• 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

Mathematician

Reason, and reason again
I'd at least want some rules setup so that people who act irresponsible are held accountable. My girlfriend told me a story of a friend of hers that has a condition where they can't eat foods with seeds [forget the disease or whatever].

So this guy goes on vacation and where he's at they are serving corn on the cob [a no-no for him]. He eats anyway [despite the doctor saying he should not] and ends up in the hospital. HE should pay this bill, not the Government or even the insurance.

I think there at least needs to be some checks and balances so that people can't just run amock and do whatever.

I do agree that our healthcare system [if you can call it that] is garbage. I'm just very nervous that we would end up with a nationalized healthcare system that wouldn't work right and we'd end up in a huge mess like what we already have.

That's only asking for a slippery slope. There would be legal cases between the government and individuals over whether the conditions could have been avoided, much like now with HMOs denying patients of money. Much of America is obese due to their own fault. There are millions of smokers, drinkers, and drug users. Meat eaters are more susceptible to cancer. Teenagers pull stupid stunts to impress their friend. There is a natural tendency for humans to want no harm put upon themselves, but even in cases where people risk their health the bill should be fit through taxes.

Your concerns are valid ones, but it would be easier on the patient to have a national registry, system, and flow of money.
 

Mister_T

Forum Relic
Premium Member
jonny said:
Sorry, I was thinking one thing and typing another. A lot of people keep bringing up ridiculous insurance profits as being the reason why health care costs so much. The fact that State Farm issued rebates (and then reduced their rates for the following year) indicates to me that the insurance company profits might not be as high as people are making them out to be.
State Farm is a broker for health insurance if I'm not mistaken, so who's rates are you talking about? The broker fees that State Farm charge you or the health insurance companies that they mediate with?

Not to mention that I would hardly call those things evidence in favor of healhcare companies not being greedy or price gouging. All business markets fluctuate, so do their prices. It could be down one year and up the next.

jonny said:
Is there any neutral study that shows what the actual source of the high costs of health care is? Is it the health insurance profits? Is it the doctors fees? Is it the malpractice insurance? Is it a combination of all of the above?
It's a combination of many things such as doctor fees, ridiculous requirements to qualify for health insurance and the cost of pharmaceuticals. The question I have is why the same medical procedure in another country costs significantly less than in the States.

jonny said:
Where are the high costs coming from? If we get rid of the insurance companies and turn everything over to the gov't, will that actually reduce costs or will the cost be the same but with a different middle man
I think one of the major contributers to these high cost are the doctors themselves. There's a reason why you will see HMO's phased out in favor of PPO's: Because the doctors get a kick for PPO's and not HMO's. A lot of Physicians will not even see you if you have an HMO because they don't make any kickbacks off of it. It's disgusting.

I think government intervention would cure problems such as this.
 

Mister_T

Forum Relic
Premium Member
NoahideHiker said:
It'd be kind of funny and ironic to see Americans sneaking into Mexico to receive better healthcare for a change.
Start laughing then, cause it's already happening.
 

jonny

Well-Known Member
I do think a valid point was raised that our taxes would go up but we'd no longer have to pay for medical benefits through our jobs. I pay about 80 bucks every two weeks for my PPO coverage through Aetna.

All I want to know is whether the Govt. is going to manage/handle this w/o screwing it all up.

Do you know how much the tax raise associated with these proposed plans will be, or are they not going to be that transparent?

IF the government does this, I would prefer a seperate tax (kind of like Social Security and Medicare) so that people can see the amount that is coming out of their paycheck each month to pay for the service. I would also want the program to sustain itself from only those tax dollars.

We need more transparency in our tax system. I don't trust congress to manage my money anymore. Anyone who does is a fool. I'm sick of giving my money to the government without them having to be accountable to the people for how it is spent.
 

jonny

Well-Known Member
Would a socialized health care system mean that the government has a database of all our health issues? This could raise some interesting privacy issues.
 

Mercy Not Sacrifice

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. 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?

Absolutely. As many have said here, it's nothing short of a survival issue for some people. The catch is that you do not know when you are going to be that next person.

If you disagree with this assessment, then ask yourself this question: Do you believe that someone's profit is more important than your life?

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. :)

And knowing that every young male in America knows that it's a bad thing for an erection to last for more than four hours. :D

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.

So, you believe that your tax dollars should dictate the personal lives of others?

Kinda like the medical insurance companies are doing with people's lives?

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.

Oh. My. God. Post of the Week nominee right there, ladies and gentlemen. :bow:

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.

Quite possibly the best defense of raising taxes that I have ever heard.

Do you know how much the tax raise associated with these proposed plans will be, or are they not going to be that transparent?

1. Read the above quoted post by Khalila.

2. Tax increases don't necessarily have to be given to everyone. They can just as easily be given primarily--if not entirely--to the rich, who can very easily afford them.

IF the government does this, I would prefer a seperate tax (kind of like Social Security and Medicare) so that people can see the amount that is coming out of their paycheck each month to pay for the service. I would also want the program to sustain itself from only those tax dollars.

We need more transparency in our tax system. I don't trust congress to manage my money anymore. Anyone who does is a fool. I'm sick of giving my money to the government without them having to be accountable to the people for how it is spent.

1. Do you believe that any increase in tax should be spread on the middle and lower classes, and not just the super-rich?

2. Do you believe that corporations are not corrupt?

Would a socialized health care system mean that the government has a database of all our health issues? This could raise some interesting privacy issues.

Are you aware that corporations have already engaged in the practice of sharing some of your personal information?

Junk mail--how did you think they know where you live?

That electronic coupon you get at the checkout line in the grocery store--how do they know to give you a coupon for that particular item?
 

jonny

Well-Known Member
Mercy Not Sacrifice said:
So, you believe that your tax dollars should dictate the personal lives of others? Kinda like the medical insurance companies are doing with people's lives?

No, I don't believe that my tax dollars should dictate people's lives, but if my tax dollars are going to be taken, against my will, and used to fund something that I find morally reprehensible, I will fight against it. That's the way a democracy works. The government answers to the people...in theory.

Mercy Not Sacrifice said:
Tax increases don't necessarily have to be given to everyone. They can just as easily be given primarily--if not entirely--to the rich, who can very easily afford them.

I actually think that the middle class and poor would be better off in the long run if they shared a portion of this new tax burden. Obviously, the tax rates would be scaled to people's income, but if you just throw the entire tax burden on the rich it will result in lower wages at the bottom. Taxes go up, income goes down. That's the was Keynesian economics works anyway.

Mercy Not Sacrifice said:
Do you believe that any increase in tax should be spread on the middle and lower classes, and not just the super-rich?

Not equally, but I believe that if we are going to pay for healthcare that everyone should contribute. It wouldn't be socialism if we didn't work together, now would it? ;)

Mercy Not Sacrifice said:
Do you believe that corporations are not corrupt?

No, I do not believe that corporation are not corrupt. :)

Let me reword that... Yes, corporations are horribly corrupt, but no more corrupt than the government. That's why I favor a system that includes CHOICE.

Are you aware that corporations have already engaged in the practice of sharing some of your personal information? Junk mail--how did you think they know where you live? That electronic coupon you get at the checkout line in the grocery store--how do they know to give you a coupon for that particular item?

I have a bachelor degree in Marketing Management. Believe me, I know all about this. I also know that there are privacy laws regarding your health information. It's called HIPAA. I don't believe that our health information is stored in a government database, but I could be wrong. I wouldn't feel comfortable giving the government unfettered access to this information.
 

Mister_T

Forum Relic
Premium Member
Khalila said:
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 feel your pain.

My cousin, my best friend, could have had an MRI done to catch the bloodclot from his injured knee that killed him....the same procedure that Dick Cheny had which saved his life from the same health condition.

No hospitals wanted to touch my cousin because he didn't have insurance. He finally found a clinic that was willing to give him an MRI. They made him wait a week for his appointment....but he died a few days after his appointment was scheduled.

My cousin and I frequently discussed the sad state of healthcare. He found out first hand unfortunately and it makes that bad taste that was already in my mouth, even more repulsive
 

Mathematician

Reason, and reason again
Would a socialized health care system mean that the government has a database of all our health issues? This could raise some interesting privacy issues.

No, it wouldn't. The only persons authorized to look into your medical records would be doctors and nurses. It would be like Veterans Care and Medicare. The government, may it be federal or state, can waltz into your doctor's office right now and illegally steal their hardcopies. Socialized medicine won't put us in danger.

If we're getting to the point where we're now discussing Big Brother looking at what pain medicine we were prescribed, I think it's safe to say socialized health care has won the debate. :shrug:
 

Mister_T

Forum Relic
Premium Member
GeneCosta said:
No, it wouldn't. The only persons authorized to look into your medical records would be doctors and nurses.
Gene is absolutely correct. Read up on the HIPAA privacy act. http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/hipaa/

Also as Gene stated, if the government really wanted access to your medical history, they would find a way to get it regardless of whether we have government healthcare or not.
 

jonny

Well-Known Member
No, it wouldn't. The only persons authorized to look into your medical records would be doctors and nurses. It would be like Veterans Care and Medicare. The government, may it be federal or state, can waltz into your doctor's office right now and illegally steal their hardcopies. Socialized medicine won't put us in danger.

If we're getting to the point where we're now discussing Big Brother looking at what pain medicine we were prescribed, I think it's safe to say socialized health care has won the debate. :shrug:

I'm just trying to discuss all the issues surrounding the topic. Socialized healthcare hasn't won anytihng. You, correct me if I'm wrong, want the doctors and nurses to be federal employees. I'm assuming that means that the government will purchase all hospitals, clinics, etc. If the government owns the health care system, the government will own our health care records. I think that discussing these issues are very valid.

Criminal records are public. I doubt that health care records will ever get to that point, but I can imagine situations where the government might find it adventageous to do a "health check" or "mental check" on a person to find out their mental, emotional, or physical health.
 

Mister_T

Forum Relic
Premium Member
jonny said:
Criminal records are public. I doubt that health care records will ever get to that point, but I can imagine situations where the government might find it adventageous to do a "health check" or "mental check" on a person to find out their mental, emotional, or physical health.
They can do that now legally with a court order or a subpoena. What's your point?


 

Mathematician

Reason, and reason again
I'm just trying to discuss all the issues surrounding the topic. Socialized healthcare hasn't won anytihng. You, correct me if I'm wrong, want the doctors and nurses to be federal employees. I'm assuming that means that the government will purchase all hospitals, clinics, etc. If the government owns the health care system, the government will own our health care records. I think that discussing these issues are very valid.

Criminal records are public. I doubt that health care records will ever get to that point, but I can imagine situations where the government might find it adventageous to do a "health check" or "mental check" on a person to find out their mental, emotional, or physical health.

You're delving into the realm of unproven hypotheticals. Has any industrilized country with socialized health care even remotely threatened to use its citizens' health records in a damaging way?
 

jonny

Well-Known Member
You're delving into the realm of unproven hypotheticals. Has any industrilized country with socialized health care even remotely threatened to use its citizens' health records in a damaging way?

Dunno. I do know that our country has a pretty poor track record on privacy issues in the last decade or so. I don't care what other countries are doing. I care about what our country does.
 

jonny

Well-Known Member
They can do that now legally with a court order or a subpoena. What's your point?

My point is that if we are going to give a corrupt organization complete control of our health records that we should ask ourselves if the risk is worth it.
 

Mister_T

Forum Relic
Premium Member
My point is that if we are going to give a corrupt organization complete control of our health records that we should ask ourselves if the risk is worth it.
And then what? Our health records are already in the hands of a corrupt organization. And if the government wanted health records that badly right now, they could get them. Having private healthcare corporations isn't going to stop them from obtaining such information.

I have to say that's a pretty weak argument for not making it easier to save lives of people in need.
 

jonny

Well-Known Member
And then what? Our health records are already in the hands of a corrupt organization. And if the government wanted health records that badly right now, they could get them. Having private healthcare corporations isn't going to stop them from obtaining such information.

I have to say that's a pretty weak argument for not making it easier to save lives of people in need.

I say that turning the entire health care system over to the government and creating a monopoly is a pretty drastic measure to "make it easier to save the lives of people in need." It is possible to solve the problem while continuing to have choice. Like Edwards said - you mandate health coverage. Provide an affordable solution for those who cannot afford it through private firms. At the same time, you penalize businesses that do not provide coverage to their employees to help pay for the system.
 

Mister_T

Forum Relic
Premium Member
I say that turning the entire health care system over to the government and creating a monopoly is a pretty drastic measure to "make it easier to save the lives of people in need." It is possible to solve the problem while continuing to have choice. Like Edwards said - you mandate health coverage. Provide an affordable solution for those who cannot afford it through private firms. At the same time, you penalize businesses that do not provide coverage to their employees to help pay for the system.
It already is a monopoly Jonny. Which is why so many people are dying: There are no alternatives.

As for the solution you presented, it is definietly better than what we have now. But why not just create an entire system where everyone can afford it instead of having all of these middlemen? Healthcare shouldn't be a "choice." It should be the purpose it was initially intended to be: A good available to the public. Just like Police and Fireman.
 

jonny

Well-Known Member
It already is a monopoly Jonny. Which is why so many people are dying: There are no alternatives.

As for the solution you presented, it is definietly better than what we have now. But why not just create an entire system where everyone can afford it instead of having all of these middlemen? Healthcare shouldn't be a "choice." It should be the purpose it was initially intended to be: A good available to the public. Just like Police and Fireman.

I don't think you really know what a monopoly is then. The system we have right now is NOT a monopoly. If you don't like your insurance company, you can get a new one or complain to your HR department. When I worked for a larger company, we had three different insurance companies to choose from.

There are alternatives - there are just no affordable alternatives available without discrimination.

A few years back I was denied insurance coverage by Blue Cross Blue Shield because I had a "pre-existing condition" (a gall stone that was no longer a problem). When I was denied coverage, I received a letter from the state of Utah mentioning that they had some sort of an insurance program I could use. I wish I still had the letter so I had more details. I'll have to dig it up.

Anyway, I'm all in favor of the government providing affordable coverage - especially to children - for people who cannot get coverage otherwise. I just don't want to give the government complete control over the system.
 

Reverend Rick

Frubal Whore
Premium Member
No, it wouldn't. The only persons authorized to look into your medical records would be doctors and nurses. It would be like Veterans Care and Medicare. The government, may it be federal or state, can waltz into your doctor's office right now and illegally steal their hardcopies. Socialized medicine won't put us in danger.

If we're getting to the point where we're now discussing Big Brother looking at what pain medicine we were prescribed, I think it's safe to say socialized health care has won the debate. :shrug:

Gene, hard copies are a thing of the past. Everything is on computer now. When you have a MRI, the doctor sees it instantly. During an examination, the doctor enters all the information on computer.

jonny was worried about the government knowing about medical records, but I fail to see how they don't have access to them right now. When it was hard copy, it was semi-private.
 
Top