Health Care Reform in the U.S.

This is a serious political issue that I have been interested in a lot as of lately. I want to get your guys' opinions on this topic.

Are you guys for or against publicly funded health care, and why...

Against.

Government ruins everything it touches. (Social Security, medicare, stimulus bill) Whatever estimate the government gives you on how much something will cost add a x5 onto it at least. Medicare was estimated to cost $12 billion in the 1960, including inflation, it actually would cost $111 billion.


We already have a huge deficit. Obama estimates 9 trillion by the end of his term, take a look at some graphs of the deficit. They have to raise taxes to compensate but expect a special name for it (cap and trade).

No matter what industry, the centralization of power to the government saps our liberty and freedom. Remember this is 1/6 of the economy.

Lastly when president Obama was asked if his kids would be enrolled in this he answered, "I would get the best care for my family". Is that a no? I think so.

Deonesis wrote:

Against.

Government ruins everything it touches. (Social Security, medicare, stimulus bill) Whatever estimate the government gives you on how much something will cost add a x5 onto it at least. Medicare was estimated to cost $12 billion in the 1960, including inflation, it actually would cost $111 billion.


We already have a huge deficit. Obama estimates 9 trillion by the end of his term, take a look at some graphs of the deficit. They have to raise taxes to compensate but expect a special name for it (cap and trade).

No matter what industry, the centralization of power to the government saps our liberty and freedom. Remember this is 1/6 of the economy.

Lastly when president Obama was asked if his kids would be enrolled in this he answered, "I would get the best care for my family". Is that a no? I think so.

Ok... just probing a bit further... Would you say that your are more worried then about the financial management than the quality of a publicly funded health care system, or do you think that the quality would be just as big a problem?

If you take the UK and Canada as an example then yes I would be worried about quality.

I really don't know a lot about a government ran health care system, but isn't it true that they are selective with people on the surgeries and medication that they can receive?

If it is a yes I would never won't the government ever touching this because it would just end badly

Someone will have to choose whether they deem you eligible for treatment. Now its the insurance company, if the government takes of I'm sure it will be a committee of doctors that are government certified or trained.

Deonesis wrote:

If you take the UK and Canada as an example then yes I would be worried about quality.

Just to play devil's advocate, if the UK and Canada are being brought into this, the world health organization reported in 1997 that their country's overall health care performance was actually better than ours. Here is the link to compare the stats,

Granted the report shows the U.S. has the best response rating to a medical need, the other countries, U.K. and Canada are not very far behind. The big question is, would a nation of our population size maintain the quality of health care at all under the same systems as these countries. I could not say, or even guess at this, myself.

But how long would you have to wait for this quality service? I think any government healthcare is going to have some rationing. Also do you ever hear of anyone going to the UK or Canada specifically for medical treatment?

Deonesis wrote:

But how long would you have to wait for this quality service? I think any government healthcare is going to have some rationing. Also do you ever hear of anyone going to the UK or Canada specifically for medical treatment?

Michael Moore went Canada, but I think that was because he ate his U.S. doctor.

Michael Moore, he doesnt have a bias.

Deonesis wrote:

Michael Moore, he doesnt have a bias.

He's probably the fairest person I know...

Micheal Moore, this guy?

xFenixXRisingx wrote:

Deonesis wrote:

If you take the UK and Canada as an example then yes I would be worried about quality.

Just to play devil's advocate, if the UK and Canada are being brought into this, the world health organization reported in 1997 that their country's overall health care performance was actually better than ours. Here is the link to compare the stats,

Granted the report shows the U.S. has the best response rating to a medical need, the other countries, U.K. and Canada are not very far behind. The big question is, would a nation of our population size maintain the quality of health care at all under the same systems as these countries. I could not say, or even guess at this, myself.

My father-in-law actually served in the military, was stationed in Europe and watched a government run health care system kill one of his family members. He had a family member with a terminal illness in a country with a government run health care system. In such a system patients are treated in a queued system. For example, a gun shot wound where a patient is taken to the emergency room is a prioritized queue because the injury is immediately life threatening. However, many diseases, specifically terminal illnesses that require expensive treatments and expensive medication and jack health care costs up (i.e. Cancer, etc.) would not take priority because the illness is not "immediately life threatening". Hence, if someone with an ear ache is queued higher than you with cancer they will be treated 1st. Even though the terminal illness is not immediately life threatening, it is life threatening if not adequately and quickly treated before the disease advances to a fatal stage.

This is what happened to my father-in-law, who watched a family member slowly and painfully die over the course of a 12-month period. Watching a government run system fail them repeatedly until they died.

I agree there needs to be serious health care reform in this country, but I still support a privatized system over a government supported, funded and/or run system. Look at Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare and the stimulus bill as examples of how the government can poorly manage spending citizen's tax dollars to the point of bankrupting our country.

It's a simple equation... the government can only generate money to spend 3 ways...

1. Spend money and immediately repay it through taxation.
2. Borrow money (i.e. loans, credit, etc.) which eventually gets repaid through taxation with interest.
3. Printing more money (which causes inflation... didn't work too well for Germany's economy during WW2)

Compare government spending to individual finances. If a person was in say $10,000 credit debt, would they get them self out of debt by taking out more loans (i.e. personal loans, home equity loans, etc.) and signing up for more credit cards? The answer is a big FAT NO!

yeckshemesh wrote:

This needs to be moved to a new thread called...Why is ****** such a faggot?

Admins listen and move this.

Thanks for your cooperation!

Dear yeckshemesh,

Such language and behavior is not acceptable on the DoomShare Clan Forum. It violates the forums terms of agreement and has been removed. Additionally, such a post truly shows insecurity about your own sexuality. Please be honest with yourself, come out of the closet and stop insulting others.

Sincerely,
Forum Admin

Shit needs to be done. I don't care if its private, or run by the government. People on welfare have better care than we do, and its government run.

hulkwillsmashu wrote:

Shit needs to be done. I don't care if its private, or run by the government. People on welfare have better care than we do, and its government run.

Welfare is another topic that a pile of shit and I believe that it is a little different. Granted that the government does run that but they also give it to them at a lower cost and sometimes will have it with free prescription coverage. So I think it is a different because it doesn't restrict you when you can or cannot get medical care.

If you want to understand what the difference between how it is now vrs how they want it to run here is a perfect example.
http://news-political.com/2009/08/13/canadian-colorectal-cancer-death-rate-projected-to-be-66-greater-than-united-states/

I look at it this way. "The Government" has its job to protect the people.... Not give them "security" but to give them freedom...
***********************

John Adams

"But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever."

"There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty."

"Children should be educated and instructed in the principles of freedom."
"When people talk of the freedom of writing, speaking or thinking I cannot choose but laugh. No such thing ever existed.
No such thing now exists; but I hope it will exist. But it must be hundreds of years after you and I shall write and speak no more."

"But what do we mean by the American Revolution? Do we mean the American war?
The Revolution was effected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people;
a change in their religious sentiments, of their duties and obligations...This radical change in the principles, opinions,
sentiments, and affections of the people was the real American Revolution."

"Liberty can not be preserved without a general knowledge among the people."

taken from Liberty.com/quotes
*******************************

Thomas Jefferson

"Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government,

I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter."

"That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves."

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort,

to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

"I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have."

liberty.com/quotes



With Just these 2 statements from the founding fathers show me how it should be.
The government needs to stay out of it and stop regulating what it is doing now!
That will bring health care down in price. That will help the Doctors become real honest to goodness people,
not some robot doing it a certain way because they have to because this rule and this law says so.
YOU CANT PROGRESS AND LEARN IF YOU CANT TRY!

I have friends in Canada, Germany and Europe. Some of them have pretty serious health issues.
My one friend had an emergency and went to the emergency room. They told him that he would have to
come back tomorrow because they were not taking care of people with their plan numbers til then, and
if he wanted to go to another hospital he would have to pay out of his own money and those particular
hospitals are what we would call scalpers the price is usually 3x more then it would cost in a normal situation.

So if you were to need a doctor but there is such a high need for it and they regulate usage because of the
high demand so that it is fair for everyone to get a chance to see the doctor will your issue be resolved
in a quick manor. What if you have a life threatening illness and you get in to see your Doctor and he says
"Well I think we may have this fixed, but to be sure I want you to come back in for a checkup. My Next
available time slot is 6 months from now" Granted the issue is Extreme.... But if it happens you are F*)#@%_@

Now I am not saying that the current system is correct either, But over all it is 1,000,000x better then what they
are trying to setup.

ELFRACER wrote:

If you want to understand what the difference between how it is now vrs how they want it to run here is a perfect example.
http://news-political.com/2009/08/13/canadian-colorectal-cancer-death-rate-projected-to-be-66-greater-than-united-states/

I look at it this way. "The Government" has its job to protect the people.... Not give them "security" but to give them freedom...
***********************

John Adams

"But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever."

"There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty."

"Children should be educated and instructed in the principles of freedom."
"When people talk of the freedom of writing, speaking or thinking I cannot choose but laugh. No such thing ever existed.
No such thing now exists; but I hope it will exist. But it must be hundreds of years after you and I shall write and speak no more."

"But what do we mean by the American Revolution? Do we mean the American war?
The Revolution was effected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people;
a change in their religious sentiments, of their duties and obligations...This radical change in the principles, opinions,
sentiments, and affections of the people was the real American Revolution."

"Liberty can not be preserved without a general knowledge among the people."

taken from Liberty.com/quotes
*******************************

Thomas Jefferson

"Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government,

I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter."

"That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves."

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort,

to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

"I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have."

liberty.com/quotes



With Just these 2 statements from the founding fathers show me how it should be.
The government needs to stay out of it and stop regulating what it is doing now!
That will bring health care down in price. That will help the Doctors become real honest to goodness people,
not some robot doing it a certain way because they have to because this rule and this law says so.
YOU CANT PROGRESS AND LEARN IF YOU CANT TRY!

I have friends in Canada, Germany and Europe. Some of them have pretty serious health issues.
My one friend had an emergency and went to the emergency room. They told him that he would have to
come back tomorrow because they were not taking care of people with their plan numbers til then, and
if he wanted to go to another hospital he would have to pay out of his own money and those particular
hospitals are what we would call scalpers the price is usually 3x more then it would cost in a normal situation.

So if you were to need a doctor but there is such a high need for it and they regulate usage because of the
high demand so that it is fair for everyone to get a chance to see the doctor will your issue be resolved
in a quick manor. What if you have a life threatening illness and you get in to see your Doctor and he says
"Well I think we may have this fixed, but to be sure I want you to come back in for a checkup. My Next
available time slot is 6 months from now" Granted the issue is Extreme.... But if it happens you are F*)#@%_@

Now I am not saying that the current system is correct either, But over all it is 1,000,000x better then what they
are trying to setup.

Wait. You posted a link to an article about more people having butt cancer in Canada than the US? Maybe since everyone in Canada has health care, maybe more people are being diagnosed with serious illnesses. Maybe the rate would be higher in the US if more people had access to health care and wouldn't have to put off seeing a doctor to get properly treated.

And what does the 2 quotes from Adams and Jefferson have to do with health care? These people had wooden teeth and their doctors probably still used leeches. Health care back then was completly different than it is today.

I'm all for new regulations when it comes to healh care. I'm not saying I want it free, it would be nice, but I'm fine with paying my part. The current system sucks, and I don't think it can be fixed on its own. I think its time to try something new.

lol if you read the article more closely it says that more people DIE from butt cancer in Canada then in the US even though we have more cases of it....

As too the Quote they are basically saying government needs to stay the fuck out of things.... Because the more control they have the less freedom we have...

ELFRACER wrote:

As too the Quote they are basically saying government needs to stay the fuck out of things.... Because the more control they have the less freedom we have...

Agreed.

I am totally against the government running health care for several reasons.

1. The government can't run anything well except the military, and that is all they should run.
(A) Social security
(B) Medicare
(C) Medicaid
all of which are on the verge of bankruptcy.

2. There is no way this won't lead to rationing in some way shape or form. This also will likely make the medical advancements that are being made non existent anymore because of their great cost in the beginning.

3. They are going to dictate the price of services and not compensate doctors accordingly, which will ultimately lead to a decline in skilled doctors, or may even lead to a shortage. Would you want to go into a field and rack up possibly over 100K in school debt for the government to sit back and tell you how much you can make? I know I wouldn't.

4. Our taxes will have to go up, there is no way around this. First of all the house of representatives cannot introduce legislation that will add to the national debt, there has to be a way to pay for this. Also they are claiming they are going to follow the pay as you go approach. Not a bad idea except the government only has 2 sources of revenue. Taxes, and borrowing money which is just then repaid through taxes. You may say they will come from the rich however the government cant really learn from history as the numbers have shown with higher tax rates come lower tax revenues. Not to mention the rich that they expect to fund this have the ability to just up and move to tax friendly countries, or more their businesses off shore to places like Ireland.

5. This is nothing more them trying to seize more of our civil liberties from us. I'm sorry for anyone who doesn't understand this however this federal government was founded upon the principal of limited power. There is a good reason for that too, we are not governed by angels, we are governed by men and all men are capable of evil. I kind stole that last sentence from George Washington but I feel its a pretty accurate analogy. The government was also founded on the principle that the powers it does have are lent to it by we the people. We need to prevent them from creating more and more government dependencies like this is, otherwise we will wake up one day and realize that we dont live in a freee society anymore.

6. The system can be reformed elsewhere and it would more then cure the issue.
A. Tort reform
Prevents lawyers from making doctors carry unheard of amounts of insurance just to practice as well as would help stop defensive medicine. Doctors dont have to orders pointless costly tests anymore.
B. Allow employers to group more empolyees together across state lines to open up the "risk pools" and ultimately lower the cost.

C. And I like this idea better then B. Take the burden off of employers for health care and leave it up to the individual. This would make the market much more competitive and again drive down costs. If insurance companies had to compete for individual clients on an individual level instead of trying to pick up big corporations with 5,000 employees with 2 different options, we all would benefit.


Well there is my 2 cents for now.

SgtMcbowflex wrote:

C. And I like this idea better then B. Take the burden off of employers for health care and leave it up to the individual. This would make the market much more competitive and again drive down costs. If insurance companies had to compete for individual clients on an individual level instead of trying to pick up big corporations with 5,000 employees with 2 different options, we all would benefit.

Only problem is, how do we get the health care providers to do this?

That I'm not sure of at this time, outside of more garbage federal legislation which just puts us back to square one in this problem.