jump to last post 1-30 of 30 discussions (75 posts)

National Healthcare for America

  1. trish1048 profile image80
    trish1048posted 7 years ago

    For or against?

    Personally, I hate the idea.  The government needs to stay out of my personal life.  I like my freedom of choice.

    1. profile image0
      Madame Xposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Amen!

    2. Maddie Ruud profile image84
      Maddie Ruudposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Oh?  And how do you feel about marriage?  Gay marriage?  Abortion?  Assisted suicide?  These are all matters of personal choice.  But I'm willing to bet you want the gov't to interfere in at least one of them.

      I'm not advocating a certain position on any of those issues, merely pointing out that you're making a blanket statement, drawing a straight line where it's really a fuzzy area.

    3. profile image60
      debbie5256posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I believe that everyone, not just the rich and people in congress should have access to the same health care.
      It should not just be for a handful of people. What makes you think you are better then me?
      I'm 57, have Fibromyalgia, arthritis, and tremors. But I can not afford health care.
      I have friends in Canada, they have health care for everyone, not one person is better than the other.
      If you have an emergency they handle it right away.
      When one of the men who was transferred from Canada to work on well rigs. His wife got cancer. He had to take out bankrupcy here, it broke him. When he went back to Canada he received free health care for his wife then.
      Debbie Bridgeport, WV

  2. profile image0
    pgrundyposted 7 years ago

    This is one of those topics that is so messy and so divisive that it is hardly worth talking about anymore. People just divide along ideological preferences and proceed to get nasty with very few facts in hand.

    That said, I don't care anymore.

    I make it a point to avoid the health care system entirely because 1) it costs a fortune and at the end they usually just tell you you're sick, which you probably knew when you showed up, and 2) the care isn't good, in fact some of it will kill you.

    So yeah. Give me some of THAT.

    Not!

  3. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 7 years ago

    Where do you live that the care isn't good?

  4. Uninvited Writer profile image82
    Uninvited Writerposted 7 years ago

    Of course, you don't want Canadian-style healthcare.

    We put our old people on ice floes to die... (not really but if you listen to all the propaganda you'd think it is so)

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Well, you do have to occassionally thin the herd to remain economically fit you know.

  5. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 7 years ago

    Actually, something like that is in the House bill...

  6. trish1048 profile image80
    trish1048posted 7 years ago

    I would be interested to hear from Canadians and any other country that has socialized medicine.  It's true, what I hear here on the radio makes it sound absolutely horrendous.  However, even if it isn't, I still don't like the government meddling in my personal affairs.

    1. euro-pen profile image75
      euro-penposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I live in an European country with a socialized health care system meaning the costs are divided equally (more or less) among the members. It is not exactly government-run since the system is maintained by self-organized institutions which are funded by the employees and employers (children, non-working family members, unemployed people and the elderly are insured as well). Additionally it is funded via taxes (this would be the government part) and some institutions are run by the federal government as well (i.e. university hospitals).

      Up to now the system has served me (and some of my family members, colleagues and friends) quite well while the overall costs are relatively low (though growing due to the ageing of the society). Actually some institutions do have a high international reputation (e.g. they safed the life of the Ukrainian president after he was poisened, a lot of rich business people from the Middle East seek treatment here etc.).

      However, the quality of health care systems are notoriously difficult to measure and assess (especially in an international comparison). At least life expectations do not vary that much (among the group of the "rich" countries), meaning in the grand scheme of things it does not matter where you live (so long as you can pay your bills at the medical doctor/hospital etc. of course).

      Just an additional note: Personally, I do not feel that my government does intervene in personal choices concerning health care. I can choose my medical doctor by myself and the hospital I want to look for care. I also could get additional private health insurance schemes, if I would want.

      Of course, for some special treatments there are not that many different hospitals available since I am living in a very small country, just over 8 mio. inhabitants).

      1. jiberish profile image78
        jiberishposted 7 years ago in reply to this
    2. Amanda Severn profile image92
      Amanda Severnposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Trish, if you want to know more about socialised healthcare in the UK, you could do worse than read the excellent detailed and factual hubs put to together by London Girl. This is certainly not the first forum thread on this thorny topic, and I doubt if it will be the last. Please keep an open mind about any advertisments in the press bad-mouthing socialised health-care, as the cases quoted will often be taken completely out of context, and will almost certainly fail to give the whole picture.

  7. profile image0
    pgrundyposted 7 years ago

    It's interesting to note that Britain instituted its current national health care plan when it was economically wrecked by WWII and the country was in rough shape in lots of other ways. Now UK residents have a longer lifespan than US residents, lower infant mortality, etc, etc...

    But we sure wouldn't want THAT here. No that would be horrifying.

    1. Amanda Severn profile image92
      Amanda Severnposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Pam, I read an article in the British press last week which told how a couple of cases where the NHS had failed to measure up had been sought out by American 'documentary' makers, and the resulting interviews have since been used as part of a campaign to justify not going down the same route in the USA. The article went on to say how appalled the interviewees were that their situation had been exploited in this way and how their words had been taken out of context in order to make the point.

  8. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago

    The issue is now even more difficult because they are now arguing about funding for abortions.  Because Americans are almost equally divided on this issue, it could doom any chance for major changes to our insurance and healthcare systems.

    1. profile image0
      pgrundyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      The goal is to bog the discussion down in culture war issues. That tactic is very old, but sadly it is also effective.

  9. Uninvited Writer profile image82
    Uninvited Writerposted 7 years ago

    From this site:

    https://www.cia.gov/library/publication … 2rank.html

    Life expectancy Canada 81.2
    Life expectancy US 78.1
    Life expectancy UK 79.1

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Statistics far more complex than face value.

  10. SweetiePie profile image84
    SweetiePieposted 7 years ago

    All the angst over universal health care in the US is very unfounded.  Usually people who are well off financially are the first ones to get upset about it.  Interestingly, many of them do not have to go without health care, or have not had to pay five thousand dollar deductibles, or would ever have to sell their house to pay for a procedure.  I would like to see universal health care pass, but there are just too many people profiting from the status quo, and that is what the fuss is about.

  11. SweetiePie profile image84
    SweetiePieposted 7 years ago

    No health care system is perfect, but at the moment the US ranks 37th in the world.  I am not big on going to the doctor or anything, but personally I could not afford it if I get in a major accident.  That is what is scary about our health care system here.  If you have a couple of part time jobs your employer will not pay for your health care, and you are forced to buy independent insurance with far less coverage.  I do not even have insurance at the moment and I rarely go to the doctor, but I hate to see people that need urgent medical care go with out, or do with less because of their financial situation.  Here is the world wide ranking of health care.

    http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

    1. profile image0
      pgrundyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Sweetie Pie,

      I agree with what you say here, and I think many, many Americans are on the same page you are with it. In 2001 I got comprehensive heath care coverage for the first time when I took a job with a multinational insurance company. The first year we had a great HMO that covered almost anything with a $10 copay. Get a cold, have open heart surgery, didn't matter, you paid ten bucks. The following year that HMO went out of business and we went to 80/20 plans and our premiums went up. Every year thereafter we got less coverage and paid more out of pocket for care that was often confusing and even dangerous. Now most corporations are pushing HSA plans with $2500 and $5000 deductibles.

      I guess my point is, even people WiTH private insurance are seeing the costs go up by double digits every single year and the level of care go down. Any raise you might get is eaten up by annual increases in health care costs. I actually watched my real wages decline for seven straight years due to this trend, even choosing the least amount of coverage available to me.

      So I don't work for a corporation anymore and I don't have health insurance either.

      But I think it's messed up that every other industrialized nation on earth can figure it out except ours.

  12. BeauFla profile image60
    BeauFlaposted 7 years ago

    The health care debate is going to get nastier and nastier. There are a lot of people that make huge amounts of money with our current system. They will be the ones fighting against changing the health care system.

    The average health insurance executive makes 14 million dollars a year.

    That is a lot of potential health care down the drain.

    I say scrap the for profit insurance companies, scrap the for profit hospitals they don't work.

    All insurance is the pooling of different peoples' money to hedge against the possibility of having to paying huge hospital expense in the future.

    The only difference between nationalized health care and "insured" health care is you have companies at the top making huge sums of money making decisions about your health care.

    Remove the middle man save the money and move on down the road to a healthier life.

    Insurance companies are not in the business of protecting you they are in the business of making money off you.

    it used to be that hospitals were Not for profit institutions, don't remember when they became for profit. The hospital itself was not considered a profit center. That does not mean that there was not profit involved, just the the "hospital" itself was not a profit center.

    Now we have bean counters that decide how many nurses are needed, the type of equipment etc...I know two people that have died directly due to malfeasance of the hospital they were in. For "profit" hospitals are a deadly dangerous places.

    ---Off Soap box Now---

  13. Amanda Severn profile image92
    Amanda Severnposted 7 years ago

    Before I learned more about American Healthcare I used to gripe and groan about the NHS. It seemed entirely unreasonable that we had to pay around £7 for each prescription item (never mind that we pay nothing at all for a consultation!)and that less serious medical procedures might involve a waiting list. Now, however, I recognize that actually, the vast majority of the time, the NHS is really more than adequate, and we have a parallel system of private healthcare available for those who don't want to rub their shoulders with the general public, or can't wait twelve weeks or so for a surgical procedure. It's not perfect, and probably never will be, but it's better than doing battle with expensive insurance schemes and being terrified of illness because of the cost of care.

    1. profile image0
      pgrundyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I went off all medications two years ago when the price WITH insurance approached $300 a month.

      I could never afford those meds without insurance, but it got to where I couldn't afford them with it either. Most of the time I feel fine, but there are days when I wish I had access.

      The last 'real' job I had required a doctor's release that cost me $80 for less than five minutes of my own provider's time. I think that practice should be illegal.

  14. SweetiePie profile image84
    SweetiePieposted 7 years ago

    pgrundy,

    I agree with your points.  I had one job where I actually had good medical coverage, and that was the first time I taught high school.  I was not very good at managing student behaviors, so I decided to leave that position.  A few years later I tried teaching elementary, and I went for what I thought was the least expensive health care, the HSA.  The HSA program was supposedly tax free savings account for the thousand dollar deductible I had to pay. 

    Well since I never made that thousand dollar deductible there was little need for the HSA, and the darn thing got added to my income each year, which means I had to pay taxes on it anyway. I hear what you are saying about how employer health insurance is not much better.  In my experience the deductibles were lower compared the five thousand dollars I had to pay for my back injury with private insurance, but I pretty much stay out of the hospital because of the astronomical costs.

  15. profile image0
    pgrundyposted 7 years ago

    Yes, insurance or no insurance you're pretty much screwed if you have to be in the hospital for any length of time. "Sicko" was about people WITH insurance. People WITH insurance go bankrupt all the time in the U.S. because they break a leg or get cancer or have a heart attack.

    I went to the dentist to get a tooth pulled last year and the dentist told me that's all anyone comes to him for anymore--extractions. He said too many people are out of work or they do work but can't afford regular care so they show up when the tooth comes out. I didn't even really know the guy and he was like, unloading on me emotionally. The whole thing had him bummed out so bad he was unloading on his patients.

    That happens a lot actually.

    I wish I had ten dollars for every doctor who treated me like I was a psychotherapist instead of a patient. I should send THEM bills. smile

  16. SweetiePie profile image84
    SweetiePieposted 7 years ago

    Yes it is very common for people to go broke even with insurance.  I guess what I should have elaborated was those who are against universal health care are usually wealthy enough that an extended hospital stay would not hurt them financially.  I am not trying to generalize about that, but I find the side against universal health care either to be lacking empathy, or falling for ads opposed to it.

  17. Jane@CM profile image60
    Jane@CMposted 7 years ago

    If we went with National Health care today, my father-in-law's chemotherapy would stop today.  They would consider him to old to treat sad

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Some would be just fine with that for the greater good and all.

      No wonder Senators and Congressmen are getting an earful from their constituents these days?

      http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08 … own-halls/

    2. Amanda Severn profile image92
      Amanda Severnposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      How old is he?

    3. profile image0
      pgrundyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      What are you basing that statement on?

      There isn't even a national plan on the table, so how do you know this?

      1. Jane@CM profile image60
        Jane@CMposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        My father-in-law has been told this by his doctors. They said they've read and seen the proposal.  I hope there isn't a plan on the table.  I wish the doctors would not be telling this to their patients either.  Unfortunately, my in-laws think the world came to an end after the election.

        1. Uninvited Writer profile image82
          Uninvited Writerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          How old is he? You can't exactly take the word of people who have a vested interest can you?

          1. tksensei profile image59
            tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Yeah, you can't ask sick people about what kind of care they want. I mean, what do they know?



            roll

          2. Amanda Severn profile image92
            Amanda Severnposted 7 years ago in reply to this
          3. Jane@CM profile image60
            Jane@CMposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            He is in his early 70's.  My in-laws are sort of backward, for lack of a better term, if the doctor says something, its going to be true to them.  As much as we try to convince them that this isn't going to happen any time soon, most likely not at all, they still worry themselves silly over it.

  18. kmackey32 profile image80
    kmackey32posted 7 years ago

    Thank god. My credit report shows mostly all medical bills that I cant afford to pay. I think everyone should be able to have insurance or at least affordable insurance.

  19. trish1048 profile image80
    trish1048posted 7 years ago

    Maddie,

    You're right.  The government tries to put its nose into everything, and National Healthcare is just a new way to to rape the public.  Free healthcare?  No such animal.  They'll simply raise our taxes so it can be funded. 

    Just how deep does the government think our pockets are?  What with astronomical prices for anything anymore, there are no dollars to be squeezed.

    I would venture to guess that more than half the country is one paycheck or less from becoming homeless.  So, it's not only the wealthy who are concerned.

    1. Amanda Severn profile image92
      Amanda Severnposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Trish, don't dismiss this out of hand without reading how things are done elsewhere. Universal healthcare is a proven and successful method of healthcare delivery in the majority of Western Nations. What makes America different?

  20. rsmallory profile image84
    rsmalloryposted 7 years ago

    Absoultely, unequivically and completely AGAINST the idea of Nationalized Health Care.

  21. Uninvited Writer profile image82
    Uninvited Writerposted 7 years ago

    I was talking about the doctors, scaring their patients.

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Yeah, doctors don't know about what their patients need either...


      roll

  22. Uninvited Writer profile image82
    Uninvited Writerposted 7 years ago

    Yes, but they don't need to tell people that if there is national health insurance they will be denied treatment and will probably die.

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      There is very likely a better chance their doctor has actually read the bill under consideration than most of the people who would be voting on it.

  23. Colebabie profile image61
    Colebabieposted 7 years ago

    I think that I would be happy with a national healthcare system. Whatever the plan is, I'm interested in seeing it and if it is going to work. Crossing my fingers.

    1. Amanda Severn profile image92
      Amanda Severnposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Sounds like a reasonable approach.

      1. tksensei profile image59
        tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Crossing your fingers and hoping is a reasonable approach?!

        1. Amanda Severn profile image92
          Amanda Severnposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          No, but keeping an open mind, and not swallowing every dodgy bit of propaganda hook,line and sinker, is probably a very reasonable approach.

        2. Colebabie profile image61
          Colebabieposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          What is the other option? I'm not on the board who makes these decisions. I work in healthcare. I know the system sucks. If it can be improved I'm all for it. The objective is to increase the quality of life for patients. As long as that is done, I'm cool.

          1. tksensei profile image59
            tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            What is the other option besides crossing your fingers and hoping for the best?! Are you serious?

          2. tksensei profile image59
            tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Yes you are. You are a citizen who can vote (I assume).

            1. Colebabie profile image61
              Colebabieposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              I am. So where can I put my 2 cents in? What can I do to improve health care? Besides be a good PA.

              1. tksensei profile image59
                tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                In the voting booth where you decide who will represent your district and state in congress.

                1. Colebabie profile image61
                  Colebabieposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Did that. So after that, what should I do? Besides hope that if who I voted for got elected they make decisions that will help patients.

                  1. tksensei profile image59
                    tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    You should call and write your reps, you should organize with your fellow citizens,and you should stay informed and involved. You know, democracy and all that...

        3. jiberish profile image78
          jiberishposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          What happens if it doesn't work? There is no plan for reversal.

  24. Uninvited Writer profile image82
    Uninvited Writerposted 7 years ago

    I'm in Canada, my mother was in her early 70s when she was diagnosed with a cancerous brain tumour. She got the same treatment for her cancer that she would have gotten had she been younger. Her surgery took place within days of her diagnosis and her treatment began not long after that. All this talk about people being too old to be given treatment is a fairytale.

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Have you read the bill being considered?

    2. Amanda Severn profile image92
      Amanda Severnposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      My Mum was 74 when she was diagnosed with a cancerous tumour. She also was given the best of care and offered a good range of options. Nobody once said she was too old for treatment. Why would they? 74 is comparatively young these days. (I'm in the UK BTW)

      1. Uninvited Writer profile image82
        Uninvited Writerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Not in the US it seems...average life expectancy 78 smile

        1. Amanda Severn profile image92
          Amanda Severnposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Sounds like they need Universal Healthcare!

          1. tksensei profile image59
            tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Yeah, 78.06 vs. 78.7 is a shocking discrepancy, especially when you take into account the massive difference in rates of immigration between the two countries.

            roll

            1. profile image0
              ryankettposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Haha, well that extra 6 and a half months will do me fine! being a smoker however, I would be very lucky!

              Would be interested if you could provide me with immigration statistics however, I am not so convinced that the US immigration problem is any worse than the UK's (if you are talking about the UK?). We have a stupid tunnel remember, and hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers waiting at the other end in Calais to jump on lorries, in order to seek our overly generous benefits system.... of course the US has Mexico which provides a problem, but have you been to London recently (or ever?)

    3. SweetiePie profile image84
      SweetiePieposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I agree with many of the cogent points you and LondonGirl make.  People that have never lived under a national health care system usually do not understand how it works, and they are falling for the scare tactics.

  25. Uninvited Writer profile image82
    Uninvited Writerposted 7 years ago

    No I haven't. I have seen the propaganda commercials slagging the Canadian system though.

    Have you read all of it? I don't believe it has been decided upon yet has it?

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I have not, and it has not. I expect that it will not pass.

  26. profile image0
    ryankettposted 7 years ago

    The British pay more tax in order to pay for the NHS, but I wouldn't change it for the world. Having also recently discovered how much my self employed American friend had to pay per year for health insurance.... I see the NHS as one of the best things about living in Britain. There would be uproar if it was to be privatised.

    Most of the NHS funding comes from a tax called 'National Insurance', which also funds state pensions. There are private hospitals in Britain that the more wealthy can join, and it is also possible to opt out of National Insurance contributions. But I will always pay my national insurance as the state pension and the free health care is, in my opinion, imperative for the wealthfare of the British people.

    The NHS also keeps a hell of a lot of people in a job, one of the only organisations recruiting in my area at the moment... I would sooner see my tax money keeping nurses and administrators in a job than any other thing to be honest. Same with our educational system too.

    We pay more tax than you, but we a guarenteed a reasonable quality of life for it.

  27. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 7 years ago

    No, it's ultimately you and your fellow citizens. That's why when congress reconvenes they are going to let this bill die.

  28. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 7 years ago

    http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/imm_n … ation-rate


    Which does not take into account the 11 million illegal immigrants in the US vs the 'mere' half million in the UK...

  29. Kidgas profile image79
    Kidgasposted 7 years ago

    I like reading the wikipedia articles which discuss healthcare in the US:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_car … ted_States


    and compare the Canadian and US systems:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_a … s_compared

  30. MomintheMiddle profile image60
    MomintheMiddleposted 7 years ago

    ALL FOR THIS AND QUICK!

 
working