Our stupid health system rewards the healthy and punishes the sick.

[Cleita]

The for profit health insurance and HMO systems reward the healthy with affordable coverage and socks the premiums to the people who need a doctor, the sick and elderly. I believe it is a human right to have access to health care when you need it, not when you can afford it.

Everyone will need health care one of these days and many of us who had health coverage our whole lives find ourselves without adequate coverage after our working days are over, whether due to retirement or illness. We find we no longer have access to affordable health care after we fall sick and are unable to work anymore.

We need laws that state this, that all Americans and residents of the USA must get the health care they need regardless of their ability to pay. You watch how quickly Congress will pass a universal health care bill, if all health care professionals have to provide care even when there is no chance of collecting payment for it.

[SharonAnn]

1. It also rewards the wealthy and punishes the poor

The best health insurance (and at the lowest co-pay cost) is provided to the highest income workers. The more money you get paid in a company, the less you have to pay for health insurance and the more things it covers (like extremely thorough annual checkup with all related diagnostic tests).

CEOs have absolutely obscene health insurance coverage (and retirement plans) compared to their workers.

Isn't that just "special".

[Cleita]

2. I think Congress has a sweet deal too.

How else did Strom Thurmond live in a hospital while finishing out his last term? If Congress had to deal with the system like we do, health care coverage would move up to a top priority on the calender.

[Intelsucks]

4. Bingo. Their retirement package ain't too bad either.

n/t

[Hippo_Tron]

36. Even Rush Limbaugh agrees with you there...

So you know something's wrong.

[BlueJazz]

3. People who I come in contact with...

...on a day to day basis (I'm a network engineer and computer tech)
and are from other countries are always appalled at our health care system.
I had one customer from Europe ask me why we put up with this crap...
I just told her "Only the dumb-ass republicans and the ignorant sheeple
in this country put up with it.... unfortunately, they drag the rest of us down with their ignorance "

She agreed.

[Woodstock]

6. Isn't it funny how most of these people

are sympathetic to Democrats? If only they could vote. Not a one of the ones I've met go for the Republican baloney.

[BlueJazz]

8. Oh, Man...tell me about it....

I'm always amazed at the "leftness" of the Europeans I meet.
I mean, these people truly know the score about government and life in general.
Even the ones that tell me they are towards the right in their own country
would be called "Radicalliberals" in this one.

Not that there's anything wrong with that! :)

[Woodstock]

5. Same with drugs and prisons

Makes no sense not to provide treatment for drug addiction BEFORE people get to the point where they rob or kill to keep it going. Then we get to pay to keep them in prison.

But better yet, how about mental health coverage? Why not help people BEFORE they turn to drugs in the first place?

That's Republicans - penny wise and pound foolish. Hell, it's too much to even say they are penny wise. They are just foolish.

Then again, maybe that's just where they want them - in jail on our dime. And never to vote again if they do get out.

[Wapsie B]

34. I agree

about Mental health coverage. Let's get them BEFORE they spray the post office or a school with an uzi. It just seems to be so easy to cut these touchy-feely programs that try to PREVENT crime and build more prisons and jails.

[demothinker]

7. Keep this in mind...

There's a reason for what you state-in principle, anyway, if not in practice. One reason why the health care system rewards the healthy is to provide incentive to stay healthy. If people knew they could get away with any unhealthy behavior they wanted to (diet, smoking, lack of exercise, etc.) and that the gov't would have to foot the bill for their health care, they're more likely to. Also, it's to disincentivize those who, if it were free, would rush to the emergency room for every little thing instead of having to wait a few days to see a doctor.

I'm for universal health care, but it's ripe for abuse. We need to find a way to provide it yet still provide incentives for people to strive to not NEED it.

[Cleita]

9. Good try in trying to put in insurance co. propaganda, but no cigar..

The insurance industry doesn't want to pay any claims if they can get away with it, so insuring the healthy makes sense to them. They don't want the sick people and the elderly who need health care. Don't you get tired of throwing out these little lies about people rushing to emergency rooms for hangnails and such. The fact is there would be less traffic in the emergency room of the uninsured if everyone had coverage and would get their health problems looked and and taken care of before it becomes a full blown disease.

Since universal health care works really well, with little abuse in just about every industrial nation on the face of this earth, why are you throwing our these lies. I hate astro-turf.

[demothinker]

17. Nice try yourself

But I've personally KNOWN people who would go to the emergency room rather than wait for a doctor's appt. You honestly think that people wouldn't go to the emergency room rather than wait for an appt if it costed them the same? I think you're underestimating the selfish nature of many people. Plus, how would there be less traffic in the emergency room? Most people in the emergency room aren't there for chronic illnesses, hence the term "emergency".

And how can you know whether I've been throwing out these "lies" long enough to get tired of them, since you don't know me and this is the first time I've posted on health care on this forum. Or are you just attacking me because you don't like my opinion? Hmmm...

Also, I said I support universal health care-did you just ignore that? I just see the potential for abuse, so I would like to find a way to prevent abuse so that the ones who are honest aren't taken advantage of.

On edit: corrected typos

[Cleita]

19. Ohhhh, puleeez.

If your friends can afford to go to the emergency room, who is to stop them? Ancedotal heresay is hardly facts. If you want real facts, go to this website:

http://www.pnhp.org/facts/singlepayer_myths_singlepayer_facts.php

While you are at it go over the rest of the website if you truly support universal health care.

[demothinker]

21. Went there and looked...

And the only thing that addressed what the topic was was "Most estimates do indicate that there would be some increased utilization of the system"...hmmm, that seems to support my argument!

Thanks for agreeing with me! :-)

But by all means, since NOBODY abuses any other social situation, like welfare, social security, tax breaks, etc, go ahead and think that universal health care will be utopia with no negative effects. I'll be busy trying to make it workable for the most people.

[Cleita]

22. Did you look at why?

BECAUSE PEOPLE WHO UP TO NOW WERE DENIED HEALTH CARE WOULD BE ABLE TO GET THE HEALTH CARE THEY NEED!! SICK PEOPLE WHO NEED HEALTH CARE ARE THE LEAST ABLE TO AFFORD IT WITH OUR SYSTEM.

[demothinker]

24. yes

But you used the site to try to refute my point. The only thing that addressed it was that quote, which doesn't actually apply-I was being facetious. There was nothing on the site saying that people would not abuse the emergency room the same as there is welfare abuse, tax loophole abuse, etc., and anyone who knows anything about human nature knows that's the case-if not, just go drive around a while and see all the people who drive unsafely just to get ahead a little bit in traffic. Or all the people in line at the grocery store that look impatient.

We are not a patient society. If you present an option where people think they can get service faster, they'll take it. It's just common sense.

[Cleita]

26. No I didn't. Your point is health care industry propaganda.

I am very familiar with this propaganda so don't pretend that it is new. Your big complaint, or rather your talking point, is about people abusing the emergency room. Trust me if you have ever been to an emergency room in any city, you will find out that the ER doctors don't have time for this. Also, a wait of several hours is usually standard while the ER works on the real emergencies. With accessible health care, the people you describe would probably go to a clinic for small medical problems. This is not only efficient but saves money as the hangnail would most likely be treated by a technician or nurse, not a doctor.

But of course an efficient medical system would cut the money grubbing for profit insurance and HMO industry out of the equation. This is what your propaganda is about. So you invent all these horror stories about how terrible a health care industry is that has a single payer, the government, to fund it. The emergency room scenario is only one of many horror scenarios about universal health care. They are all lies intended to frighten people away from real change.

[demothinker]

28. Horror stories? LOL

You have a bit of a flair for the dramatic, don't you? I didn't paint any "horror story". I simply pointed out a possible negative that should be considered if we are to move towards universal health care, which should always be done, in any case.

Whatever. You're not interested in exchanging ideas-I've put out something that for some reason has snapped your mind shut (it's probably a sensitive issue for you for some reason), so you're calling me a "propagandist" and a "liar" and accuse me of throwing out "talking points", even though I have backed it up with analysis. I won't waste any more of your time.


On edit: corrected accusation directed at me to be accurate. :-)

[Cleita]

29. The emergency room overload story goes back

to the days of Hillary Clinton's health plan. If you are sincere, you will admit that the emergency room BS is just that. You haven't posted any source for your claims. Your "analysis" is useless without it. Your argument has no credibility until you can come up with some facts and figures from a source that isn't a right wing think tank.

[Powerlock]

48. Wow imagine that

"Most estimates do indicate that there would be some increased utilization of the system"

Yea, now that people can actually AFFORD to go the doctor for medical needs instead of having to live with X problem that NEEDS to be treated (a problem many vets and seniors have BTW) I would imagine there would be LEGIT increase in medical use.

[camero]

30. OK let's see now

1. FDA will not vouch for the safety of produce. Chilis ring a bell?
2. Mad Cow now in US livestock. Only 10-15% of cattle are tested.
3. The practices that are banned in beef are allowed in other meat and poultry products. Chicken and other meats could not be safe.
4. Arsenic levels in tap water got turned back to pre-Clinton regs.
5. Pollution regs for coal-fired plants rolled back.
6. Nuclear testing radiation is more widespread than thought. Not limited to the mountain states.
7. Global warming causing a rise in temps which bring more misquito-borne illnesses.

And you're going to tell me that it's all the patient's fault? I was listening to a nurse once tell my friend that being overweight was the cause of his cancer. Which is bullmalarkey. Not one study has linked obesity with any cancer. It's just another way to keep the corporations off the hook.

The corporations are the new communist collective without worker and human rights.

[camero]

10. We all need it.

You're going to get sick even if you live the healthiest life. Noone just goes. And need I not remind ya of the pollution in the atmosphere, chemicals in our food, side effects of our medicines, etc, etc, etal.

Blaming everything on lifestyle is not going to solve our health problems or our environment. They are still coming up with evidence that the cancer from nuclear testing in the 50s is worse than thought.

Maybe that's what's wrong with the repubs. Too much radiation on the brain. :)

[gold_bug]

13. that's very speculative;

look at any industrialized country that has more progressive health care than the USA, has everyone suddenly quit exercising and quit worrying about what they eat/drink and turned into a nation of slobs that require frequent trips to the doc for maintenance?

[Skittles]

14. YES

THEY ARE NOWHERE NEAR AS FAT AND LAZY AS WE ARE.

[demothinker]

18. Apples and oranges

It's a difference in lifestyle. Look at the converse of what you're asking-do you think people would make an effort to live a healthier lifestyle if they had free health care? I seriously doubt it. But have there been people who quit smoking because, in part, it made their health insurance too expensive? I'm sure there are.

I'm not saying we'd become a country of uncaring fat slobs, I'm just saying that that's a possible negative result that we would have to be careful of. Every positive idea has some negative effects-this one is no different. The question is whether you can live with them to get the positives. And, as I said, I support universal health care-I would just try to minimize the negative impacts of it by trying to identify them ahead of time.

[yankeedem]

41. We are a country

of uncaring fat slobs. Most countries in the western world have lower rates of obesity, and have lower infant mortality rates and longer life expectancy than the US.

I don't wish to be argumentative with you. You are like most people, who have been fed only one side of the health care story all your life.

To address your main point, we should never restrict health care for the masses because of the abuses of a few. ANY program will have abusers. These abusers are used by the powers to destroy the system for the many. The welfare "abusers" who got multiple checks, etc, led to the downfall of the welfare system. This is one example. Nowadays we get stories of Medicare abuse on a daily basis. The only purpose of these stories is to get people angry enough about the "waste" of money to allow the republicans to "reform" Medicare out of existance.

[brook]

33. If

the health care system really wanted to provide incentives toward staying healthy....they'd offer annual checkups.

As for ER visits, they are deliberately over charged to the system.This was explained to me at length when I protested a $7200+ bill for an ER visit recently.

[Cleita]

71. You know that in our county Tenet has taken over

all the hospitals. That's why you got that outrageous bill. We have been completely corporatized.

[lpricanprynces]

35. Playing Devils Advocate Here

I also believe that Americans should have access to affordable healthcare, but why punish the responsible people for the irresponsible. If someone wants to kill themselves with cigarettes or food, that shouldn't be forced upon taxpayers. Why should I have to pay the same insurance rate as my 400 lb. coworker? If you have a clean driving record, why would you want to pay the same rate as someone with 5 accidents?

[yankeedem]

42. Insurance isn't "punishing" the responsible?

Your health insurance premiums at work are based on a pool of people, which probably includes that unhealthy worker. Next red herring, please.

[Cleita]

69. So should we pay for you for being irresponsible for

driving a car, getting into a bus or a cab? Or do you magically appear whereever you wish being safe of course? I suppose you won't be irresponsible and get old so it doesn't cost all those responsible young people who have the sense to die before they become a burden.

[Powerlock]

47. Are you for real?

When I eat unhealthy food never once does the thought "hm my insurance company will either pay or not pay for the potential consequences" thus influencing if I eat unhealthy or not.

I don't know anyone else who thinks that way either.

Also, state paid health care works fine in europe. There are no problems with people "running to the emergency room" for every little thing. Why would it be different here? There is little if any "abuse" in europe.

[Cleita]

70. Welcome to DU Powerlock.

No they don't abuse the emergency room because the physicians are free to care for the sick instead of pandering to the well-insured in order to support themselves.

[Mairead]

11. Support Kucinich or CMB. They offer a solution

Kucinich offers much more than a healthcare solution, so I'd urge you to send money to and vote for him, but support one or both of them if you want a healthcare solution, because they're the only ones offering one. Everyone else is trying to perpetuate the broken system we have now.

It's a really simple choice: either support real change, or go on suffering.

[efhmc]

12. I just so agree. Why don't they give free, comprehensive physical exams

to all people yearly. The amount of money that would be saved by this in the long run prevention of disease would be enormous.

[Silverhair]

15. Yes. And I believe that we can get congress to act on it, even

if the Reps win big this election cycle. Yes, and even have W sign it. I will talk about the political side of it in one of my series posts on health care.

[Cleita]

16. Thanks Silverhair.

No matter what, we need to push this issue to the forefront.

[Malva Zebrina]

20. I have noticed a disturbing trend re health care

above that of the corporate control so evident lately and that is the "preventative" medicine. It now seems that if you are too fat and eat too much of things that other corporations have bobbled before your eyes that are full of unhealthy sugar and fat and now mad cow, it is YOUR fault for not doing anything about it.

This, in the long run, I see as a tool of the insurance corporations to blame SICK PEOPLE for their illnesses.

Sooner or later, something has to be done about the health care of the citizens of this nations--it is not only the wealthy that are priviledged to have the best, but the less than wealthy and even the poor who do deserve to have the same advantage when it comes to their health and their survival.

[Cleita]

23. Preventive care is just another tool in the insurance company

playbook to deny coverage. Real preventive medicine would make health screening available to everyone so that diseases could be cured more easily and more inexpensively in the beginning stages.

[demothinker]

25. There's nothing wrong with preventive care

You're blaming the tool when you should be blaming the craftsman. Using it to prevent real reform is wrong; using it to blame the unhealthy is wrong (although people don't do NEARLY enough to take care of themselves as they should); but there's nothing wrong with preventive care in and of itself-in fact, in a universal health care system, a good preventive care service would reduce the cost on society, since there would be much less strain on the free system.

On edit: clarification

[Cleita]

27. Real preventive care doesn't cut the patient away from

the care because he can't follow some gestapo type of rules initiated by the for profit money grubbing insurance and HMO's who have no intention of delivering health care. Why aren't you concerned about the fact that most health care professionals nowadays don't accept any insurance or HMO plans because they are constantly being stiffed on reimbursement for their services. So many of us are paying for health care that is getting harder and harder to get.

[Malva Zebrina]

31. I am not so sure

let's take diabetes for one, only because it is the one that is being touted as the most "preventable"

I think you are buying into the fact that people, themselves, will be blamed for their own illness, no matter what they have done or what they think or where they are in the scheme of things.

Diabetes once was defined by a fasting blood sugar over 140. Oh Oh--no one actually knows about the "dawn effect" as described by the innovative Dr. Bernstein, (who has written a book describing this phenomena--"Dr. Berstein's Diabetese Solution" -- but now, in spite of the fact that no one has actually described the etiology behind this "dawn phenomena", the fasting blood sugar titrate was lowered to 126 by someone who saw fit to lower the bar. So now, how many more people are included in the diagnosis of "diabetic"? A whole lot more--and do we even know if this is warranted? Where are the studies that would tell us that this is indeed a proper parameter toward the diagnosis of diabetes? I, as a lay person, cannot find one at all. It is entirely left up to the doctory and the medical people--who are, more than likely, the pharma companies who are manufacturing the drugs that they tell us are necessary to control this diabetes that is manifest with a blood sugar of over 126. I would certainly like to see some studies that would tell me that this is indeed a logical conclusion.

Those who are aware of the dawn phemomena are certainly aware that a fasting blood sugar of over 126 is certainly possible in diabetics--but it need not be the be all and the end all of the blood sugar titrates--it is the blood test that determines the average BS, that is really the indicator of the severity of the disease.

So now we have people with a more thanb 126 fasting blood sugar, without any indication as to their HbAic average, being labeled as "diabetics" and further, we also see a lowereing of the bar as to the term "pre-diabetic" from the previous average of 110 to 100.

Can someone please tell me why this is being done?

It is a terrible state to be in when one cannot trust it's own governmnet guidelines. but I do not. I do not, because I think that the pharma corporations are out for all they can get, and if that involves lowering the bar, so that more of their pills will be ordered by the doctors, I do believe they will do it.

What resources does the average person have in o0rder to determine if indeed these pharma cos are looking out for our welfare, rather than their own profit?

What a terrible state of affairs in this, the most wealthy and the most powerful nation in the world, eh?

[camero]

32. The dawn phenomona

Is when you liver secretes its store of sugar overnight causing high blood sugars in the morning.

I agree with what you're saying 100% especially about the A1c being the indicator of diabetes. A glucose tolerance test certainly helps to identify it. Just thought I should explain the dawn effect.

[Venomous_Rhetoric]

37. Pointless arguments

Being a Canadian, I have had this argument with Americans countless times. Everytime I try mention the good points of our health care system, they attack it as if it's straight from some communist back- country. They try make up stories of long waiting lists, line ups at emergency rooms, etc. Mostly they are untrue, but a case of bungling pops up, and suddenly it's the whole system that is no good. The only time our health care system runs into trouble is when the government tampers with it, cuts budgets, and tries to privatize it in some way to make a political buddy rich.

The truth is, health care in Canada is not "free" What it is, is a universal not for profit single payer system. It would be like the USA having one nation-wide insurance company, that everyone MUST pay into. Those that can't are covered by those who can.
It costs about $1800 per year for the average taxpayer in Canada for this system.
Because it's a single payer system, administration costs are far far less that the american system.
The average cost for health care in the usa is $5400. This price includes what a decent private plan costs, and the tax cost of government medicaid. yet 40-50 million people (or more I'm told)
have no coverage at all.This USA cost is also expected to rise over the net ten years to $10,000. thats insane!

In Canada, regular medical check-ups, mammograms etc. act as preventative medicine, which catches problems before they become serious ones, thus keeping costs down, people are generally healthier in Canada than the USA, despite our terrible, communist system.
Sure, there are problems within the system, but nothing that cannot be fixed with the political will to do so. I'd gladly pay more even a thousand more per year to make it top notch. It still is cheaper that the chaotic system in the USA.

In the last 10 years, I've had several visits to the hospital. I've had a bad accident in which I literally tore every ligament and cartilage in my knee, resulting is 6 separate surgeries to FINALLY be able to walk again. I've had a heart attack ( no, I'm not fat!) corrective heart surgery, then another heart attack, more surgery, followed by intestinal problems, more surgery, followed by a pancreas problem, which nearly killed me and cost me a 8 month hospital stay, followed by development of a rare condition known as Scleroderma, which has resulted in continuous treatments since. (also was the cause of other previous problems) Thankfully, because of our system, things are treated and under control, and life goes on. I visit the doctor monthly, but I'm in relatively good health now, I just have blood chemistry done to keep watch on things.

The cost? nothing more than I have always payed through taxes, and continue to pay. Drug costs are a problem, as we don't have much in the way of coverage other than an income based rebate (once you spend x% of income on drugs, they are free)but even those are far cheaper than USA prices, thanks to regulation and greed monitoring.

What would all this have cost me in the USA? I have heard plenty of USA stories, and I wonder why the government hasn't implemented a similar style system. For the supposed greatest nation on earth, why is it you have 3rd world health care?

Usually at this point I get booted out, or insulted out of the chat room.

[Malva Zebrina]

38. people have reported a bill of over a thousand dollars

for a simple, uncomplicated emergency room visit. :shrug: I am sorry for your health predicaments--that does not sound like fun and hope you are on your way toward better health now--sounds like you are.


Your system as you have described it, seems superior to one which corporations rule the health care of the citizens of a country.

It would be a good idea to keep in mind that no other country is rushing to develop a health care system like the United States.

[brook]

39. my experience in Canada...

was that costs were about a tenth of what they were here in the US. (This is many years ago). I have had 3 serious episodes with diverticulitis. The 1st, in the US cost about 3500. The second, in Canada, was a bit over 350. That included being admitted and treated for approximately one week. Last August, I was treated in an emergency room for around 4 hours for an episode. The bill was over $7000. The treatment in all three cases was virtually identical; morphine, anti-biotics and hydration. ( The prescribed week of bed rest took place at home this last time).

An aside to the issue of smokers: I smoke. Three years ago, a carton of cigarettes was 17+change. It's now 43+change. That's 26+ in taxes per carton or about 100 a month. Why isn't that money applied to related health costs if need be? Where did all those tobacco settlements go? BTW, I have no related health problems at this time, after 55 years of smoking.

[Malva Zebrina]

73. wow, that is a long time smoking

I gave up cigarettes seven months ago and smoked for almost 45 years. I have no pathology as a result of that, except that I do have diabetes and do have some athrosclerosis in my legs--and some intermittant claudication, so it is painful to walk , but I force myself to walk two mile every other day, anyhow because I am afraid that I will not be able to walk at some point and that is scary- more scary than dropping dead of a heart attack--LOL

I can not longer afford to buy cigarettes and my husband also gave up smoking after smoking cigarettes for longer than myself. He is now coughing and coughing every other day and evening, and had pneumonia a few months ago, which a pill was prescribed that cost ten dollars per pill -- the entire precription was over one hundred dollars-for ten goddam pills---a pill a day for ten days. We live entirely on SS--our income is below 12,000 dollars. We live in Maine, and it is cold here for at least six months--we are old people and we need to keep the heat up--we keep the thermostat at 60 , sometimes 58 degrees, --all day -- we wear sweaters and the like and actually the best thing is to outside and walk for an hour or so--when you come back in, the house feels warm. He has taken a job at the local supermarket (was once a toolmaker) for twenty hours a week at the age of seventy, and the job is to be, in effect the janitor--he cleans the toilets and the floors that other people slobber up--he does this four hours a day, five days a week, because we had a furnace problem and the bill was 600 dollars to repair this furnace which we bough new five years ago.

See, we were told that we needed to have a whole NEW furnace--we were choking on the fumes, actually, A whole new furnace after five years?

Well let me tell you folks, we older folks need to be aware more than ever--I for one, and I am not ashamed of this, went berserk and wild when this person, this snot faced youngster told me I needed a new furnace after only five years of a new furnace, the third one since we moved here! I went berserk--an old lady screaming and hollaring--yup--you know me--and this is what you have to do when you get to this point. Then, as it turned out, the warrantee was still "good". Well duh--howcome then you told me I needed a new furnace? So we got the new part under the warantee, and let me tell you, it was then a matter of well we needed this and we needed that and blah , blah --so the bill for what we "needed" came to 600 dollars which we are now paying off at 100 dollars a month because that is all we can do. Ugh-and to think if I did not act like a crazy old woman, we would have to be paying for another new ,3000 dollar or more new furnace. I am a crazy woman--yup--love it.

Do NOT let anyone take advantage--the elderly are the most exploited of all populations--so do not pay attention to what others say or to what you may think they think.

Just be mean.

[camero]

43. Are you addressing my post?

Or someone elses? I wish we had the Canadian system here. Since the American system is geared so much to profit, they will find any way to make money that they can. Hence the lowering of standards for diabetes.

I picked up a lady in my cab once from a hospital and we were discussing my diabetes(and I'm thin) and she said that if I ever had to go to get out as fast as I could because they would find more things wrong just to jack the bill up. And they do.

[Cleita]

45. Thanks for posting this.

It's the for profit insurance and HMO industries in this country who spread the rumors about the "bad" Canadian system. They don't do it directly but they hire PR firms to do it for them. They also put out the venemous Harry and Louise ads and now have some organizations pretending to be for senior citizens but that are just propaganda outlets for the industry.

I have seen them tear down internet discussions of people who are mostly for reform and a single payer system and totally convince them that only the devil runs health care in Canada and other nations with national health care. Yeah, they are good at trying to insult you out of a discussion or getting you banned. I have gone horn to horn with them, but I don't let them attack me because I have a lot of sources and documents to back up my arguments. If you demand the same of them, they don't have anything or it's some right wing think tank with unverifiable statistics.

Battle on because they can't keep winning.

[newyawker99]

46. Hi Venomous_Rhetoric!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[BlueJazz]

49. Glad to have you here...Venomous_Rhetoric...

It's great to hear the truth about the Canadian system and the sad, sad truth about the one here.

I sincerely believe that the Insurance Industry has become so powerful in the USA that a single-payer system here will NOT happen.......even in my lifetime. They will continue to fool the idiots
in this country into believing that they "have the best system available"

[JanMichael]

56. Thank you! I too get tired of the Canada bashers.

And I'm not a Canadian either. I just get sick of the lies about Single Payer Plans.

[guajira]

40. Not my HMO -- Healthy Members Pay for Medical Care for Others!!

Everyone has the same options, and the premium costs keep sky-rocketing even if you never see a Dr. for years!!

Some members use more benefits than they pay in, and the healthy members cover the costs.

[Cleita]

44. Your HMO I'll bet is posting healthy profits on the stock

exchange with your premiums. Trust me, the day you start using them for a chronic illness, they will find a way to get rid of you. I paid into my HMO for a couple of years before I decided I needed a check up. The doctor who was supposed to be my primary care physician, didn't know who I was and had stopped accepting new patients from that HMO several years before. No one had bothered to inform me from the HMO but they continued to collect my premiums.

When I finally found a physician to see me in another town, she put me through a lot of tests. My premiums went up three months later. Then she too dropped that HMO for fee reimbursement problems. I shopped around for another health plan. They had effectively gotten rid of me, who had been a cash cow up to then, and they didn't miss me one bit.

[Misterpilot]

50. I want free health care

I pay for my own health insurance and it is $650 per month. I think it is my right to get it free. The government could force doctors to charge nothing and make the drug companies give away medications. If they had to pay for it they could just tax rich people and the evil corporations that screw us every day anyway.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

51. Don't you have anything better to do?

Slow night over at FR?

[Venomous_Rhetoric]

52. It's not Free

Even in Canada. But I suppose you haven't read my post. It's called a single-payer system. Yes, must be what you call a "freeper" (see! I'm getting the hang of this already!) As soon as you mention Canadian health care the put their fingers in their ears and say "LALALALALALALA COMMUNIST RUN!"

Japan has also adopted a Canadian style system, as well and many other countries.
If you Democrats get a government in '04, The first step in moving towards a single payer system would be to have government FORCE a merger of ALL Health care insurers into ONE company. This will give you time to streamline your billing system in all hospitals, establish a rate-fee schedule. It will have Min. impact on the economy except for jobs in the insurance co. field.
After than, move to remove profit from that remaining company, have the funds it collects properly managed and invested to generate more money, thereby cutting contribution costs for the rate payer, and you are almost there! then it's just a matter of making it a deduction from everyones paycheck, or a % of tax payable.
No more medicaid, everyone working or not is covered. It's not that hard for America to do, it just takes political will.

[Venomous_Rhetoric]

53. Further

it takes away company medical plans, which free's up capital for companies, so job creation will follow, absorbing those lost in the Insurance field. those other insurance companies can then move to non medicare services, like dental care.
And best of all, it will be CHEAPER.
Then after that, you can hammer the drug companies and cap their gouging as well.

[TarHeel82]

54. Real Thought

I believe we all look for a healthy society and wish for
everyone to be there best. It does concern me that so many of
our group absolve people of their responsibility to do their
best to be healthy. No system can handle a situation where
everyone takes what they want with no responsibility for their
actions. Lets show our people the way to live healthy and be
responsible so that those who are truly in need and don't have
the resources can be provided for by the common good. Begin
with a strong foundation and not a give it all away and the
system will be stronger for all of us.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

55. "Living a healthy life" is no guarantee

My grandmother never smoked ("I've never had a cigarette in my mouth" she used to boast), but she developed emphysema anyway.

[RandomKoolzip]

57. Okay, hypothetically...

let's say you get hit by a car....

Or you develop cancer but have not done anything to bring on that cancer...

Or like me you work in a kitchen of a restaurant and some asshole bumps into you while you're slicing meats and cuts your thumb off...

Or you get attacked by a pit bull....

Or a doctor prescribes pills to you and you have an allergic reaction to them...

Or you get viciously beaten up by a mugger...

Or you get food poisoning....

Or you have a heart attack at 25....

Or you develop some illness through no fault of your own, which happens a lot, sorry to say....

Then how does the theory of "personal responsibilty" enter into it?

Seems to me that the cult of "personal responsibility" have never seen the need for a safety net to help out with unforseen circumstances (ususally because they all come from rich families and can't understand how lucky they actaully are and credit themselves with "making it" on their own with no assisstance...)

[Cleita]

58. More astroturf.

Explain how Richard Reeves could have lived a lealthier life and not have the paralysis that he lives with day to day after an unfortunate accident? The fact that Reeves has wealth and a health care plan to fall back on from the Screen Actors Guild enables him to stay alive. Any other Joe Schmoe would be dead by now without any of the physical therapy and other platinum care Reeves get.

How about Joanne McGuckin's husband in Idaho? He got multiple sclerosis, couldn't work, had six children, property and a wife. He never got health care after the first phases of his disease and died without the benefits of hospice care and pain killers, only what his family could provide him.

They made the news a few years back because Joanne couldn't pay her property taxes and the county siezed her property and went to throw her and the children off the property. They lured her out with an offer to take her to a Food Bank and arrested her. The children frightened held off the sheriffs with guns. When they finally got the children to surrender an appalling tale of starved children, poverty and the deterioration of the family fortunes emerged because of the illness suffered by the bread winner of the family.

What if there had been some social safety nets like health care in place for people who, through no fault of their own, fall on bad times? There would have been a different tale to tell. Instead, in a Republican governed state like Idaho, the only food they got was from charity, when they got it. Their home, worth $150,000 on the market, was sold for a few thousand dollars in back taxes. Joann was thrown out in the street with no recourse. Sure, she could have gotten a job. GET REAL. This is an area where are the locals live hand to mouth on low paying seasonal work. Her children were thrown into foster care. This should never happen in America.

[billyskank]

65. I agree with everything except one thing

it's Christopher Reeve, isn't it?

[Cleita]

74. Yes, it is.

Where did I get Richard from? *blush*

[JanMichael]

59. It always amazes me how HC threads always draw out Industry talking...

...points.

It's laughable actually.

[Cleita]

60. It's not laughable JanMichael, although I respect

what you are saying. It is the very thing that is preventing us going to a single payer universal health care system like Canada's. We are going to have to fight these industry shills every inch of the way.

[creativelcro]

61. Well, if the healthy are so because they behave in a certain

way, such as they don't smoke and exercise regularly etc, then it is just fair that the healthy people should be rewarded. Like the good drivers are rewarded. I see plenty of people behaving like idiots, in ways that will affect their health adversely, but they don't care. So, why should I care when they get sick ? They increased their own chances of getting sick. And I'm not even a conservative. Imagine how conservatives might feel about this.

[Cleita]

62. So you would rather that everyone has to do without

a health safety net because a few people behave like idiots? Remember that the idiots will be contributing to a single payer plan along with everyone else.

[creativelcro]

63. No, I'd like people to stop whining about the sick

being shortchanged. And I want the system to reward people who engage in healthy behaviors and punish those that don't, in terms of premiums. Like any serious insurance business.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

64. They already do

Non-smokers and those who forego chemical dependency coverage already get lower rates than smokers and people who think they'll need chem dependency coverage.

The problem is that even the optimum rates are unaffordable.

[creativelcro]

66. My plan does not ask me if I smoke or not.

They simply don't have the info. I receive health care through a university. There are 3 bands of income, with corresponding premiums. No mention of smoking at all in determining how much I pay...

[Cleita]

67. You have the wrong idea about how a universal health plan

works. Money is taken out of your check to cover it, like they do for Medicare. Unlike Medicare you have health coverage as well as the old geezer next door. It's really simple. Take health care dollars that are already spent on various inefficient for profit plans and actually use them for health care. The money is collected by a central agency of the government and payment disbursements made from the same central agency. This makes administrative costs between 2%and 3% unlike the administrative costs of private plans which run between 15% and 20% conservatively and often a lot more.

Also, everyone is covered, not just a select healthy population. Our health care costs $4,000 per person per annum and 30% of the population doesn't have coverage. Other countries can cover every single one of their citizens for approximately $2,500 or less per annum. Now who has the most inefficient system?

What if those people, who smoke, had health care from the cradle up? They would have been encouraged not to smoke each time they got a check-up, not forty years later when they develop emphysema and it's too late. Look at the reality instead of what the insurance industry wants you to believe about rewards and unhealthy life styles and other BS to distract you from the truth.

[camero]

68. Hmm...What if you get cancer from pollution?

They'll try to blame that on you too.

[Deja Q]

72. And if you get sick, they'll jack up the rates and call you a risk!

Freedom my ass. We're slaves to corporate fa$cism.

I agree with you totally, but it's gonna be hard to defeat the repukes and the braindead mush-for-brains citizenship who'll buy any hogwash thrown on their heads. I mean, more than hgalf the country supports the thief'n'chief* - that alone speaks volumes. :scared: