• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Free health care in America

fullyveiled muslimah

Evil incarnate!
Fresh on the heels of having seen Sicko, the new documentary on health care by Michael Moore, I am horrified by America's lack of free health care. It was demostrated how France, Canada, Britain, and even Cuba has universal free health care. In these countries you don't need a health insurance, you don't need anything when you're sick. You just go to the doctor. Medicine is obscenly cheap in these places, but here it is the other way around. When a person gets sick, they just have to deal with it on their own when they don't have health insurance. Even when they do have it, the co-pays and deductibles are a nightmare. I am living in this situation as we speak, so I have a full reality of how ridiculous this health system is here in America.

Should we have universal health care in America? Why or why not?
 

jonny

Well-Known Member
There's no such thing as "free" health care. You're going to pay for it one way or another - most likely by paying higher taxes. It might balance out though when you eliminate the money that you have to pay out of your paycheck each month for healthcare (I pay about $80/month right now. If I had children that would quadruple).

I don't mind exploring the idea of gov't health care - but not until the government commits to balancing the budget. We can't pay for the government programs that we've got so far and adding another HUGE program isn't going to help our government manage our money better. I'd consider an ammendment to the consitution that requires congress to balance the budget (I haven't really researched this idea fully) and elimination of 'earmarks' on bills passed by congress - then, and only then, will I listen to an argument about letting the government take over health care.

Personally, I think everyone agrees that the government screws up just about everything it touches. It is extremely corrupt. Unless we have some sort of system that allows people to opt-out and get private insurance, I don't know how we can really trust the government to do better with this than they have with other things in the past. Did anyone else read the article today about the former Surgeon General testifying of being forced to 'keep quiet' on health issues?

I should add that I'm more inclined to let the states deal with this. I don't like the idea of depending on the federal gov't for everything when it could be managed better at a state level.
 

Booko

Deviled Hen
Fresh on the heels of having seen Sicko, the new documentary on health care by Michael Moore, I am horrified by America's lack of free health care.

I wish I could go see Sicko, but alas, until someone invents the popcorn-free theater that's not an option. :( I guess I'll wait for Netflix.

Well, we do have free health care, but only if your 65 or older and that sort of thing. It's not like we don't know how to do it in some form.

It was demostrated how France, Canada, Britain, and even Cuba has universal free health care. In these countries you don't need a health insurance, you don't need anything when you're sick. You just go to the doctor. Medicine is obscenly cheap in these places, but here it is the other way around.

Not only that, but doctors there focus on the patient's needs, and are not rushed on to the next patient because insurance demands only allow them a certain amount of time with each patient if they plan on keeping their practice open. Also, they don't get reimbursed for talking to a patient and counseling them on good diet or quitting smoking or things like that that make a huge difference in people's health. They are paid for procedures. This encourages unnecessary procedures, which drive up healthcare costs.

Not to mention many of those tests are not done because they are strictly necessary, but rather they are a means to cover a doc's butt in case of a malpractice lawsuit, it's a way to get past the insurance company's rules that tend to depress the doc's ability to stay in business, and if a hospital is involved, trust me, I used to write and maintain the bloody software that hospitals across this nation use to analyze the *profit* a doctor is making for a hospital.

If you're a doctor and you're not ordering enough tests to pay for the hospital's equipment -- they will drop you off their list of docs with privileges there. They only want docs who make money for them.

When a person gets sick, they just have to deal with it on their own when they don't have health insurance.

Even if they do get sick, they may have to deal with it on their own. The allopathic medical profession has the money all tied up and jealously guards their market share. This is why they've gone after chiropractors for years (and lost in the Supreme Court) and are again going after them now that the makeup of the Court has changed to favor them. This is why you can be arrested in this country for actually healing people with cancer (cf. Getzen and his problems in Texas -- he moved to Mexico). This is why traditional remedies that people have used for thousands of years cannot be advertised for the things we all know they are good for. This is why naturopaths can be arrested and tossed in jail if they say anything remotely prescriptive. They have to couch their words *very* carefully so it all can be cast as "just education."

And believe me, I've got a lot more where that comes from.

Oh, did I mention that allopathic medicine was completely unable to cure and not even treat the illness(es) I've had for the last 5 years? Oh someone sure can -- it's why I'm here now instead of bedridden on Oxycontin just waiting to die. We've paid in the neighborhood of $30K a year to keep me alive and get me functional again. The insurance I pay dearly for reimburses me for nearly none of that. It's a damned good thing my husband makes a good income.

As Moore points out in his movie (I saw an interview) thousands (I think he said 18K?) people DIE in this country every year because they do not have access to healthcare.

Even when they do have it, the co-pays and deductibles are a nightmare. I am living in this situation as we speak, so I have a full reality of how ridiculous this health system is here in America.

I've experienced the UK's system and this one. I'll take the UK's any day. btw, you're more likely to survive a heart attack in the UK than here. Why? Doctors and hospitals don't move out of impoverished areas where the populace can't pay the bills -- because it doesn't matter there! They bills get paid whereever you are.

Should we have universal health care in America? Why or why not?

Our system is hopelessly broken and predicated on a number of things that make no sense for the subject of healthcare. Healthcare is treated like a business that sells widgets. Well of course the manufacturer of widgets will want to sell you more widgets. Well, the "manufacturers" of healthcare want to sell you more healthcare than you need too. So it gets expensive and we wonder why?

And on the other side are the insurance companies. They have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to make profits. They don't have a responsibility to see that we remain or get healthy. So guess what? They do everything in their power to ensure that they don't actually have to provide you with the service you pay them for.

What a crock.

But I don't see what can change our system on the level it requires short of a collapse of the system altogether. Which, I think, is inevitable if we don't have a serious debate about it, and it may be inevitable anyway, because the monied interests are not interested in a change, they are even more powerful now than they were a few decades ago, and they will fight change tooth and nail.

But when 75% of Americans have no coverage and the hospitals are closing because their patients can't pay, maybe then someone will pay attention.

Frankly, I think the Internet and grass roots is the only place where change can really be spearheaded. The mass media in this country have their bills paid by Big Pharma. They are not going to take on the people who pay their bills.

One immediate thing we could do, though, is what Australia did. They realized that pharmaceutical costs were skyrocketing. They went back to the old ban on advertising, and the costs dropped.

It used to be you couldn't advertise drugs here either. We've done it before, and we can do it again. It's a bandaid on a hemmoraghing patient, but it's something.
 

Booko

Deviled Hen
There's no such thing as "free" health care.

Free health care is really a misnomer. Of course it has to get paid for somehow.

You're going to pay for it one way or another - most likely by paying higher taxes.

Yes, and you and businesses won't be paying insurance premiums, which would offset the taxes.

It might balance out though when you eliminate the money that you have to pay out of your paycheck each month for healthcare (I pay about $80/month right now. If I had children that would quadruple).

Don't forget what many employers are paying also. That's quite a chunk of change, and they aren't happy about it either.

I don't mind exploring the idea of gov't health care - but not until the government commits to balancing the budget.

If we stop invading other countries and trying to rule the world, we will have more than enough money to pay for this. If freakin' Cuba can do it (and they're only two notches below us on the measure of how good the healthcare is), then we have no excuse I can see.

(Oh, and on the subject of military spending, there's a lot more cash given to that than just the DoD budget. Money for military spending is squirreled away in all sorts of other agency budgets.)

We can't pay for the government programs that we've got so far and adding another HUGE program isn't going to help our government manage our money better. I'd consider an ammendment to the consitution that requires congress to balance the budget (I haven't really researched this idea fully) and elimination of 'earmarks' on bills passed by congress - then, and only then, will I listen to an argument about letting the government take over health care.

These are very real concerns, Jonny, and I must say that as a fiscal conservative I share them with you. I see no reason why earmarks serve the country, and can't imagine the Founders would recognize a "bill" of the sort we have today.

I'm not sure about the implications of a balanced budget amendment, but you know, that would make a great thread of its own. Many states have them...how would that work? Would you like to start a thread?

Personally, I think everyone agrees that the government screws up just about everything it touches. It is extremely corrupt.

I agree about the corruption. They are bought and paid for...and the two top industries are the military and healthcare. If you take the money out of ruling the world and out of healthcare as it is now, you might actually reduce the amount of corruption. Who knows? :shrug:

Unless we have some sort of system that allows people to opt-out and get private insurance, I don't know how we can really trust the government to do better with this than they have with other things in the past.

I'd like to see our friends from the UK address this topic and how National Health deals with things.

Admittedly, the UK is about the size of one of our states, so that may affect the workability of the system. There's no guarantee that a system that works there would work if expanded to the size we'd need here.

But if you look at the EU collectively, it would mirror us pretty well. Maybe we need some federal level guidance but work things at the state level. There are so many options to consider.

Did anyone else read the article today about the former Surgeon General testifying of being forced to 'keep quiet' on health issues?

Yes, I did. It's typical for this Administration, I'm sad to say. I wonder what happened to the idea that lying is immoral? It seems to be the modus operandi right now. It's a sad day when our gov't is so bent that one could say with a straight face, "Q: How do you know a politician is lying? A: They open their mouth." But that seems to be the case today, and it doesn't seem to matter which "side" you're talking about.

I should add that I'm more inclined to let the states deal with this. I don't like the idea of depending on the federal gov't for everything when it could be managed better at a state level.

I wonder about this myself. First off, it doesn't make sense to assume the cost in NYC is going to be the same as in Peoria. Everything is more expensive in NYC...healthcare too. I don't think a one-size-fits-all system would necessarily work very well. I wonder how Medicare does it?

I haven't been tapped into the "socialized" part of our healthcare -- just the profit-making part.
 

jonny

Well-Known Member
Booko said:
One immediate thing we could do, though, is what Australia did. They realized that pharmaceutical costs were skyrocketing. They went back to the old ban on advertising, and the costs dropped.

It used to be you couldn't advertise drugs here either. We've done it before, and we can do it again. It's a bandaid on a hemmoraghing patient, but it's something.

This came about in the 90s under Clinton didn't it? I don't remember any pharm commercials before I left on my mission in 1998. Now they are everywhere. I'm in favor of blocking these also, and not just because I hate hearing the word "erection" while I'm trying to eat my dinner. :)
 

jonny

Well-Known Member
Booko said:
I wonder about this myself. First off, it doesn't make sense to assume the cost in NYC is going to be the same as in Peoria. Everything is more expensive in NYC...healthcare too. I don't think a one-size-fits-all system would necessarily work very well. I wonder how Medicare does it?

I think that the federal gov't's role in this should be to give the states incentives to fix the problems. We all agree that everyone needs health care, but we have different ideas of how we should go about getting it done. The reason why I support the states taking control of this is because the people will have more of a voice on how their states spend their money. The federal gov't could give them incentives by withdrawing funding for certain programs if the states don't meet some basic requirements for health care for their residents. I know they do that with the highways (This is a reason why you won't really see any states with a speed limit over 75 mph - my understanding is that they lose funding from the federal gov't if they go above that).
 

jonny

Well-Known Member
Another potential problem I can see with universal health care is the fights that will arise on what is covered. I can only imagine the debates when people start discussing using tax dollars to pay for abortions, birth control, etc. Ugh. I dread the thought of it.
 

fullyveiled muslimah

Evil incarnate!
Free healthcare is actually healthcare paid for throught the collective taxes paid by everyone in the country. I see it like this, first off income taxes are illegal. That's the first thing we gotta digest. The second thing is that because they make us pay that tax anyway under pain of taking all a person's possesions and garnishing all their wages, they might as well use that money to pay for the healthcare of everyone. With all teh money the gov't squeezes out of us, why don't we have it?

I tell you what, if politicians stop pocketing all the money, and engaging in croni-ism, we'd have the money. Like booko said too, if America stops invadign and occupying every country in the known world, we could have that money too.

From that movie Sicko, there were some true horror stories. One of them was finding out that so many health insurance companies hire a team of people who's job it is to find a reason to drop you as a client if you happen to actually need that insurance. For instance, if you have full coverage then you actually get sick, and the company has to spend money on you, they will investigate everything about your medical history. If they find the slightest thing that you didn't "report" to them before, they will drop you. This one lady's littel toddler died because, the mother had full coverage from her job that was supposed to extend to her kid. Well when the baby got sick, she took her kid to the hospital, but hey refused to work on her. The baby's temp was above 104, and she went into cardiac arrest. The emergency doctors refused to handle the child because the mother's insurance company did not cover that hospital. The mother took the child to an apporoved hospital, but too late. The child died upon arrival after having several seizures.

If these stories were few and far between, you could say sometimes peopel slip through the cracks, but it happens all the time. Everytime those companies deny people who are chronically or teminally ill, they are responsible for killing people, because hospitals will not continue care without pay. Even if you do have insurance, it could mean bankruptcy because you can't pay all the co-pays and buy all your medicine. If you have a terminal or chronic illness, you can kiss all your money goodbye.

Whatever the system is for healthcare in this country, it should not be made impossible to receive standard healthcare. Alas, i don't think it will work here because teh system as it stands will not tolerate it. Our goverment is simply too corrupt to handle this.
 

Mathematician

Reason, and reason again
I definately agree with the idea of having a national databank but keeping the points of power to the lowest possible level. I want to see all profits wiped from the equation. Anything that meets that criteria, to me, is leaps and bounds above our system. I'd probably settle for a bill that only met one of the two, if it was only temporary.
 

Ciscokid

Well-Known Member
Fresh on the heels of having seen Sicko, the new documentary on health care by Michael Moore, I am horrified by America's lack of free health care.

Doesn't bother me much.

It was demostrated how France, Canada, Britain, and even Cuba has universal free health care.

It's not free. It's called that but it's not free.

In these countries you don't need a health insurance, you don't need anything when you're sick.


All you need is an appointment...which takes quite a while. Canadians have been known to come to the states to get an operation because it would have taken so long had they waited in Canada.

You just go to the doctor. Medicine is obscenly cheap in these places, but here it is the other way around. When a person gets sick, they just have to deal with it on their own when they don't have health insurance. Even when they do have it, the co-pays and deductibles are a nightmare. I am living in this situation as we speak, so I have a full reality of how ridiculous this health system is here in America.

Should we have universal health care in America? Why or why not?


No, I pay enough in taxes as it is. I'm not saying our health system is in good shape because it isn't. I just don't believe you should have to pay for my healthcare and vice versa.
 

Inky

Active Member
I think of doctors as in the same category with teachers and firefighters--they're a national resource. Everybody needs them, and a healthy and safe population is good for the country overall. So, it makes sense to me that doctors should have the same protections and endorsement as teachers, firefighters, police officers, etc. That way they can spend their time and effort serving their community instead of worrying about what the hospitals and insurance companies are doing this year and how to get as much money as possible from their patients.
 

kadzbiz

..........................
Perhaps if there wasn't so much spent on defense, the govt could do more for its people. I heard that a lot of people go bankrupt just trying to pay off medical expenses for major surgery. Here in Australia, people were encouraged to take on private health insurance and the later you left it after turning 30, the more it was going to cost you. The trouble is, why should someone pay heaps on private health insurance to get covered for things like having a baby where it costs you a lot after insurance anyway when one can go in as a public patient and have it all paid by the healthcare system? Doesn't make sense. I think the health system is a problem just about everywhere in the world. Has anybody got it right?
 

jonny

Well-Known Member
I think of doctors as in the same category with teachers and firefighters--they're a national resource. Everybody needs them, and a healthy and safe population is good for the country overall. So, it makes sense to me that doctors should have the same protections and endorsement as teachers, firefighters, police officers, etc. That way they can spend their time and effort serving their community instead of worrying about what the hospitals and insurance companies are doing this year and how to get as much money as possible from their patients.

How many doctors will there be as soon as we start paying them like teachers and firefighters. I wouldn't go to all that school to become a gov't employee.
 

fullyveiled muslimah

Evil incarnate!
I just don't believe you should have to pay for my healthcare and vice versa.

Why not? We are paying for our own medical needs as it stands, but what about people who can't afford that? Health care is ridiculously expensive. I see no problem taking care of one another in that regard because everyone gets sick at some point in their lives. Getting anything done in these hospitals cost literally an arm and a leg. Medicare, medicaide, and all these other companies do not pay for the things that make you well. If a person finds a cure the companies don't want to pay for that. They only want to pay if they can make money. Making the money is way more important than making people feel better.

All you need is an appointment...which takes quite a while. Canadians have been known to come to the states to get an operation because it would have taken so long had they waited in Canada.

According to the documentary that was revealed to be a false accusation against countries who have universal healthcare.

My point is that if a person has had a good job for a long time, saved their money the whole time, getting a chronic illness, or a terminal one should not spell doom for people's lives. Getting sick shouldn't be the thing that scares me because I know I won't be able to afford it. So many people have gone bankrupt, just for being sick and it's not fair.





One thing that happened here in Chicago is that there was a county hospital and it's associated clinics that were free. Chicago Cook County Hospital was one of the leading hospitals in the city despite not charging people who had low income or no insurance. Within this past year, they ended all that suddenly. Now the poor have no refuge for healthcare, because they cannot pay. Cook county cannot refuse immediate emergency care, but will release you if your life is not in danger once it is established that you cannot pay. The poor are simply out of luck. If we get sick we just have to deal with it. Me and my husband are below the national poverty standard technically, and he is already sick. I fear if one day I also become ill enough to go to the hospital, because I will not be able to go. I will not be able to get the medicine I need. God forbid the health companies cease to pay the little they do for my husband's meds, because if they did he would die, all because we can't afford $300 per bottle meds.


This government knows people get sick and rather than assist its citizens and look out for them, they'd rather drain them dry, then leave them to die. It is a big business and in this capitolist system, they can't let it become available to all. Even with the corruption of the healthcare companies, they do not allow everyone to get it even if they can afford the premiums. If you are too fat, you'll get denied. If you have a pre-existing condition, you get denied. If you are considered in any way high risk for a health problem, you get denied and it's not right.

I get so angry about this because the government does care one wit about the trouble they cause people with all this beaurocratic red tape, frustrating people, and when they deny people in need. The people do not even care. Yes universal healthcare would mean paying taxes before hand, but then we wouldn't have to pay premiums for health insurance either. The money they take out of John Doe's check for his insurance on the job wouldn't be necessary. So it balances out with the elemination of other taxes. The taxes we pay should be sufficient to pay for that already. If the government would stop misappropriating the tax money they squeeze out of us, we'd be able. If big business wasn't so greedy, we'd be able. If our money wasnt' used for greasing the palms of all these politicians, we'd have the money.
 

fullyveiled muslimah

Evil incarnate!
How many doctors will there be as soon as we start paying them like teachers and firefighters. I wouldn't go to all that school to become a gov't employee.


When they interviewed a doctor in the UK, Mr. Moore asked if he was kind of poor because he worked for the government. The doctor laughed and showed Moore his million dollar home. The doctor also said that he gets more money and incentives if he has more healthy patients than sick ones. If he can get them to stop smoking, or get their blood pressure down, or get them to lead healthier lives, he gets a pay bonus. The doctor also said they get bonuses for the more time they spend with each patient.

Not only was the healthcare system infinitely better, but in France not only is healthcare universal but daycare is also paid for and is available for working parents for about whats equal to a dollar a day. The doctors there also give you time off from your work if you ailment is severe enough. They write a note to your employer and then the employer pays 60% of the person's pay, and the gov't pays 40%, effectively ensuring the person recieves 100% of their normal pay as if they were working. That is unheard of over here. You'd be lucky to get unemployment regardless of why you are out of work. Now mind you that unemployment money is the same money they take out of your check when you were working. So basically it's your money anyway that they refuse to give you. Outrageous.


Excuse me if I am all over the place with this, but I am so angry about it. I tend to get a little scatter brained on a subject that is vast to me that has many aspects I would like to touch but haven't organized my thoughts.
 

fullyveiled muslimah

Evil incarnate!
There have been so many horror stories I have witnessed and heard. Privately owned hospitals are under no obligation to serve you if you have no insurance. This applies even in an emergency situation. I have seen with my own eyes more times than I want to relay, sick people who were obviously in very bad shape if not close to death be turned right around. You know, when you have an emergency you call the ambulance, they take you to the nearest hospital because its protocol. Well, that hospital can turn you right back out the door once they realize you aren't paying. I have seen many relatives of my friends die because care was refused. They couldn't sue either, because the hospital was within it's rights. Now tell me there's nothing wrong with that? Are the lives of the poor worth so little? Apprently so.
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
The USA spends more of its wealth as a proportion of GDP than any of the countries you mention.

Health care is not free in the UK we pay for it through national insurance.

It is when you are ill that you are least able to pay.... we only pay when we are well.
we are only a cost factor on the health service when we are ill.
This ensures it is in their interest to get us well as soon as possible.
The reverse is true in the USA hospitals and doctors only make money from you when you are sick.
Your Insurance companies are on a win, win, Premiums are costed and they stop paying when they might start to make a loss on you.
 

fullyveiled muslimah

Evil incarnate!
Health care is not free in the UK we pay for it through national insurance.

Okay everybody keeps pointing out to me that it isn't free. I'm no idiot. I know people pay through taxes and that it isn't manna from the heavens where the health fairy waves a wand and cures you. That's not directed at you either Terry.

That doesn't even matter. However people in the UK pay for healthcare it is better system than what we've got going here.


It is when you are ill that you are least able to pay.... we only pay when we are well.
we are only a cost factor on the health service when we are ill.

Exactly. See you shouldn't have to pay out of your nose when you're sick because if you really sick you probably aren't working at that moment. It matter not to me how the government works it out as long as everyone in that country can get sufficient care. If it works better for the gov't to make me well, then that's all the better for me. if I have to pay a tad more taxes, so be it because it beats going homeless when I got sick.


Your Insurance companies are on a win, win, Premiums are costed and they stop paying when they might start to make a loss on you.

Right again. Problem is it is only they who win. The patients are on a lose lose situation. When they aren't sick they have to payt he premiums. When they are sick, the company may well drop them because they acutally have to use the money you paid for you. It's crazy.
 

jamaesi

To Save A Lamb
About the only thing I can say here that hasn't been said by many others here (frubals to fullyveiled and Booko!) is that I work in a cemetery.

And I am damn sick of watching people being buried who would still be here with their families and loved ones and parents and siblings and children and lovers if only they were millionaires or billionaires or had health insurance. One woman, who's daughter just died of cancer that could have been treated if only in the three jobs that girl held they gave her insurance, backed into my car in the parking lot of the cemetery office and just got out and sobbed as I held her. Just remember that next time you're sick or injured and blessed with health insurance that won't drop you. That's not your distraught family members. That's six feet of dirt that isn't over you.

I just don't understand how people can be so nonchalant when other people are suffering. Until it happens to them, I suppose. I would happy endure a tax raise if it meant my fellow Americans weren't dying for being poor.
 
Top