Health Care -- Privilege, Right or Responsibility?

[ClydeR]

Tom Brokaw asked at last night's debate whether health care in America is a privilege, right or responsibility. McCain answered that is a responsibility. Obama answered that it is a right.

I think that's a question the country needs to answer before we start changing the current system. The two candidates' answers also show how they view the role of government and individual rights and responsibilities.


BROKAW: Quick discussion. Is health care in America a privilege, a right, or a responsibility?

Senator McCain?

MCCAIN: I think it's a responsibility, in this respect, in that we should have available and affordable health care to every American citizen, to every family member. And with the plan that -- that I have, that will do that.

But government mandates I -- I'm always a little nervous about. But it is certainly my responsibility. It is certainly small-business people and others, and they understand that responsibility. American citizens understand that. Employers understand that.

But they certainly are a little nervous when Senator Obama says, if you don't get the health care policy that I think you should have, then you're going to get fined. And, by the way, Senator Obama has never mentioned how much that fine might be. Perhaps we might find that out tonight.

OBAMA: Well, why don't -- why don't -- let's talk about this, Tom, because there was just a lot of stuff out there.

BROKAW: Privilege, right or responsibility. Let's start with that.

OBAMA: Well, I think it should be a right for every American. In a country as wealthy as ours, for us to have people who are going bankrupt because they can't pay their medical bills -- for my mother to die of cancer at the age of 53 and have to spend the last months of her life in the hospital room arguing with insurance companies because they're saying that this may be a pre-existing condition and they don't have to pay her treatment, there's something fundamentally wrong about that.

So let me -- let me just talk about this fundamental difference. And, Tom, I know that we're under time constraints, but Senator McCain through a lot of stuff out there.

Number one, let me just repeat, if you've got a health care plan that you like, you can keep it. All I'm going to do is help you to lower the premiums on it. You'll still have choice of doctor. There's no mandate involved.

Small businesses are not going to have a mandate. What we're going to give you is a 50 percent tax credit to help provide health care for those that you need.

Now, it's true that I say that you are going to have to make sure that your child has health care, because children are relatively cheap to insure and we don't want them going to the emergency room for treatable illnesses like asthma.

And when Senator McCain says that he wants to provide children health care, what he doesn't mention is he voted against the expansion of the Children's Health Insurance Program that is responsible for making sure that so many children who didn't have previously health insurance have it now.

Now, the final point I'll make on this whole issue of government intrusion and mandates -- it is absolutely true that I think it is important for government to crack down on insurance companies that are cheating their customers, that don't give you the fine print, so you end up thinking that you're paying for something and, when you finally get sick and you need it, you're not getting it.

And the reason that it's a problem to go shopping state by state, you know what insurance companies will do? They will find a state -- maybe Arizona, maybe another state -- where there are no requirements for you to get cancer screenings, where there are no requirements for you to have to get pre-existing conditions, and they will all set up shop there.

That's how in banking it works. Everybody goes to Delaware, because they've got very -- pretty loose laws when it comes to things like credit cards.

And in that situation, what happens is, is that the protections you have, the consumer protections that you need, you're not going to have available to you.

That is a fundamental difference that I have with Senator McCain. He believes in deregulation in every circumstance. That's what we've been going through for the last eight years. It hasn't worked, and we need fundamental change.

More... (http://debates.org/pages/trans2008c.html)

[Audriana]

It's my belief that healthcare should be one of the few things that is state provided. Nobody should profit on wheather somebody lives or dies.

[Parkbandit]

If Healthcare is a RIGHT, then I would also assume that food, clothing, shelter, transportation and money should also be a RIGHT.

[Amber]

Some of you might remember my post about my mom being terminally ill. Against all odds, she's still here, but it's been not only an ongoing battle against cancer, but also with her insurance company. She had to go on disability from work and when that ran out, her insurance company wanted to drop her coverage, even though she was still covered under COPRA. Every new prescription or treatment she's prescribed presents a new battle with her insurance company. Nobody should have to deal with such a bureaucratic mess or worry about losing everything in an effort to stay alive.

[ElanthianSiren]

Half between right and responsibility.

America is notorious for it's excellent accute care. You have a heart attack, we can pretty much drag you into an ER and fix you up. What we suck at is preventative care. Before we can say that health care is a right, we have to get the general population to respect its health. I don't envy whoever would get that job.

[Gan]

Its a responsibility.

Should have made a poll, ClydeR.

[Gelston]

I don't think it should be a right. Why should I have to pay for other people's problems, when more then half of the US is obese?

I don't want to pay a 57% income tax either, plus it opens up a Pandora's box inwhich the government will start fucking with more and more things, such as how healthy your life is. I think you should be allowed to be as unhealthy as you want, but its your own problem when you start to suffer from that. BTW, I'm a smoker.

[Keller]

I don't want to pay a 57% income tax either.

Do you live in Canada?

[Mabus]

I don't want to pay a 57% income tax either, plus it opens up a Pandora's box inwhich the government will start fucking with more and more things, such as how healthy your life is. I think you should be allowed to be as unhealthy as you want, but its your own problem when you start to suffer from that. BTW, I'm a smoker.
This would open us up to more "Nanny State" actions and laws.

Now I know some people like the government holding their hands, but I prefer individual responsibility, liberty and freedom to government mandates.

[Kranar]

Do you live in Canada?


I live in Canada, I'm in the highest tax bracket and neither do I personally, nor does my business come close to paying that much in taxes. Not to mention I am pretty sure business taxes in Canada are lower than they are in the U.S.

It's taboo to say but the U.S. wastes an obscene amount of money on things in the name of national defense. The U.S. could still maintain an equally if not more powerful national defense and dramatically cut down on spending.

[thefarmer]

Insurance should be easier to get, easier to afford, and easier to navigate. If it takes the government stepping in and regulating it, I'd be for it.

[Keller]

I live in Canada, I'm in the highest tax bracket and neither do I personally, nor does my business come close to paying that much in taxes. Not to mention I am pretty sure business taxes in Canada are lower than they are in the U.S.

It's taboo to say but the U.S. wastes an obscene amount of money on things in the name of national defense. The U.S. could still maintain an equally if not more powerful national defense and dramatically cut down on spending.

I don't understand where 57% income tax came from?

[Parkbandit]

For all those people who voted for it being a right.. do you even know what that means?

If healthcare is a RIGHT, why would you give someone healthcare before the necessities of life itself.. namely food and shelter. If healthcare is a right, then clearly you would agree that food and shelter should obviously come first. Should we now feed everyone and provide everyone shelter? And if you believe we should.. then obviously you also believe we should cloth everyone as well... because if healthcare is a a RIGHT, then obviously clothing is as well. And what about transportation? Getting from one place to another is clearly a RIGHT if healthcare is. And let's not forget employment. Should we also employ everyone or make sure everyone has an income? And let's be honest.. you can't have shelter without utilities. Water, sewer, electricity, phone.. those should also be RIGHTS as well, no?

It's real easy to classify things as Rights.. until you actually think about them and the way you would provide those rights.

[Methais]

For all those people who voted for it being a right.. do you even know what that means?

If healthcare is a RIGHT, why would you give someone healthcare before the necessities of life itself.. namely food and shelter. If healthcare is a right, then clearly you would agree that food and shelter should obviously come first. Should we now feed everyone and provide everyone shelter? And if you believe we should.. then obviously you also believe we should cloth everyone as well... because if healthcare is a a RIGHT, then obviously clothing is as well. And what about transportation? Getting from one place to another is clearly a RIGHT if healthcare is. And let's not forget employment. Should we also employ everyone or make sure everyone has an income? And let's be honest.. you can't have shelter without utilities. Water, sewer, electricity, phone.. those should also be RIGHTS as well, no?

It's real easy to classify things as Rights.. until you actually think about them and the way you would provide those rights.

If you're hungry, you can go out and shoot something and eat it, or grow a vegetable garden.

If you're sick, you can't throw some seeds in the ground and grow a doctor.

I'm not particularly sure wtf I'm talking about either, so save your breath. :club:

[Parkbandit]

And with the importance of the Internet in our lives.. should having a computer with Internet also be considered a right?

[Methais]

And with the importance of the Internet in our lives.. should having a computer with Internet also be considered a right?

As long as porn exists, yes.

[g++]

It's my belief that healthcare should be one of the few things that is state provided. Nobody should profit on wheather somebody lives or dies.

Actually I think they should. I cant think of a better way to motivate people to be good at something.

As far as the health care thing I don't think its a right, but neither is unemployment or social security either really its just some shit we do because we realize many good people would fall through the crack without it. There is a distinction between "should we as a society choose to offer this to everyone" and "do we as a society think everyone is entitled to this as a human".

If the government wants to start a pay in program to ensure everyone can get health care I suppose it would be worth it although seeing my check go down would obviously suck sometimes the social good does outweigh personal loss. I think some legislation targeted at the health care industry could solve many of the problems without having to resort to government control.

People take pot shots at the health care industry for sorting who lives and dies but really...someone has to do it. Its not popular to say but with more people suffering then there are resources to save them, the alternative would be useless procedures and medications being wasted when they could go to people who actually need them. It will likely only get to be more repugninant with government control. Money should not weigh as heavily as it does on the decisions but theres still going to be people in the country dieng for lack of treatment regardless of how we structure health care.

[g++]

I agree with you in principle, but the money factor also brings us to a particularly undesirable outcome. You say "more people suffering than there are resources to save them."

There are many cases where the only thing keeping the prices high for a particular drug are not actually the cost of making (or even researching) the drug, but simply that they have a patent/monpoly on making it for so many years.

Hard to swallow that a child has to die so that future drugs can be lucrative and promising to develop to save other people. It's a cold, utilitarian argument that works (makes more sense to deny giving that child the expensive [but cheap to make] drug to keep that drug and future drugs profitable enough that the health companies research treatments for other things), but that kind of behavior also brings risk of development of simply treatments, rather than cures for any given disease..

I completely agree with you. I think this should change, I dont think that the only way to do this is to completely nationalize medical insurance. It could be done with government oversight in the form of targeted legislation and expansion of the already in place welfare forms of medical care. I mean we have medicare and medicaide..they just suck. Why not put the money there instead of nationalizing an industry.

Its interesting that you mention the patent monopolies which your against and the lack of people looking for a cure in the same paragraph however. The being opposed to one and for the other is almost contradictory. Patent monopolies are the only reason any company is looking for a cure to anything.

[Amber]

Patent monopolies are the only reason any company is looking for a cure to anything.
I have to disagree with this. The vast majority of biomedical research is conducted without such mercenary goals, but rather for the advancement of knowledge. Not that I'm a company, but I am co-inventor on a patent which has been licensed to a company to develop treatments for insulin resistant diabetes, ALS, and HCMV retinitis. Neither I nor any of my co-inventors conducted our research with the intention of making a profit. Rather, our aim was to understand the basis of RNAi and to explore the possibility of exploiting the pathway to cure diseases. Of course the company which bought licensing rights IS looking for a profit, so I'll say you're part right.

As to right vs obligation vs responsibility, it really is a complicated issue. My personal belief is that everyone IS entitled to a basic minimal health care. We already have the poorer people in our society covered by medicare and medicaid, which basically seems to me to indicate that our government believes that those below the povery level are entitled to health care. Currently however, this entitlement doesn't extend to those above the povery level who lack health insurance. If this is such an essential need that it's guaranteed to the poorest of us, then it should be such an essential need that it's guaranteed everyone.

I'm NOT saying that we should all have free health care or free medical insurance. In fact, very few of us should. Rather, I feel everyone, even those currently on medicaid, should have to pay for their health insurance. To ensure that people do take responsibility for their health, I would advocate a sliding scale insurance premium or copay to be determined by lifestyle assessment. If you smoke, add 20 bucks a month to your premium. If you're overweight, add another 20. Alcoholic? Add another 20. and so on and so on. I don't know what the answer is and I think I'm beginning to ramble, but I really feel strongly that our current health care system is inherently flawed.

[Mabus]

To ensure that people do take responsibility for their health, I would advocate a sliding scale insurance premium or copay to be determined by lifestyle assessment. If you smoke, add 20 bucks a month to your premium. If you're overweight, add another 20. Alcoholic? Add another 20. and so on and so on. I don't know what the answer is and I think I'm beginning to ramble, but I really feel strongly that our current health care system is inherently flawed.
This is where it turns into social engineering, and becomes problematic.

Where is the line drawn?

Do we charge more based on race, sexual preference, genetic profile and previous exposure to toxins in a work environment? Do we force people to drop cultural traditions that may not be acceptable by the majority?

Each of those could be shown to have an impact on life expectancy and various physiological conditions.

I stand against "Nanny State" decisions that could infringe on personal liberty.

I have proposed that "Public Health Centers" be created for those that cannot afford preventative and diagnostic care (I think I even briefly brought it up in another thread on this forum). We could use tax (and other) incentives to draw public companies and private health care professionals to partner with state and local interests in serving their communities.

Providing basic care lowers the costs for everyone, and such a system would cost less, and interfere with liberty less, then a mandated government-run system for all.

[thefarmer]

I have proposed that "Public Health Centers" be created for those that cannot afford preventative and diagnostic care (I think I even briefly brought it up in another thread on this forum). We could use tax (and other) incentives to draw public companies and private health care professionals to partner with state and local interests in serving their communities.

Providing basic care lowers the costs for everyone, and such a system would cost less, and interfere with liberty less, then a mandated government-run system for all.

Your "Public Health Centers" are already in existence. They're called free clinics, and don't even come close to the treatment and care a hospital can provide.

[Mabus]

Your "Public Health Centers" are already in existence. They're called free clinics, and don't even come close to the treatment and care a hospital can provide.
Thank you for oversimplifying my intent. I take the fault for it, as I did not present a detailed plan outlining all facets. I am not a health care worker, nor am I an administrator of a health care center.

From the people I have helped direct to the current "free clinics" I would agree with you in their lack of usefulness.

If they exist as you say (and I have heard), and are not as fully functional in all areas as I envision (in the ideas I have sent to my representatives over the years), then why not better the existing structures rather then create new bloated systems that invite corruption, additional taxation and bureaucracy?

Most handle care once a health problem exists. I picture more work on preventative care, education, outpatient care and followup. I do not picture these centers as emergency centers, or as specialized medical centers (though it would be nice if in a state several centers that specialize could share resources, by cross-referral).

What would be wrong about expanding care at such centers for those that truly cannot afford such treatment, and doing it in a way that is the closest to cost-neutral to the federal government?

[Gan]

Your "Public Health Centers" are already in existence. They're called free clinics, and don't even come close to the treatment and care a hospital can provide.

The scope of a free clinic and a full service acute care hospital are so far off the map from each other its like comparing apples to cargo vans.

Free clinics have their usefulness and their presence is valued by those who utilize their services. And acute care ED's see the benefit of their existence by not having to treat non-emergent walk-ins that would otherwise been seen by free clinic facilities. Which directly impacts hospital wait times, ED volumes and hospital costs for treating indigent cases.

Please do more research on how non-emergent and indigent ED volumes affect your local hospital and how that in turn impacts the community around you before you quip off your slight against free clinics.

[Ignot]

For all those people who voted for it being a right.. do you even know what that means?

If healthcare is a RIGHT, why would you give someone healthcare before the necessities of life itself.. namely food and shelter. If healthcare is a right, then clearly you would agree that food and shelter should obviously come first. Should we now feed everyone and provide everyone shelter? And if you believe we should.. then obviously you also believe we should cloth everyone as well... because if healthcare is a a RIGHT, then obviously clothing is as well. And what about transportation? Getting from one place to another is clearly a RIGHT if healthcare is. And let's not forget employment. Should we also employ everyone or make sure everyone has an income? And let's be honest.. you can't have shelter without utilities. Water, sewer, electricity, phone.. those should also be RIGHTS as well, no?

It's real easy to classify things as Rights.. until you actually think about them and the way you would provide those rights.

I don't think you know what "right" means, PB. Maybe it's hard for you to see because your not in a position alot of people are in. There are people out there, working two jobs so they can put food on the table and clothes on their kids back but have to skip their Doctor appointment because they can't afford the visit. Or they have to avoid purchasing their heart medicine because it costs to much. Your correct on some things, Food is fucking important! A place to live is important especially if you have a family to take care of. People are willing to sacrifice healthcare benefits so that they can keep their family with food and shelter. That person has a RIGHT to healthcare, IMO and right now it is not affordable for that person. They don't have a fucking RIGHT to a phone. You are taking it to far and missing the whole point of the question.

Also, I did not like this question at all. Everyone should have a right to healthcare and the government has a responsibility to make it so. Its a bad question, IMO

[Gan]

There are people out there, working two jobs so they can put food on the table and clothes on their kids back but have to skip their Doctor appointment because they can't afford the visit.
That does not mean that they can not be seen by someone at a facility such as a free clinic. Thats like skipping dinner because you cant afford the steak dinner and are either too dumb or prideful to find the dollar menu. Not to mention that all emergent (meaning life threatening) medical issues are required to be treated/stabilized (EMTALA Act) if they present themselves to any hospital ED. And county hospitals are mandated by city/county charter to treat indigent populations regardless of insurance status.


Or they have to avoid purchasing their heart medicine because it costs to much. Again, medicine perscribed at a free clinic is free. Not to mention the $4 perscription services at many large grocery chains (Wal-Mart). Additionally drug manufacturers also request that those having trouble affording medication that they manufacture contact them for discounts, etc. And there are numerous programs such as the one Montel Williams sponsors (Free Medicine Foundation (http://www.freemedicinefoundation.com/)) that also provide assistance with this very need. The resources are there.


Your correct on some things, Food is fucking important! A place to live is important especially if you have a family to take care of. People are willing to sacrifice healthcare benefits so that they can keep their family with food and shelter. Why should they sacrifice when the healthcare resources are available for them? There are already state programs designed to place specific demographics on healthcare insurance such as the CHIP coalition (http://www.texaschip.org/) in Texas. There are free clinic facilities to treat common healthcare maladies as well as hopsitals which are requied by law to treat life threatening emergent healthcare issues. And county facilities which are mandated to treat indigent population regardless of insurance status (yes, these are county hospitals). Again, the resources are there if you look.


That person has a RIGHT to healthcare, IMO and right now it is not affordable for that person. They don't have a fucking RIGHT to a phone. You are taking it to far and missing the whole point of the question. Here's where others will disagree with your opinion and where you'll get the chance to call them an idiot simply because of that disagreement.

[AnticorRifling]

It should be a privilege. One that has certain criteria that need to be met prior to being awarded said privilege. A privilege that can be removed/revoked under certain circumstances.

[g++]

I have to disagree with this. The vast majority of biomedical research is conducted without such mercenary goals, but rather for the advancement of knowledge. Not that I'm a company, but I am co-inventor on a patent which has been licensed to a company to develop treatments for insulin resistant diabetes, ALS, and HCMV retinitis. Neither I nor any of my co-inventors conducted our research with the intention of making a profit. Rather, our aim was to understand the basis of RNAi and to explore the possibility of exploiting the pathway to cure diseases. Of course the company which bought licensing rights IS looking for a profit, so I'll say you're part right.

As to right vs obligation vs responsibility, it really is a complicated issue. My personal belief is that everyone IS entitled to a basic minimal health care. We already have the poorer people in our society covered by medicare and medicaid, which basically seems to me to indicate that our government believes that those below the povery level are entitled to health care. Currently however, this entitlement doesn't extend to those above the povery level who lack health insurance. If this is such an essential need that it's guaranteed to the poorest of us, then it should be such an essential need that it's guaranteed everyone.

I'm NOT saying that we should all have free health care or free medical insurance. In fact, very few of us should. Rather, I feel everyone, even those currently on medicaid, should have to pay for their health insurance. To ensure that people do take responsibility for their health, I would advocate a sliding scale insurance premium or copay to be determined by lifestyle assessment. If you smoke, add 20 bucks a month to your premium. If you're overweight, add another 20. Alcoholic? Add another 20. and so on and so on. I don't know what the answer is and I think I'm beginning to ramble, but I really feel strongly that our current health care system is inherently flawed.

Yah I mean I worked a couple years in the research sector of hopkins and worked with alot of good people like you who are quite driven to find cures. Unfortunately there is no way in god forsaken hell that people like you can afford to run clinical trials and get your own medicines past the FDA and onto shelves. The people that do have the money to do this are not going to do it for the love of the game. Sad but true.

[Jenisi]

These threads are getting really repetitive. I don't even have to look at the poll results to know exactly which posters chose which result, what they're going to say about the issue, and who is going to start shit first by calling someone else an idiot. Oy vey.. I've been posting here too long.

[Gan]

These threads are getting really repetitive. I don't even have to look at the poll results to know exactly which posters chose which result, what they're going to say about the issue, and who is going to start shit first by calling someone else an idiot. Oy vey.. I've been posting here too long.
So why even post in this thread?

Lacking attention?

[Gan]

I'm curious to hear more from those who chose Healthcare should be a privilege.

[AnticorRifling]

I'm curious to hear more from those who chose Healthcare should be a privilege.
What do you want to hear?

I think it's a privilege that requires you to pay into the system/taxes. It's the right of an American citizen but that doesn't apply to everyone holed up in the land of the free so make it a privilege or at least make it a right that's not abused and such a huge candle to all the moths out there.

I guess I'm bitter on the subject of healthcare since my twins spent so much time in the NICU and I've been paying some huge ass bills and while I was there I saw some illegals getting the same treatment that I'll also be paying for thanks to taxes. I'm not saying you shouldn't get healthcare but I should own your ass if you're not paying for it.

*Edit* It's been 2 years since my kids left the NICU, I'm still working 2 jobs to cover that stay plus follow up shots, attention. And I have pretty decent health insurance.

[Gan]

The reason why I ask is because I think privilege and responsibility are very close in nature. Moreso than the 3rd selection of being a right. Or I'm leaning more towards privilege than responsibility - based on everyone's interpretation of what each means.

I dont know why ClydeR added that option in post-OP.

[CrystalTears]

I dont know why ClydeR added that option in post-OP.
Because those were the choices given to McCain and Obama during the debate. I chose responsibility but I'm more between that and privilege myself as well. I certainly don't believe it's a right.

[Daniel]

Actually I think they should. I cant think of a better way to motivate people to be good at something.



You assume that by having a profit that you motivate people to provide better healthcare, when the reality is that it provides people the motivation to make more money, health and wellbeing be damned.

I believe healthcare is a responsibility. I believe that everyone should do everything within their power to obtain it, but that the government should be willing and capable to fill that gap if neccessary.

It makes no sense that we can spend trillions on building lasers to shoot asteroids out of the air but we can't spend money on saving people's lifes or making them healthy. It's that same kind of ass backwards thinking that gets us into economic trouble in the first place.

[Parkbandit]

The people who believe it's a "right" are also the same type of people who claim that their "rights" have been infringed upon all the time. I think it's a fundamental misunderstanding of what the term "RIGHT" actually means.

[Parkbandit]

I believe healthcare is a responsibility. I believe that everyone should do everything within their power to obtain it, but that the government should be willing and capable to fill that gap if neccessary.



Holy hell, the end really is near. I completely agree with this line of thought with Daniel, and I double checked.. we ARE in a political thread.

12/12/12 is coming early....

[AnticorRifling]

I believe healthcare is a responsibility. I believe that everyone should do everything within their power to obtain it, but that the government should be willing and capable to fill that gap if neccessary.


I can agree with this somewhat. As long as you're not saying I have a responsibility to cover someone who isn't trying.

[g++]

You assume that by having a profit that you motivate people to provide better healthcare, when the reality is that it provides people the motivation to make more money, health and wellbeing be damned.


Yes generally industries where a large profit margin exist are where the best and brightest show up. I already stated in several posts I agree there is an endemic problem at the upper echelons of the health care industry with cost analysis being taken to the extreme but to think that making the industry non-profit would solve it is naive at best. The industry would just implode as skilled people walked across the steet to the private sector.

[Parkbandit]

I can agree with this somewhat. As long as you're not saying I have a responsibility to cover someone who isn't trying.


There are always going to be people in our country we have the moral obligation to help... the permanently disabled, the temporarily disabled, children and the elderly. If you aren't on that list... get a fucking job.

[AnticorRifling]

There are always going to be people in our country we have the moral obligation to help... the permanently disabled, the temporarily disabled, children and the elderly. If you aren't on that list... get a fucking job.

And that's all I ask.

[Jenisi]

I did vote to hastily, and I do understand what ParkBandit is saying. But I agree it's a privilege in a sense nothing is owed to us. But I believe it is a duty of the American people to take care of themselves and others. Now, granted MOST companies offer excellent healthcare plans but insurance isn't always the answer. When an actual crisis comes up, Insurance companies try to weasel out of any way to pay for services rendered.

Get a job? If you haven't noticed but healthcare rates are INSANE.

"It isn't just $5-a-pill aspirin. Daily room charges exceed $5,000 in some New Jersey hospitals. An appendectomy in California, including about two days in the hospital, has an average list charge of $18,000. Nationally, federal data show the median charge for treating a heart attack is more than $20,000.

...

When Karen Hamers' teenage daughter Michele needed knee surgery, Hamers called several hospitals near her home in Vero Beach, Fla., and asked how much the surgery would cost. At the time, her family did not have health insurance. After choosing a hospital, Hamers paid the surgeon and then also paid the hospital what it said the surgery would cost: $4,200.

"Six days after surgery, we receive a letter from the hospital asking for an additional $21,000," Hamers says. She asked for an explanation and got an itemized bill."

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/2004-04-13-rising-hospital-costs_x.htm

There is a HUGE issue with healthcare right now, we have a shitty plan. And I am completely for pro-regulation of the healthcare system.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

What do you want to hear?

I think it's a privilege that requires you to pay into the system/taxes. It's the right of an American citizen but that doesn't apply to everyone holed up in the land of the free so make it a privilege or at least make it a right that's not abused and such a huge candle to all the moths out there.

I guess I'm bitter on the subject of healthcare since my twins spent so much time in the NICU and I've been paying some huge ass bills and while I was there I saw some illegals getting the same treatment that I'll also be paying for thanks to taxes. I'm not saying you shouldn't get healthcare but I should own your ass if you're not paying for it.

*Edit* It's been 2 years since my kids left the NICU, I'm still working 2 jobs to cover that stay plus follow up shots, attention. And I have pretty decent health insurance.

This is where my feelings about it get conflicted.

For my entire life I'll have medical bills for about 500 dollars a month. I work really hard to pay them down, I'm responsible about working with billing at the doctor's and hospital, I pay an elevated rate on my insurance without whining about it (too much).

On one hand, I despise the exact thing you've pointed out-- seeing other people who just don't seem to give a damn, who engage in reckless and stupid behavior, who aren't even going to attempt to pay for themselves. Mostly because I've gone to great lengths to not be that way.

On the other hand, my insurance issues and medical bills are one of the biggest stressors in my life. I'm responsible and hard working and at the same time am trying to keep myself healthy (because if I'm not healthy, I'm not working and not able to contribute to anything) and it doesn't seem right to me that I'm spending hours each month on the phone with my insurance, arguing over what I'm being billed for and why they won't pay for most of it.. or when I'm denied coverage for treatments my doctors want to do and there's no way I'd be able to afford things on my own without SOME help from my insurance company.

I ultimately selected "right" in the poll above because that bottom feeling is not overshadowed by the top.. but I can definitely and easily understand where other people are coming from. It's a complicated issue to me but I guess I can't ignore my personal bias in it. I think there will always be people who abuse any system but I'm all for putting measures into place that cracks down on that.. my issue being that these leeches fuck it up for everyone else.

I also agree with people who have said that we need to work on our preventative care, badly. Better education in schools about nutrition and fitness, bonuses and incentives for people who practice a healthy lifestyle (i.e. insurance bonuses for people are already being offered at many places of work) and all of that.

[Jenisi]

Many countries that have pro-regulated systems give doctor's "bonuses" if they convince their regular patients to lead healthy lifestyles. This then dramatically decreases high-cost procedures.

[AnticorRifling]

I did vote to hastily, and I do understand what ParkBandit is saying. But I agree it's a privilege in a sense nothing is owed to us. But I believe it is a duty of the American people to take care of themselves and others. Now, granted MOST companies offer excellent healthcare plans but insurance isn't always the answer. When an actual crisis comes up, Insurance companies try to weasel out of any way to pay for services rendered.

Get a job? If you haven't noticed but healthcare rates are INSANE.

"It isn't just $5-a-pill aspirin. Daily room charges exceed $5,000 in some New Jersey hospitals. An appendectomy in California, including about two days in the hospital, has an average list charge of $18,000. Nationally, federal data show the median charge for treating a heart attack is more than $20,000.

...

When Karen Hamers' teenage daughter Michele needed knee surgery, Hamers called several hospitals near her home in Vero Beach, Fla., and asked how much the surgery would cost. At the time, her family did not have health insurance. After choosing a hospital, Hamers paid the surgeon and then also paid the hospital what it said the surgery would cost: $4,200.

"Six days after surgery, we receive a letter from the hospital asking for an additional $21,000," Hamers says. She asked for an explanation and got an itemized bill."

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/2004-04-13-rising-hospital-costs_x.htm

There is a HUGE issue with healthcare right now, we have a shitty plan. And I am completely for pro-regulation of the healthcare system.


Blame the free loaders, you're paying for them. Hence why it being a "right" should not be an option.

[Jenisi]

Blame the free loaders, you're paying for them. Hence why it being a "right" should not be an option.

Can't stop them with our current system.

[Daniel]

Yes generally industries where a large profit margin exist are where the best and brightest show up. I already stated in several posts I agree there is an endemic problem at the upper echelons of the health care industry with cost analysis being taken to the extreme but to think that making the industry non-profit would solve it is naive at best. The industry would just implode as skilled people walked across the steet to the private sector.


I think this is a silly reasoning. You don't need unfettered profit making ability to attract the best and the brightest. There are plenty of other ways to create incentives without creating this sort of hazard.

Also, not everyone is motivated by greed, and quite frankly I don't want a guy treating me who's only to make that cheddar. I want someone that actually gives a shit about my well being.

[g++]

There are plenty of other ways to create incentives without creating this sort of hazard.

Like? How many people here get payed in milk shakes and pats on the back?



Also, not everyone is motivated by greed, and quite frankly I don't want a guy treating me who's only to make that cheddar. I want someone that actually gives a shit about my well being.

Its not greed to expect to be paid a lot of money for doing a hard complicated job that took a decade or more to train for. Why would your cardiologist care about you in the absense of money. I mean does he get off work and walk down the street picking up homeless people and giving free medical advice after work? No because no one pays him to do that.

[CrystalTears]

Quite a few specialist doctors perform procedures for people with rare conditions in their field for research and development because they would like to see their field advance to help people at their own risk. So I wouldn't be so quick to assume that no doctors will go out of their way to help if it means not getting paid for it.

[g++]

Quite a few specialist doctors perform procedures for people with rare conditions in their field for research and development because they would like to see their field advance to help people at their own risk. So I wouldn't be so quick to assume that no doctors will go out of their way to help if it means not getting paid for it.


Salivating over the thought of being the first to discover a rare disease isnt the same as doing something out of the goodness of your heart.

Following this line of reasoning we should reform taxes in this thread while were at it we can start a new tax system where you can just pay as much as you want since obviously no one gives a shit about money except greedy people.

[Daniel]

I can agree with this somewhat. As long as you're not saying I have a responsibility to cover someone who isn't trying.

I think there is a fundamental disconnect between the two camps.

I'm not talking about giving anyone with a pulse free boob jobs.

There is a very large swath of American citizens who work hard, hold down a job and are productive members of society who do not have adequate health coverage. So, when shit hits the fan they are basically assed the fuck out.

Those are the people we should be working to help.

[AnticorRifling]

I'm not talking about giving anyone with a pulse free boob jobs.


Let's not get hasty.

[Daniel]

Like? How many people here get payed in milk shakes and pats on the back?



Its not greed to expect to be paid a lot of money for doing a hard complicated job that took a decade or more to train for. Why would your cardiologist care about you in the absense of money. I mean does he get off work and walk down the street picking up homeless people and giving free medical advice after work? No because no one pays him to do that.


There are more than a few people who do just that. To suggest they don't exist is highly ignorant. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be fair compensation for doing something that is hard to do. I'm saying that money should not take over for the care of individuals.

[Daniel]

Let's not get hasty.

I really don't want to see you with bigger boobs.

[AnticorRifling]

I really don't want to see you with bigger boobs.

So you're saying you like my boobs just how they are? Aww you big sweetie.

[Gan]

Holy hell, the end really is near. I completely agree with this line of thought with Daniel, and I double checked.. we ARE in a political thread.

12/12/12 is coming early....
:help: I am in agreement as well. (for the most part)
(OK, who hacked Daniel's account?)



I can agree with this somewhat. As long as you're not saying I have a responsibility to cover someone who isn't trying.
:yes:


There are always going to be people in our country we have the moral obligation to help... the permanently disabled, the temporarily disabled, children and the elderly. If you aren't on that list... get a fucking job.
:yes:

Let's not get hasty.
LOL

[g++]

There are more than a few people who do just that. To suggest they don't exist is highly ignorant. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be fair compensation for doing something that is hard to do. I'm saying that money should not take over for the care of individuals.

Tell ya what well both inject ourselves with insulin and cause heart attacks Im going to a hospital and paying, you rely on the kindness of strangers and well see who dies first. To suggest doctors would continue working in a non-profit industry is ludicrous and to suggest profitability does not effect the quality of an industry is border line insane.

[AnticorRifling]

Just make sure you're using the insulin that my company produces, I need to get paid.

[DeV]

Emergency health care is already a right. I guess we can thank life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for "that one".

Good health breeds life therefore my belief system lies somewhere between responsibility and priviledge. Responsible capitalism (I'm dreaming, I know) and the priviledge of responsible citizens taking advantage of and doing everything possible to obtain and sustain health insurance for themselves and their family.

My personal belief is that every person deserves care for actual medical emergencies, but you cannot discount the number of people who actively abuse the system with non-life-threatening problems. Receiving free healthcare for non-life-threatening problems is a drain, not only on the government, but on responsible citizens who are already doing their part by having health insurance and regularly ascribing to preventive care measures.

[CrystalTears]

Salivating over the thought of being the first to discover a rare disease isnt the same as doing something out of the goodness of your heart.

Following this line of reasoning we should reform taxes in this thread while were at it we can start a new tax system where you can just pay as much as you want since obviously no one gives a shit about money except greedy people.
I'm not saying doctors would work for free on general principle. I just didn't agree with your assertion that doctors wouldn't do any kind of work for free because they're all greedy.

And I didn't mean discovering a rare disease. I was speaking more about those who perform free reconstructive surgery for someone with a rare deformity of their face or removing extra limbs (I watch way too much Discovery Channel). Maybe they are getting compensation of some kind, but I've seen how it was free for the patient.

[g++]

I'm not saying doctors would work for free on general principle. I just didn't agree with your assertion that doctors wouldn't do any kind of work for free because they're all greedy.

I did not say they are all greedy. I said the industry would fall apart if it was non-profit.

[Audriana]

I haven't read this whole thread yet, but there's some points I'd like to make.


For all those people who voted for it being a right.. do you even know what that means?

If healthcare is a RIGHT, why would you give someone healthcare before the necessities of life itself.. namely food and shelter. If healthcare is a right, then clearly you would agree that food and shelter should obviously come first. Should we now feed everyone and provide everyone shelter? And if you believe we should.. then obviously you also believe we should cloth everyone as well... because if healthcare is a a RIGHT, then obviously clothing is as well. And what about transportation? Getting from one place to another is clearly a RIGHT if healthcare is. And let's not forget employment. Should we also employ everyone or make sure everyone has an income? And let's be honest.. you can't have shelter without utilities. Water, sewer, electricity, phone.. those should also be RIGHTS as well, no?

It's real easy to classify things as Rights.. until you actually think about them and the way you would provide those rights.At one time I thought you were an asshole who may have some decent ideas and thoughts that just happened to be opposite of my ideas and thoughts. Somebody who, between the insults and moronic one liners, might actually have some decent input about the world, and somebody worth reading for input even if I don't agree with it. Now I know that you are just a complete idiot. I've gone back and forth on just setting you up on ignore for a while, and this easily tipped the scales. I'm not going to comment directly on your ideas here due to how completely asinine they are.


Nobody should profit on whether somebody lives or dies. When you boil it down, life is the only thing we get on this planet. Just a few years to run around eating and fucking, hopefully doing something to better the world in the mean time. Nobody's time should be cut short because they aren't fortunate enough to have the money to see a doctor. Nobody's daily lives should be compromised because they can barely afford to feed themselves.

What all you are saying when you select that Healthcare is a privilege or responsibility is that rich people have more of a right to a healthy, long life than poor people. You're saying that because Paris Hilton had the good graces to be born to a rich family, she has more of a right to life than somebody that is born to a poor family with severely life-limiting and life-altering ailments.

Health insurance is bullshit. The Healthcare industry is broken. It needs a complete overhaul at least and complete governmental control at most.

[AnticorRifling]

I like the ideas you presented as argument to fix the broken system, the insight you provided as possible corrections for the bullshit where also informative....wait whut

[g++]

I haven't read this whole thread yet, but there's some points I'd like to make.

At one time I thought you were an asshole who may have some decent ideas and thoughts that just happened to be opposite of my ideas and thoughts. Somebody who, between the insults and moronic one liners, might actually have some decent input about the world, and somebody worth reading for input even if I don't agree with it. Now I know that you are just a complete idiot. I've gone back and forth on just setting you up on ignore for a while, and this easily tipped the scales. I'm not going to comment directly on your ideas here due to how completely asinine they are.

**********************ALERT***********************
SARCASM AHEAD!!!!!!!
**********************ALERT***********************


Ya PB I used to think you were cool :fu:

[Daniel]

Tell ya what well both inject ourselves with insulin and cause heart attacks Im going to a hospital and paying, you rely on the kindness of strangers and well see who dies first. To suggest doctors would continue working in a non-profit industry is ludicrous and to suggest profitability does not effect the quality of an industry is border line insane.

There's a whole slew of difference between a "non profit" industry and the fuck you in the ass "I'm rich bitch!" industry that we have now.

[g++]

There's a whole slew of difference between a "non profit" industry and the fuck you in the ass "I'm rich bitch!" industry that we have now.

Right but this whole discourse between us started on a quote you took from my response to a post that said "No one should profit on who lives and dies". So everything I have been saying is generally along the line of medicine being non-profit vs medicine being a for profit enterprise. I have said several times now and even pointed out I have said it once that I frigging agree alot of the more repugnant forms of cost analysis should be legislated against, Im just saying the industry needs to be profitable or it will be worse for everyone involved.

[Parkbandit]

I haven't read this whole thread yet, but there's some points I'd like to make.

At one time I thought you were an asshole who may have some decent ideas and thoughts that just happened to be opposite of my ideas and thoughts. Somebody who, between the insults and moronic one liners, might actually have some decent input about the world, and somebody worth reading for input even if I don't agree with it. Now I know that you are just a complete idiot. I've gone back and forth on just setting you up on ignore for a while, and this easily tipped the scales. I'm not going to comment directly on your ideas here due to how completely asinine they are.

Mush Head,

You calling ANYONE on this message board an idiot is a joke. Seriously. Let's go through your post of stupidity..

And let's be honest.. you aren't going to comment directly on my ideas because you probably didn't understand them.



Nobody should profit on whether somebody lives or dies. When you boil it down, life is the only thing we get on this planet. Just a few years to run around eating and fucking, hopefully doing something to better the world in the mean time. Nobody's time should be cut short because they aren't fortunate enough to have the money to see a doctor. Nobody's daily lives should be compromised because they can barely afford to feed themselves.

You live in a fantasy world, Mush Head. Plain and Simple. I would love to live in a world where everything is provided to us as a "right" and we don't have to do a single thing except accept it. Unfortunately, that's not reality.



What all you are saying when you select that Healthcare is a privilege or responsibility is that rich people have more of a right to a healthy, long life than poor people. You're saying that because Paris Hilton had the good graces to be born to a rich family, she has more of a right to life than somebody that is born to a poor family with severely life-limiting and life-altering ailments.

Untrue. I can have great health insurance for about $150 a month. It doesn't matter if you make $20,000 a year or $200,000 a year or $2,000,000 a year. It's all about choices you make. Think health insurance is less important to you than a cell phone or cable TV? Great. THAT IS YOUR CHOICE, but don't bitch and moan that you don't have health insurance when you are driving around in your Escalade and talking on your new iPhone.



Health insurance is bullshit. The Healthcare industry is broken. It needs a complete overhaul at least and complete governmental control at most.

I agree it does need overhaul... but name ONE thing that government controls that isn't chock full of excessive spending and blatant abuse. Name one.

I'll await your next stupid post.

[Mtenda]

My opinion is with our current technologies, health care should be a right.
Ultimately, health insurance should be done away with altogether and their should be a new tax for health care. OMGOHNOEZ TAXES!!!! SOCIALISM!!!!
Of course it will have to be a gruadual process to make it work, insure quality of health care, and to make sure we have health care along the way. Saying doing that gives the government the power to socialize everything is flat out rediculous. You have the right to vote, don't let that happen. If regulated properly, with proper checks and balances, we won't have to worry about a decline in the quality of health care or corruption. Will there be some bumps in the road? Of course their will. Will their be some bad seeds who try to fuck it up for everyone? Of course. But that is no reason to fear trying it. What have we got to lose at this point? If you take out the inflated insurance prices and inflated prescription prices, then their will be plenty of money and incentive to go around. Doctors can continue to make "good money". Although with malpractice suits and insurance requirements nowadays are they? Maybe we can regulate that too with a more socialist approach to health care. OMGOHNOEZ SOCIALISM!!!! Get over it.

Saying you don't want to pay for obese people or something like that is extremely narrow minded. That is a seperate issue altogether and remember that we probably all have our own vises when it comes to health. Even the "most healthy" people you know are probably doing something that is not ideal and what is ideal is changing all the time anyways. At any rate, obesity and smoking are more issues of parenting and discipline then healthcare. Maybe we can provide incentives for those that can prove they are leading healthy lives? I dunno, there are many details that need to be worked out, but still, take away inflated insurance and precscription costs and there would be plenty of money to go around. We could afford to send every citizen colorful baloons and puppies to eat every month along with quality nationwide healthcare with what we are getting raped for now. I'm going out of town for a couple of days so I won't be able to defend my position. So now is the time for all of you to come back with some constructive ideas like how much of a idiot, moron, or retarded liberal I am.

[Parkbandit]

Ya PB I used to think you were cool :fu:


Wow, I'm hurt. Really.

You simply don't get that I don't give two shits what you or anyone else here thinks.. do you. Unlike many posters here, I don't need this forum to feel better about myself or try to be the most popular or gain the most attention because it's lacking in my life. I come here out of boredom and for entertainment. Nothing more.

Don't like my response? Give me negative feedback. THAT will show me.

[Gan]

I haven't read this whole thread yet, but there's some points I'd like to make.

At one time I thought you were an asshole who may have some decent ideas and thoughts that just happened to be opposite of my ideas and thoughts. Somebody who, between the insults and moronic one liners, might actually have some decent input about the world, and somebody worth reading for input even if I don't agree with it. Now I know that you are just a complete idiot. I've gone back and forth on just setting you up on ignore for a while, and this easily tipped the scales. I'm not going to comment directly on your ideas here due to how completely asinine they are.
We'll be sure to quote his posts in response so you can see them. ;)



Nobody should profit on whether somebody lives or dies. When you boil it down, life is the only thing we get on this planet. Just a few years to run around eating and fucking, hopefully doing something to better the world in the mean time. Nobody's time should be cut short because they aren't fortunate enough to have the money to see a doctor. Nobody's daily lives should be compromised because they can barely afford to feed themselves.
So what system do you recommend? How do you intend to staff it, manage it, and of course fund it? Please dont use the Roddenberry Star Trek model either.


What all you are saying when you select that Healthcare is a privilege or responsibility is that rich people have more of a right to a healthy, long life than poor people. You're saying that because Paris Hilton had the good graces to be born to a rich family, she has more of a right to life than somebody that is born to a poor family with severely life-limiting and life-altering ailments.
Thats not what we're saying at all. Go back and reread the thread. Then think about the levels of healthcare that are being discussed here and whats already provided, whats considered necessary and or elective, and how said care can be obtained. Then I direct you back to the question above.


Health insurance is bullshit. The Healthcare industry is broken. It needs a complete overhaul at least and complete governmental control at most.
All insurance is bullshit when you get down to it. Its gambling on odds of you getting sick vs. you staying healthy. Whats even worse is that insurance companies are allowed to restrict participant pool size which not only reduces efficiency in selection of primary care providers and facilities but also creates huge inefficiencies in premiums based on restricted participant pool size. Bottom line, the more people in a pool, the cheaper the premiums will be in most cases. Factors that can affect that are participant pool demographics (age, gender, etc.).

One of the things I liked from McCain's plan was to force insurance providers to remove regional restrictions on coverage (meaning forcing insurance companies to open up larger participant pools). I dont know if he's still considering that option. If he's not then he's lost my support for his plan.

[Parkbandit]

So now is the time for all of you to come back with some constructive ideas like how much of a idiot, moron, or retarded liberal I am.

I don't think I could do as good of a job pointing this out as you just did.

[g++]

Wow, I'm hurt. Really.

You simply don't get that I don't give two shits what you or anyone else here thinks.. do you. Unlike many posters here, I don't need this forum to feel better about myself or try to be the most popular or gain the most attention because it's lacking in my life. I come here out of boredom and for entertainment. Nothing more.

Don't like my response? Give me negative feedback. THAT will show me.

Next time I guess ill put it in italics....its come to this...christ.

[Clove]

There are many cases where the only thing keeping the prices high for a particular drug are not actually the cost of making (or even researching) the drug, but simply that they have a patent/monpoly on making it for so many years.I think it's popular to underestimate the cost of drug research, but those opinions rarely come with any cost analysis.

[Mtenda]

I don't think I could do as good of a job pointing this out as you just did.

Funny. After reading your previous posts, I added that last sentence with you in mind.

[Parkbandit]

Next time I guess ill put it in italics....its come to this...christ.


I wish I could take back the negative feedback I just gave you then.

[Clove]

I believe the focus should be making healthcare more affordable, not buying healthcare for everyone out of the public coffers. We're already paying 4k per capita for healthcare in this country- we're just not getting enough service in return.

This has more to do with effective health insurance monopolies, laws that favor insurance agencies over their insured, and poorly designed incentives for businesses and individuals.

I think we can make healthcare affordable enough.

[Mtenda]

I believe the focus should be making healthcare more affordable, not buying healthcare for everyone out of the public coffers. We're already paying 4k per capita for healthcare in this country- we're just not getting enough service in return.

This has more to do with effective health insurance monopolies, laws that favor insurance agencies over their insured, and poorly designed incentives for businesses and individuals.

I think we can make healthcare affordable enough.

If it can be done, I'm all for it. Either way though, drastic changes need to be made and people in power that are invested in the current system will have to be taken on. A good plan is not even half the battle. Telling the people who are already getting obscenely rich that we are going to put a stop to it is the hard part. They have a bunch of money, they aren't gonna make it easy.

[Parkbandit]

Telling the people who are already getting obscenely rich that we are going to put a stop to it is the hard part. They have a bunch of money, they aren't gonna make it easy.

YEA, IT'S NOT FAIR!!!

Sounds like class envy to me...

[Mtenda]

Yeah except, I'm rich. Thanks for assuming though.

[Mtenda]

YEA, IT'S NOT FAIR!!!

Sounds like class envy to me...

I can associate with the pain of middle class citizens though because I grew up in a lower middle class family. When I go to get my prescriptions filled and see the cost, I can't help but think about a time when I could not have afforded it and how lucky I am to be where I am now.

[Gan]

If it can be done, I'm all for it. Either way though, drastic changes need to be made and people in power that are invested in the current system will have to be taken on. A good plan is not even half the battle. Telling the people who are already getting obscenely rich that we are going to put a stop to it is the hard part. They have a bunch of money, they aren't gonna make it easy.

http://cdn.overstock.com/images/products/muze/books/9781403729583.jpg

[AnticorRifling]

I loved that movie.

[Audriana]

So what system do you recommend? How do you intend to staff it, manage it, and of course fund it? Please dont use the Roddenberry Star Trek model either.I never said I had a solution. I stated that health insurance in this country is a joke. It's going to take far smarter people than I to come up with a system that is powerful enough, works properly, is unbias, fair and balanced.
Thats not what we're saying at all. Go back and reread the thread. Then think about the levels of healthcare that are being discussed here and whats already provided, whats considered necessary and or elective, and how said care can be obtained. Then I direct you back to the question above.But that is what you're saying. Rich people can afford very good healthcare, thus they can live longer. Why should the rich get better care than anybody else? There's a huge difference between selecting the right candidate to receive a liver based on previous health conditions, overall problems, quality of life concerns etc, and less forunate people dying every day because they simply can't afford to see a doctor.
All insurance is bullshit when you get down to it. Its gambling on odds of you getting sick vs. you staying healthy. Whats even worse is that insurance companies are allowed to restrict participant pool size which not only reduces efficiency in selection of primary care providers and facilities but also creates huge inefficiencies in premiums based on restricted participant pool size. Bottom line, the more people in a pool, the cheaper the premiums will be in most cases. Factors that can affect that are participant pool demographics (age, gender, etc.).This is assuming that you're not sick to begin with. I understand the gambling reference to other insurance, you're saying 'hey, I bet I'm not going to die'. But health insurance may be like that for healthy people, but for people that are already sick it isn't.
One of the things I liked from McCain's plan was to force insurance providers to remove regional restrictions on coverage (meaning forcing insurance companies to open up larger participant pools). I dont know if he's still considering that option. If he's not then he's lost my support for his plan.I hate to say it, but Obama made sense on the retort to that plan. Every company is just going to move to the state with the least leglislation for coverage, just like the banks do now. You'll end up with fewer options and worse insurance than before.

[DeV]

I believe the focus should be making healthcare more affordable, not buying healthcare for everyone out of the public coffers.I agree with this. It's along the lines of my "responsible capitalism" quip.

[Parkbandit]

I can associate with the pain of middle class citizens though because I grew up in a lower middle class family. When I go to get my prescriptions filled and see the cost, I can't help but think about a time when I could not have afforded it and how lucky I am to be where I am now.

I grew up in a family of 8 of a lower middle class family in upstate NY... so please don't assume you are the only one here who can relate.

[Parkbandit]

It's going to take far smarter people than I to come up with a system that is powerful enough

:rofl:

Thanks Captain Obvious. I would assume, unless we put chimps in charge, the bar would be set far higher than that.

[Solkern]

healthcare is far from a right.
Privilege, yes. Your own responsiablity? damn straight

[Mtenda]

I grew up in a family of 8 of a lower middle class family in upstate NY... so please don't assume you are the only one here who can relate.

Your comprehension is flawless. I never assumed anything. I was simply countering your assumption of me having class envy by pointing out that I am wealthy. I have not always been and therefore I can relate. How you got that I thought I was the only one that could relate is beyond me. Again, thanks for assuming.

[Parkbandit]

Your comprehension is flawless. I never assumed anything. I was simply countering your assumption of me having class envy by pointing out that I am wealthy. I have not always been and therefore I can relate. How you got that I thought I was the only one that could relate is beyond me. Again, thanks for assuming.


Here was your post:


I can associate with the pain of middle class citizens though because I grew up in a lower middle class family. When I go to get my prescriptions filled and see the cost, I can't help but think about a time when I could not have afforded it and how lucky I am to be where I am now.

Notice the key word "Though" in there? That means you are the exception.. not the rule... like you are somehow special in your association.

If you want to be understood, perhaps you should try communicating more effectively.

[Gan]

I never said I had a solution. I stated that health insurance in this country is a joke. It's going to take far smarter people than I to come up with a system that is powerful enough, works properly, is unbias, fair and balanced.
Your sense of whats 'proper' should lend to you having a solution in mind. Otherwise how will you ever convey what's proper in a way that appears workable or even possible. Thats like saying "Man should be able to fly" in support of a complaint to having to walk everywhere. Considerations have to be made on costs no matter what type of society you live in. There's no such thing as free lunch in a barter economy. And every society on Earth has its roots in the barter system. Considerations also have to be made for population size (for care estimates as well as revenue estimates if you're considering supporting said costs with taxes). Free healthcare will not just fall out of the sky for everyone who needs it. We live in a world of finite resources.


But that is what you're saying. Rich people can afford very good healthcare, thus they can live longer. Why should the rich get better care than anybody else? There's a huge difference between selecting the right candidate to receive a liver based on previous health conditions, overall problems, quality of life concerns etc, and less forunate people dying every day because they simply can't afford to see a doctor. Incorrect. Now you're moving beyond healthcare to a quality indicator of the type of healthcare received. Huge difference. Thats like begging for food and complaining because its not steak and caviar. There's a level of reasonable and realistic expectation when you're talking about provisioning billions of people with healthcare or any service.


This is assuming that you're not sick to begin with. I understand the gambling reference to other insurance, you're saying 'hey, I bet I'm not going to die'. But health insurance may be like that for healthy people, but for people that are already sick it isn't. Pandora's box of pre-existing conditions. Life deals everyone a different hand with regards to health. And the lifestyles people live can compound the negative or positive of that hand exponentially. Where would you draw the line on treatement of a terminal pre-existing condition if it were being supported by society? Does a person have a right to use society's resources at a level that would care for 1,000 other people less sick? What if a number of those less sick people died as a result of the lack of care due to the resources being directed to the terminally ill patient? Who qualifies to make that decision? If resources were not finite then I would be in agreement with you. But resources (land, labor, capital, etc.) are finite in availability.


I hate to say it, but Obama made sense on the retort to that plan. Every company is just going to move to the state with the least leglislation for coverage, just like the banks do now. You'll end up with fewer options and worse insurance than before. If thats the case then god forbid we need some baseline regulation governing how these entities structure their business. Or we need regulation to eliminate the barrier to entry into this market so competetors can enter in and make the product being offered (health insurance in this case) more available and by nature of competition cheaper.

[Mtenda]

Here was your post:



Notice the key word "Though" in there? That means you are the exception.. not the rule... like you are somehow special in your association.

If you want to be understood, perhaps you should try communicating more effectively.

That's a far stretch to try and make me look insconsiderate and discredit me for calling you on your bullshit. But if it helps you sleep at night, whatever. Lessons on communication? I hope you don't think you are swaying any opinions with your approach to communication. I'm going to go ahead and make my FIRST assumption in this thread by assuming that people that share your views wish you would STFU.

[g++]

That's a far stretch to try and make me look insconsiderate and discredit me for calling you on your bullshit. But if it helps you sleep at night, whatever. Lessons on communication? I hope you don't think you are swaying any opinions with your approach to communication. I'm going to go ahead and make my FIRST assumption in this thread by assuming that people that share your views wish you would STFU.

How I picture PB

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/old_grizzled_third_party

[Clove]

I agree with this. It's along the lines of my "responsible capitalism" quip.That's because you're rational, compassionate and sexy. Oh and I still think I can hook you up with CT... but you have to let me play too!

[CrystalTears]

That's because you're rational, compassionate and sexy. Oh and I still think I can hook you up with CT... but you have to let me play too!
For a second there I was going to yell at you, then realized this is DeV we're talking about. Win/win I guess. :D

[Clove]

For a second there I was going to yell at you, then realized this is DeV we're talking about. Win/win I guess. :DInorite? I don't see a downside for anyone here...

[Gan]

Video or it never happened.

[Parkbandit]

That's a far stretch to try and make me look insconsiderate and discredit me for calling you on your bullshit. But if it helps you sleep at night, whatever. Lessons on communication? I hope you don't think you are swaying any opinions with your approach to communication. I'm going to go ahead and make my FIRST assumption in this thread by assuming that people that share your views wish you would STFU.

Perhaps you can explain why you chose to put that word in there.. since the traditional usage would be to set yourself apart from most people. Had you left the word "though" out, then boom, you would have a point.

[DeV]

Perhaps you can explain why you chose to put that word in there.. since the traditional usage would be to set yourself apart from most people. Had you left the word "though" out, then boom, you would have a point.

Yeah except, I'm rich. Thanks for assuming though.

Just an outside observation.

[DeV]

Inorite? I don't see a downside for anyone here...
I refuse to make this thread naughty with you. Instead, I'll agree with you because you were so very right. :heart:

[Mtenda]

Perhaps you can explain why you chose to put that word in there.. since the traditional usage would be to set yourself apart from most people. Had you left the word "though" out, then boom, you would have a point.

The "though" was in reference to the post I made immediately before that. BOOOOOOOOOOOM!

I'm wealthy....though....I can associate with the pain of the middle class............how am I saying that wrong?

[Ravenstorm]

There's a very practical reason to make sure every single American is provided with health care.

Simply put, a healthy population is a productive population. If you're sick, you're not working to capacity or even working at all depending on what's wrong. Access to health care means access to preventative treatment before things get out of hand. It's much cheaper to treat an early case of bronchitis than a case of pneumonia. The person will also be out of work for less time.

The more they're able to work, the more money they make. The more money they make, the more they spend. The more they spend, the more taxes they pay. Universal health care = better economy.

[crb]

Emergency care is a right.

Preventative care is a responsibility.

"Cadillac" insurance policies are a priviledge.

[Gan]

There's a very practical reason to make sure every single American is provided with health care.

Simply put, a healthy population is a productive population. If you're sick, you're not working to capacity or even working at all depending on what's wrong. Access to health care means access to preventative treatment before things get out of hand. It's much cheaper to treat an early case of bronchitis than a case of pneumonia. The person will also be out of work for less time.

The more they're able to work, the more money they make. The more money they make, the more they spend. The more they spend, the more taxes they pay. Universal health care = better economy.

This scenario falls apart in a welfare state.

*I like the way you think though. :)

[crb]

I believe the focus should be making healthcare more affordable, not buying healthcare for everyone out of the public coffers. We're already paying 4k per capita for healthcare in this country- we're just not getting enough service in return.

This has more to do with effective health insurance monopolies, laws that favor insurance agencies over their insured, and poorly designed incentives for businesses and individuals.

I think we can make healthcare affordable enough.
And get rid of Mandates, I wanted to kick Obama in the head during the debate.

He was all like "We gotta cut costs, and we'll do that by having mandates.."

Moron.

So a special interest goes to Washington and says "Hey Obama, we're the accupuncturist association, and we think our practice is important. You should mandate that all people have accupuncture coverage in their insurance." (well, that is hypothetical, currently most such lobbying is done at state level).

So they mandate it, and then insurance rates go up to pay for it, anyone shocked?

http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results.html?artId=23576

Then Obama also railed against McCain's plan to allow people to buy across State lines just to protect these special interest mandates.

Seriously, that douche is such a hypocrite. All "I'm against special interests" then he defends things like this.

Of course... he says "We need to make sure your coverage covers important things like emergency care." scaring people into wanting mandates, but that isn't the issue. The issue is mandates for services most people would rather not have to pay for.

You can pass all the laws you want requiring insurance companies to use BIG BOLD print spelling out the benefits. You can run public education campaigns informing people what they should look for in good coverage (in addition to all the talk shows and magazines and other private groups doing it) but the government should not be mandating that everyone have a cadillac. It just isn't necessary and it causes people to go without insurance.

[Parkbandit]

The "though" was in reference to the post I made immediately before that. BOOOOOOOOOOOM!

I'm wealthy....though....I can associate with the pain of the middle class............how am I saying that wrong?

Oh.. so you have trouble quoting the posts you are responding to. If you are quoting a post from me, I'll assume you are responding to my post and not one of yours from another time.

Again.. if you wish to be understood, the onus is on you to communicate in an effective manner.. something you obviously failed to do in this case.

[thefarmer]

The scope of a free clinic and a full service acute care hospital are so far off the map from each other its like comparing apples to cargo vans.

Free clinics have their usefulness and their presence is valued by those who utilize their services. And acute care ED's see the benefit of their existence by not having to treat non-emergent walk-ins that would otherwise been seen by free clinic facilities. Which directly impacts hospital wait times, ED volumes and hospital costs for treating indigent cases.

Please do more research on how non-emergent and indigent ED volumes affect your local hospital and how that in turn impacts the community around you before you quip off your slight against free clinics.

I really don't need to do any research. My mother is a retired nurse who worked in several hospitals in my hometown. She also did plenty of voluenteer work in free clinics. My father worked in a hospital too, changed professions, and now is back in the medical field after he retired.

Mabus brought up his "Health Centers" (or whatever they were called, I can't scroll back that far) and I pointed out that there already are things in place like what he originally brought up.

Yes, they provide a service, but as a majority of them are right now (underfunded and understaffed) that service is akin to seeing the school nurse versus going to a doctor's office. The concept would need a complete overhaul (and most likely gov oversight) if it were to work as he envisioned. If you see that as a "slight" against them, so be it.

[Parkbandit]

I really don't need to do any research. My mother is a retired nurse who worked in several hospitals in my hometown. She also did plenty of voluenteer work in free clinics. My father worked in a hospital too, changed professions, and now is back in the medical field after he retired.

Mabus brought up his "Health Centers" (or whatever they were called, I can't scroll back that far) and I pointed out that there already are things in place like what he originally brought up.

Yes, they provide a service, but as a majority of them are right now (underfunded and understaffed) that service is akin to seeing the school nurse versus going to a doctor's office. The concept would need a complete overhaul (and most likely gov oversight) if it were to work as he envisioned. If you see that as a "slight" against them, so be it.

I'm pretty sure you need to do more research.. regardless of what your Mommy does. There is a world of difference between a clinic and a school nurse. I used to go to a clinic back in the day of my college years without healthcare and while the lines were long and the people who you were forced to sit next to had strange odors emanating from them.. the type of care is far closer to what you get from a doctors office than a school nurse. School nurses can't even hand out things like aspirin.

[thefarmer]

I believe healthcare is a responsibility. I believe that everyone should do everything within their power to obtain it, but that the government should be willing and capable to fill that gap if neccessary.



I believe the focus should be making healthcare more affordable, not buying healthcare for everyone out of the public coffers. We're already paying 4k per capita for healthcare in this country- we're just not getting enough service in return.

This has more to do with effective health insurance monopolies, laws that favor insurance agencies over their insured, and poorly designed incentives for businesses and individuals.

I think we can make healthcare affordable enough.

The combination of those two sums up my view.

[thefarmer]

I'm pretty sure you need to do more research.. regardless of what your Mommy does. There is a world of difference between a clinic and a school nurse. I used to go to a clinic back in the day of my college years without healthcare and while the lines were long and the people who you were forced to sit next to had strange odors emanating from them.. the type of care is far closer to what you get from a doctors office than a school nurse. School nurses can't even hand out things like aspirin.

A free clinic from 100 years ago doesn't compare to the free clinics of the past 20 years...

Joking aside, You're seriously saying a free clinic is comparable in service to a full-fledged hospital?

[AnticorRifling]

When PB was in college leeching was still the approved cure all.

[Parkbandit]

A free clinic from 100 years ago doesn't compare to the free clinics of the past 20 years...

You son of a...



Joking aside, You're seriously saying a free clinic is comparable in service to a full-fledged hospital?

I'm saying that the care you receive in a clinic is closer to a doctors office than a school nurses office.

[DeV]

School nurses can give out medication with written permission from a parent/guardian. They can give out prescription medication with written permission from the kid's Physician and the parent/guardian.

[g++]

School nurses can give out medication with written permission from a parent/guardian. They can give out prescription medication with written permission from the kid's Physician and the parent/guardian.

So can a Pez dispenser.

[Clove]

School nurses can give out medication with written permission from a parent/guardian. They can give out prescription medication with written permission from the kid's Physician and the parent/guardian.


So can a Pez dispenser.Win.

[Gan]

I"m going to use Texas because thats where my experience lies. (My wife is an ICU RN as well as almost complete with her ACNP degree/license).

School nurses in Texas are RN's. Same RN as one that works in a doctor's office and one that works on the general floor of a hospital.

I'm leaving off ICU/Trauma RN's because the scope of their responsibility is completely different than clinic RN's.

Free clinics are there to alleviate hospitals from indigent non-emergent medical populations (sans insurance) from walking into local hospital ED's and using up resources in the ED that are better suited to treat emergent patients (stroke, heart attack, trauma, etc.). True emergency cases (life and death). This is the scope as it is seen in a large metropolitan area.

Thats not to say its different in rural areas - because its been a long time since I've had to survey a rural facility that was not a regional medical center with its own trauma center.

Any claim of 'quality' as a basis of comparison between acute care hospitals and free clincs, again, is not an apples to apples comparison. Any comparison using quality in any degree is purely subjective because quality is utility in nature and measured differently by each patient/family member/etc.

[Gan]

So can a Pez dispenser.

Pez dispensers are better because you can take more than directed by your physician or nurse (school).

Of course, with regards to medicine - that might not be the best scenario.

The nurse at my son's school currently is a Nurse Practicioner (FNP).

Huge jump from back in the day when we could go to the principal's office and get a pack of tylenol and sit on the couch for a bit until the headache went away.

And dont get me started on what you can get from the trainers at the field house in athletics. Thats where being a jock had its benefits in high school.

[AnticorRifling]

And dont get me started on what you can get from the trainers at the field house in athletics. Thats where being a jock had its benefits in high school.

You talking about the crabs and the bumpy carrot?

[Gan]

You talking about the crabs and the bumpy carrot?

Well, they definately helped with bumpy carrots and the little dribbler.

Trainers were also a great source for pain pills. Copious amounts of pain pills.

[DeV]

So can a Pez dispenser.True. Dealers, too.

[thefarmer]

I"m going to use Texas because thats where my experience lies. (My wife is an ICU RN as well as almost complete with her ACNP degree/license).

School nurses in Texas are RN's. Same RN as one that works in a doctor's office and one that works on the general floor of a hospital.

I'm leaving off ICU/Trauma RN's because the scope of their responsibility is completely different than clinic RN's.

Free clinics are there to alleviate hospitals from indigent non-emergent medical populations (sans insurance) from walking into local hospital ED's and using up resources in the ED that are better suited to treat emergent patients (stroke, heart attack, trauma, etc.). True emergency cases (life and death). This is the scope as it is seen in a large metropolitan area.

Thats not to say its different in rural areas - because its been a long time since I've had to survey a rural facility that was not a regional medical center with its own trauma center.

Any claim of 'quality' as a basis of comparison between acute care hospitals and free clincs, again, is not an apples to apples comparison. Any comparison using quality in any degree is purely subjective because quality is utility in nature and measured differently by each patient/family member/etc.


Maybe I should rephrase.

Free clinics, as they are now, can only offer a limited amount of help(, both by design and underfunding/staffing,) which is why I used the school nurse example.

Do they do good work? Sure. But I wouldn't want to go there by choice. I'd prefer, like I imagine most people would, to go to a hospital instead of a clinic. Which is why I said they didn't work in reply to Mabus' suggestion about a similiar program.

Also, oddly enough, my parents met each other when they both started off working in the same hospital in Houston, though I forget which one.

[BriarFox]

I'm rather amused to see that all the McCainites and I agree that it's a responsibility. Despite my support for Obama, I cannot see health care as anything but a responsibility - as an ethical obligation from one human to another. It is not one's "right," if we define "right" as an inherent property of the human condition, to have others take care of you. Nor is it a "privilege" to have health care, if we define a privilege as an exclusive property of being either human or an American citizen. If it were, then everyone would have it already. Thus, it can only be a responsibility, which implies reciprocity, of course.

[Mtenda]

I'm rather amused to see that all the McCainites and I agree that it's a responsibility. Despite my support for Obama, I cannot see health care as anything but a responsibility - as an ethical obligation from one human to another. It is not one's "right," if we define "right" as an inherent property of the human condition, to have others take care of you. Nor is it a "privilege" to have health care, if we define a privilege as an exclusive property of being either human or an American citizen. If it were, then everyone would have it already. Thus, it can only be a responsibility, which implies reciprocity, of course.

I agree with you somewhat but isn't it our "right" as tax paying American citizens to have lawmakers that look out for our best interests? Or does the "responsiblity" fall completely on voters?

[Gan]

Free clinics, as they are now, can only offer a limited amount of help(, both by design and underfunding/staffing,) which is why I used the school nurse example.
Scope of services. Free clinics are by design free doctor's clinics. There are also free emergent care clinics that can handle minor traumas (broken bones, etc.) However, they are not and should never be confused with the ability to offer a range of services similar to a hospital. And realistically so, there are not enough resources to operate a full service hospital every other block in a large city.


Do they do good work? Sure. But I wouldn't want to go there by choice. I'd prefer, like I imagine most people would, to go to a hospital instead of a clinic. Which is why I said they didn't work in reply to Mabus' suggestion about a similiar program.
They key there is choice. If its a life or death situation - you have every right to seek medical attention at a full service hospital ED. They can not turn you way by law (EMTALA). Furthermore, if you're indigent then you can go to a county facility and present your Gold card and you can be seen for treatment for non-emergent issues as well. For those saying that care is not available under the current system, they are incorrect. It is there. It just may not be a matter of choice. When people start saying that only the rich can afford healthcare (blanket statement) then they are just iterating populist class based rhetoric.

The smart choice would be to seek healthcare where its available instead of trying to seek it where its not or choosing not to seek any at all.

Would I rather drive a BMW? Sure, but I choose to drive what I can afford (Ford).

[Solkern]

I found this great articile on health care and "rights"

It's a VERY interesting read, I suggest you take the time out and read it

http://www.afcm.org/hcinar.html