialised medicine are clinically insane. I mean, really, certifiable. You pay twice as much per capita for health care as countries with socialised medicine, and the service you receive for this exorbitant sum is worse by any measure you could consider. (High infant mortality, low life expectancy, etc). On top of that HALF of all bankruptcies in the USA are the direct result of inability to pay medical bills. HALF.

But, not only are you insane, you're also dangerous to the rest of us, because our own governments are (regrettably) full of fanboys who want to privatise medicine because they have been exposed to too much of your propaganda claiming that private business is more efficient, innovative and cost-effective at everything, including public services.

But I don't pay my effing taxes so that the gov't can contract public services out to private businesses who always crank up prices while reducing the quality of service, no matter what they get their hands on. I pay my taxes to the government so that a democratically accountable organisation that I personally have a stake in can provide vital public services in a fair and open manner.

Anyway, the point of all this is that if Americans would just rally around the cause of socialised medicine, we'd all breathe a lot easier in Canada and the UK. Our own health care systems are being eroded because your crap system is very, very profitable. All that extra money from your paying double for worse service is going into somebody's pocket, which is "good for the economy", which is like cocaine to governments in Canada and the UK.

Canadian Health Care We So Envy Lies In Ruins, Its Architect Admits - VisaJourney.com

 

[Storm]

Who is David Gratzer and why should I respect his opinion over Alceste's, who actually utilizes the system he's talking about?

Also, can you find the original source for that article? You never know how a forum poster might've altered it. Yes, I'm a bit paranoid.

 

[Willamena]

Castonguay speaks of Quebec's health care, in a province that is torn politically, and hence economically, by conflicting cultures (French-Canadian, Anglo-Canadian, and Metis/indigenous). He does not propose to speak of all of Canada (as David Gratzer implies). Each province has autonomous health care --what happens in one province, however unfortunate, is not representative of what happens in other provinces.

 

[Autodidact]

Canadian Health Care We So Envy Lies In Ruins, Its Architect Admits - VisaJourney.com

I notice that Mr. Castonguay does NOT advocate going back to a private-health insurance, U.S. style model.

 

[Starfish]

The U.S. system is FAR from perfect. It has it's problems too. But what if it wasn't available to this woman?
Cancer survivor battles OHIP

 

[Storm]

The U.S. system is FAR from perfect. It has it's problems too. But what if it wasn't available to this woman?
Cancer survivor battles OHIP

Every system has its problems, noone's denying that. But the fact that socialized medicine isn't perfect either doesn't justify our shameful practice of making life-saving medical care a luxury available only to the wealthy.

If that woman hadn't had the outraegeous sum of $60,000 she wouldn't have been saved under our system eithe.

 

[Starfish]

Every system has its problems, noone's denying that. But the fact that socialized medicine isn't perfect either doesn't justify our shameful practice of making life-saving medical care a luxury available only to the wealthy.

If that woman hadn't had the outraegeous sum of $60,000 she wouldn't have been saved under our system eithe.

If the U.S. had socialized medicine, would she, a Canadian, have received help here? I don't know.
Are there examples of a U.S. citizen being turned away, from a U.S. hospital, from receiving life-saving medical help, due to lack of money?

 

[McBell]

Who is David Gratzer and why should I respect his opinion over Alceste's, who actually utilizes the system he's talking about?

Also, can you find the original source for that article? You never know how a forum poster might've altered it. Yes, I'm a bit paranoid.

I found this at the bottom of the post liunked to:
Today in Investor's Business Daily stock analysis and business news

Every system has its problems, no one's denying that. But the fact that socialized medicine isn't perfect either doesn't justify our shameful practice of making life-saving medical care a luxury available only to the wealthy.

If that woman hadn't had the outrageous sum of $60,000 she wouldn't have been saved under our system either.

I agree.
One can look into any system and find those who have fallen between the cracks.
Seems to me that the goal should be to reduce the number of those who fall into the cracks.

Perhaps one day I can win the lottery and be able to afford healthcare....

 

[Storm]

If the U.S. had socialized medicine, would she, a Canadian, have received help here? I don't know.

That would depend on the system. When OR had a ballot measure proposing (state) universal healthcare, one of the arguments against it was that people from other states would utilize it without paying the taxes to support it.

Are there examples of a U.S. citizen being turned away, from a U.S. hospital, from receiving life-saving medical help, due to lack of money?

No, I'm not aware of any examples of that particular form of life-saving care being denied anyon due to lack of funds. That's because it's illegal, one of the few socialist facets of our system.

However, there are numerous examples of people being unable to afford their life-saving medication.

EDIT: Also, Jonathan Larson is a rather famous example of an uninsured man dying due to inexcusable misdiagnosis in our own hospitals.

 

[Starfish]

That would depend on the system. When OR had a ballot measure proposing (state) universal healthcare, one of the arguments against it was that people from other states would utilize it without paying the taxes to support it.

No, I'm not aware of any examples of that particular form of life-saving care being denied anyon due to lack of funds. That's because it's illegal, one of the few socialist facets of our system.

However, there are numerous examples of people being unable to afford their life-saving medication.

EDIT: Also, Jonathan Larson is a rather famous example of an uninsured man dying due to inexcusable misdiagnosis in our own hospitals.

Yes, unfortunately there are victims. Our system is run by imperfect doctors and administrators who can make mistakes.

I visited with several Canadians recently who gave mixed reviews of their system. The usual consensus was that the healthy liked it. Some said the quality was going down. Other's thought it was fine, again the healthy ones.
My friend's mother lives in New Zealand. She has to wait months for cataract surgery.

I'm not AGAINST the Canadian system. I'm just showing the other side as I see it. It apparently isn't the answer to all problems.

 

[McBell]

It apparently isn't the answer to all problems.

Fair enough.
Now the question is....Is their system better than ours?
If it means that I get medical coverage, then I say it is.

 

[Storm]

Yes, unfortunately there are victims. Our system is run by imperfect doctors and administrators who can make mistakes.

I visited with several Canadians recently who gave mixed reviews of their system. The usual consensus was that the healthy liked it. Some said the quality was going down. Other's thought it was fine, again the healthy ones.
My friend's mother lives in New Zealand. She has to wait months for cataract surgery.

I'm not AGAINST the Canadian system. I'm just showing the other side as I see it. It apparently isn't the answer to all problems.

OK, we're on the same page as far as no system being perfect.

My question for you and everyone else who opposes universal healthcare is why shouldn't we try to improve our own imperfect system?

 

[Wandered Off]

My question for you and everyone else who opposes universal healthcare is why shouldn't we try to improve our own imperfect system?

Everybody favors improvement. The issue is that some of us don't think turning it over to the government would be an improvement.

 

[Storm]

OK, fair enough. I'll reframe the question:

How is providing coverage to those who don't have it NOT an improvement?

 

[Starfish]

Everybody favors improvement. The issue is that some of us don't think turning it over to the government would be an improvement.

Agreed. We all want improvement. Believe me as owner of a business with employees, I'd love to not have to pay out every month for their insurance.

I guess we need more convincing that socialized medicine is the answer.

 

[SoyLeche]

OK, fair enough. I'll reframe the question:

How is providing coverage to those who don't have it NOT an improvement?

That would depend on how providing coverage to those who don't have it affects the overall cost and/or quality of healthcare in general.

 

[Alceste]

Who is David Gratzer and why should I respect his opinion over Alceste's, who actually utilizes the system he's talking about?

Also, can you find the original source for that article? You never know how a forum poster might've altered it. Yes, I'm a bit paranoid.

He's a fellow with the Manhattan Institute.

The Manhattan Institute (MI) is a right-wing 501(c)(3) non-profit think tank founded in 1978 by William J. Casey, who later became President Ronald Reagan's CIA director.[1]
The Manhattan Institute is "focused on promoting free-market principles whose mission is to 'develop and disseminate new ideas that foster greater economic choice and individual responsibility.'"[2]
"The Manhattan Institute concerns itself with such things as 'welfare reform' (dismantling social programs), 'faith-based initiatives' (blurring the distinction between church and state), and 'education reform' (destroying public education)," Kurt Nimmo wrote October 10, 2002, in CounterPunch.[3]

From Sourcewatch

The article was originally posted in a business investor's magazine, here.

There is no such person as "Sylvia de Vires" [sic], but he may be referring to Sylvia de Vries, who voluntarily went to the US for treatment and elected to pay up front, and is now petitioning the government to reimburse her costs. (Her life savings, literally). Not a pretty story, but I saw a dozen worse stories from the US in Sicko.