|
Users viewing this topic:
triode
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/28/2008 9:27:41 AM
|
|
|
whos_your_dolly
Posts: 78
Joined: 6/21/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
quote:
ORIGINAL: whos_your_dolly
OBAMA is a MURDERER??? who did he murder? That's a pretty dangerous accusation John.
The support of and the fact the man from a position of authority ordained by God to deal with evil not perpetrate it in regards to the unborn is complicity regarding their being murdered… I stand by the charge...
And by the way, every man is ungodly, heathen, wicked, heretic, etc. without the saving grace of Jesus.quote:
In the eternal sense, yes but not everyone supports the cold blooded murder of the unborn...
quote:
So if He could use David [that scoundrel  ], He can use Obama too, or anybody else that ends up in the whitehouse or the senate, or anywhere.
David faults and all was called a man after God's own heart... And yes God does and will use Obama, but in my opinion more like He used Pharaoh...
John
But God is FULL of surprises. and yes David was a man after God's own heart -- not because of his sins, in spite of them-- because he trusted God so completely, and abandoned himself to God. That is what God seems to want from us.
David recognized his own weaknesses and didn't deny they existed but expressed his sorrow to God. And God used him mightily. So who knows what God will do with our next president and vice president whomever that turns out to be?
Maybe Obama or whoever is elected will have trouble recognizing and/or admitting their own weaknesses before God, but that doesn't mean that can't change. God changes peoples' hearts all the time.
Most candidates will say about anything to get elected anyhow so how do we know what any of them REALLY believe or support? Pray we will make the right choice is all we can do I think.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/28/2008 9:42:58 AM
|
|
|
whos_your_dolly
Posts: 78
Joined: 6/21/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: solo_soprano22
quote:
ORIGINAL: whos_your_dolly
quote:
ORIGINAL: Stronger2day
Wow, there is some ugly rhetoric in here...
"Pearly white gates", "stumbling blocks", "sweetie pie"???? 
Why is stumbling block rhetoric? Lots of things in our lives become stumbling blocks for ourselves and for others. People who don't try to reason and don't give others any respect must have some sort of issues don't you think? People who disagree but offer no better idea shouldn't be so categorically dismissive of those they don't agree with. Nobody wants a messed up system of health care, government run or otherwise. But NO solution is the worst of all. I'm against abortion too, but what about those who are allowed to be born, and then can't get the help they need to live a healthy productive life? Isn't that just another twist to the problem we seem to have of nobody really caring about the helpless? Including the government, many many many many individuals, and the church as a whole.
Yeah, sometimes when people disagree here, respect goes out the out the window. 
I think part of the issue in this thread is that some agree that the system is broken, but not all of them necessarily have a solution... yet the solution to them is probably not universal healthcare.
The "no solution" = no action" stance is the most frustrating of all to me. We can't do NOTHING. Any way we look at it, thats the worst choice.
God definitely says to take care of the needy, and even points to the "storehouse" as the source to use. That's an option, for at least a start in the right direction.
If we all tithed to the NEEDY in some way we could deduct the charitable donation from our TAXES, and we would KNOW the money went where it was needed. Not an organized plan or a perfect solution, but a start.
Once we were tithing to a homeless shelter in a nearby city, and bringing them food and clothing from other folks that wanted to help. The man that opened the shelter told us that the money we were giving them was the only thing keeping the doors open. And our tithe was not much, believe me, because our income, since we put our careers on the back burner, has decreased steadily. And YET we have a really full and happy life. Go figure !!
There are LOT's of ways Christians could use the tithe directly to help the poor and destitute. The best case scenerio would be through the church, but since that is NOT being done with the tithes in most churches I have been to, maybe we need to rethink how we tithe and to whom.
God didn't say tithe to a support a building or a man... He said to tithe so the storehouse would be full to care for the needy. So maybe the storehouse is no longer part of the "church". A thought anyway.
Now please don't go off on me anybody about this not being on topic. The topic is socialized medical care-- for or against and why? The most crucial words in that topic are "MEDICAL CARE" and whether or not we want socialized care, we STILL NEED CARE for those who can't provide it for themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/28/2008 10:04:49 AM
|
|
|
bzirk
Posts: 2920
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Where the deer and antelope play
Status: offline
|
I agree that we can't just ignore the problem.
What we have to wake up to is that the government's involvement in health care has only made things worse as far as cost, and putting more of that sector under the dominion of the government is not going to make things better. But no one has to take my word for it. People have only to look at the continual intrusion of government into health care and the growing costs related to that to see that government is one of the chief reasons the costs have gone up. It's important to reiterate that certain steps the government has taken have limited market forces, and this has in great part created the situation.
The problem is that most people are ignorant of what's going on in the health care sector, and frankly, they don't care to find out. They just want it fixed and now, and that means swallowing what the govenrment says whole and hoping that fixes things. When has that really worked?
_____________________________
Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1)
Great quote: I just ain't God and don't know it all. -- SonInMe1
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/28/2008 10:09:25 AM
|
|
|
Furnituremaker
Posts: 15
Joined: 6/21/2008
Status: offline
|
Does God ordain government and those who are in power for good?
Romans 13
1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. 4For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. 6This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. 7Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.
This scripture was written about Rome by Paul who was imprisoned and eventually martyred by Rome, in a time of moral decline by it's citizens.
Is our government really all that evil and incapable of good? If it is evil why does God establish it, and isn't He able to reward or punish those who disobey Him?
If you look at the outlines for property, tithing, lending, etc. for the nation of Israel you will see that God commands through government that people be taken care of. The storehouse principle is for the care of the needy who have no family to care for themselves. Israel was not to lend to other Israelites with interest. Your family could not loose it's inheritance forever because it had to be returned in the year of Jubilee even if borrowed against. These laws were enforced by Judge, King and Priest.
Therefore isn't it God ordained that government be the one to make sure that those unable to care for themselves are cared for. Isn't it government that should stop the practice of loosing all your property to pay for health care when you are deathly ill(which is also a form of wealth redistribution and people coveting what belongs to others). Isn't it government that should step in and say there should be at least a limit to how much drug companies/health insurance companies etc. can reasonably make as profit from all this? As it says above if you do right then you have no fear from Authority!
One last scripture...
2 Corinthians 8
14But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality:
15As it is written, He that had gathered much had nothing over; and he that had gathered little had no lack.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/28/2008 10:15:28 AM
|
|
|
bzirk
Posts: 2920
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Where the deer and antelope play
Status: offline
|
Government will be involved some way in every aspect of our lives, so I don't espouse 0 govenrment involvement. I'm advocating less of it or at least government legislating some things that will help put market forces back into this sector of the economy and not require so much government intervention into health care finance.
_____________________________
Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1)
Great quote: I just ain't God and don't know it all. -- SonInMe1
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/28/2008 10:25:31 AM
|
|
|
whos_your_dolly
Posts: 78
Joined: 6/21/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bzirk
I agree that we can't just ignore the problem.
What we have to wake up to is that the government's involvement in health care has only made things worse as far as cost, and putting more of that sector under the dominion of the government is not going to make things better. But no one has to take my word for it. People have only to look at the continual intrusion of government into health care and the growing costs related to that to see that government is one of the chief reasons the costs have gone up. It's important to reiterate that certain steps the government has taken have limited market forces, and this has in great part created the situation.
The problem is that most people are ignorant of what's going on in the health care sector, and frankly, they don't care to find out. They just want it fixed and now, and that means swallowing what the govenrment says whole and hoping that fixes things. When has that really worked?
If you REALLY look into it zirk I think you will find that its not the FEDERAL government that is messing up the system... its the state and local administrators that have gotten their greedy fingers into the federal pie.
The system as set up at the federal level is basically sound at least in the Medicaid program I have been involved with for 20 years now. The original plan worked beautifully BEFORE the state and local agencies got a whiff of the potential gravy train for them to take advantage of.
The PROBLEM with the federal program is that the feds don't enforce it. They let the state and local administrators and agencies pull all sorts of "fast ones" which results in a totally inefficient and extremely expensive program that profits few clients and prospers layers and layers of administrators.
The state and locals need to be strictly policed and monetarily punished for ignoring their own legally binding regulations. The states make the plan, the feds ok it, it becomes legally binding, the feds send the money, the states and locals do whatever they want with it pretty much.
Oh there are some little forays into actually providing a few services to a few clients here and there, but mostly its just discovering new more devious ways to waylay the funds and get rid of as many clients as possible. Check it out. Ask the CLIENTS and their immediate caregivers. It just might surprise you.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/28/2008 10:26:58 AM
|
|
|
Sophie11
Posts: 720
Joined: 1/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: whos_your_dolly
There are LOT's of ways Christians could use the tithe directly to help the poor and destitute. The best case scenerio would be through the church, but since that is NOT being done with the tithes in most churches I have been to, maybe we need to rethink how we tithe and to whom.
God didn't say tithe to a support a building or a man... He said to tithe so the storehouse would be full to care for the needy. So maybe the storehouse is no longer part of the "church". A thought anyway.
Now please don't go off on me anybody about this not being on topic. The topic is socialized medical care-- for or against and why? The most crucial words in that topic are "MEDICAL CARE" and whether or not we want socialized care, we STILL NEED CARE for those who can't provide it for themselves.
whos_your_dolly, can you really not see what you are saying? I have seen you agree in many posts that the current healthcare systems the government runs are full of corruption. But yet you still want the government to get even more involved in healthcare.
Yet when it comes to the church you say they do not help the homeless so maybe we need to rethink where we put our money? Not that I don't understand you saying that, but shouldn't the same principle then apply to the government as well?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/28/2008 10:36:43 AM
|
|
|
bzirk
Posts: 2920
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Where the deer and antelope play
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: whos_your_dolly
quote:
ORIGINAL: bzirk
I agree that we can't just ignore the problem.
What we have to wake up to is that the government's involvement in health care has only made things worse as far as cost, and putting more of that sector under the dominion of the government is not going to make things better. But no one has to take my word for it. People have only to look at the continual intrusion of government into health care and the growing costs related to that to see that government is one of the chief reasons the costs have gone up. It's important to reiterate that certain steps the government has taken have limited market forces, and this has in great part created the situation.
The problem is that most people are ignorant of what's going on in the health care sector, and frankly, they don't care to find out. They just want it fixed and now, and that means swallowing what the govenrment says whole and hoping that fixes things. When has that really worked?
If you REALLY look into it zirk I think you will find that its not the FEDERAL government that is messing up the system... its the state and local administrators that have gotten their greedy fingers into the federal pie.
The system as set up at the federal level is basically sound at least in the Medicaid program I have been involved with for 20 years now. The original plan worked beautifully BEFORE the state and local agencies got a whiff of the potential gravy train for them to take advantage of.
The PROBLEM with the federal program is that the feds don't enforce it. They let the state and local administrators and agencies pull all sorts of "fast ones" which results in a totally inefficient and extremely expensive program that profits few clients and prospers layers and layers of administrators.
The state and locals need to be strictly policed and monetarily punished for ignoring their own legally binding regulations. The states make the plan, the feds ok it, it becomes legally binding, the feds send the money, the states and locals do whatever they want with it pretty much.
Oh there are some little forays into actually providing a few services to a few clients here and there, but mostly its just discovering new more devious ways to waylay the funds and get rid of as many clients as possible. Check it out. Ask the CLIENTS and their immediate caregivers. It just might surprise you.
What you have said is just making the case. The feds do not have the manpower to enforce. That will only cost TONS more money. Is that really what we want? More and more centralized power and less power at the state level? Plus, I'm not convinced the feds would get Medicaid right at the fed level either.
BTW, I dealt with HCFA for years, and my extended family has been dealing with them at the D.C. level for over 20 years. If you think the federal government's program is run smoothly at the federal level, no offense, but I wonder about your level of involvement and knowledge of HCFA.
_____________________________
Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1)
Great quote: I just ain't God and don't know it all. -- SonInMe1
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/28/2008 11:14:49 AM
|
|
|
lw9
Posts: 1175
Joined: 7/22/2005
Status: offline
|
I haven't been able to participate in this thread, but wanted to respond to the following, which was actually a response to one of my posts from another thread:
quote:
tacitus: Well I lived in the UK for 30 years and I can tell you that cancer patient and heart patients never had to wait 4 years for an operation unless it was something like waiting for a heart transplant where the situation is no better in the USA. There have been long waiting lists in times past, but they were for non-critical issues like hip replacement surgery. Not pleasant for the sufferer by any means, but they weren't dying.
So the caricature of the British NHS you see described in these forums is grossly inaccurate...
Having lived in the UK during the 2000 NHS healthcare crisis, these are the facts, folks:
'Four-year wait' for outpatient appointment
NHS waitings lists up again
Pledge to slash heart disease waits
Having to wait 4 years for an outpatient appointment or a specialist allows the condition to worsen and become deadly, whether that's potential cancer or heart trouble. A dental assistant I talked with had been waiting for more than a year just to find out if the grapefruit-sized tumor in her stomach was cancerous or not. Just one of many examples. Have things gotten much better?
2007: Waiting list crisis as NHS cuts costs
Guess not.
< Message edited by lw9 -- 6/28/2008 11:34:22 AM >
_____________________________
Aperture Science. We do what we must because we can.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/28/2008 11:19:27 AM
|
|
|
bzirk
Posts: 2920
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Where the deer and antelope play
Status: offline
|
And rationed healthcare (or rather more rationed health care) is what we would get.
_____________________________
Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1)
Great quote: I just ain't God and don't know it all. -- SonInMe1
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/28/2008 8:41:06 PM
|
|
|
whos_your_dolly
Posts: 78
Joined: 6/21/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bzirk
quote:
ORIGINAL: whos_your_dolly
quote:
ORIGINAL: bzirk
I agree that we can't just ignore the problem.
What we have to wake up to is that the government's involvement in health care has only made things worse as far as cost, and putting more of that sector under the dominion of the government is not going to make things better. But no one has to take my word for it. People have only to look at the continual intrusion of government into health care and the growing costs related to that to see that government is one of the chief reasons the costs have gone up. It's important to reiterate that certain steps the government has taken have limited market forces, and this has in great part created the situation.
The problem is that most people are ignorant of what's going on in the health care sector, and frankly, they don't care to find out. They just want it fixed and now, and that means swallowing what the govenrment says whole and hoping that fixes things. When has that really worked?
If you REALLY look into it zirk I think you will find that its not the FEDERAL government that is messing up the system... its the state and local administrators that have gotten their greedy fingers into the federal pie.
The system as set up at the federal level is basically sound at least in the Medicaid program I have been involved with for 20 years now. The original plan worked beautifully BEFORE the state and local agencies got a whiff of the potential gravy train for them to take advantage of.
The PROBLEM with the federal program is that the feds don't enforce it. They let the state and local administrators and agencies pull all sorts of "fast ones" which results in a totally inefficient and extremely expensive program that profits few clients and prospers layers and layers of administrators.
The state and locals need to be strictly policed and monetarily punished for ignoring their own legally binding regulations. The states make the plan, the feds ok it, it becomes legally binding, the feds send the money, the states and locals do whatever they want with it pretty much.
Oh there are some little forays into actually providing a few services to a few clients here and there, but mostly its just discovering new more devious ways to waylay the funds and get rid of as many clients as possible. Check it out. Ask the CLIENTS and their immediate caregivers. It just might surprise you.
What you have said is just making the case. The feds do not have the manpower to enforce. That will only cost TONS more money. Is that really what we want? More and more centralized power and less power at the state level? Plus, I'm not convinced the feds would get Medicaid right at the fed level either.
BTW, I dealt with HCFA for years, and my extended family has been dealing with them at the D.C. level for over 20 years. If you think the federal government's program is run smoothly at the federal level, no offense, but I wonder about your level of involvement and knowledge of HCFA.
All Im saying is the original plan for the Title 19 Waiver Program in this state was simple to understand, access, utilize and track. The program began to fall apart only when the state and locals decided to jump on the wagon with ever increasing levels of administrative intervention that did little more than harass the clients and their caregivers while contributing little to nothing to facilitate the actual functioning of the program.
So maybe instead of trying to police the agencies the feds should just get rid of the agencies altogether, set up micro boards with parents and caregivers and do direct pay from the feds to the actual care providers. That in itself will save billions.
I know of a mom in Maryland and reportedly another in Arizona who have set up such boards with their state medicaid systems and they have proven most effective. Will some parents abuse it? Probably. But as I said before, the potential for abuse at that recipient level is restricted to the amount of money they are granted which is going to be infinitely less than that pouring into the tower of administrative layers that is gobbling up the funds now, and not even justifying it to anyone.
As with welfare recipients... even if EVERY recipient totally misused all the funds they got, it would still only be 10% or less of the overall budget for that program, with the other 90% plus going to administration.[and effectively down the loo] So get rid of all the administrators then. The most you will be writing off that way is 10% or less of what you are writing off now. Seems pretty simple to me.
The gentleman from DC told me about the study they did on themselves [HEW]that showed the 90%administrative/10%client breakdown. He also told me they had figured it would have been cheaper at that point in time [mid 70's] to give everyone in the US, over the age of 18, $6000 a year across the board, no questions asked, than it was actually costing to adminster the program as it stood. And in the 70's welfare recipients were not getting any $6000 a year, so everyone would have been better off. Except of course the administrators. Oh wait... they would get $6000 too ! LOL.
Simplicity is the key.
Direct links between the source of funds and the recipients is the most economical and efficient way to provide for the needs of the disabled, at least.
How do I know this? By seeing what kind of happy healthy life my sons have led at a fraction of the cost to the taxpayer, who could have been paying hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to care for them in institutions and hospitals.
My younger son spent the first four years of his life in and out of Johns Hopkins having surgery after surgery, had full time in-home RN care and was in a specialized foster care home in Maryland.
Can you imagine how much the taxpayer is saving by having him cared for by someone in their home and kept healthy and out of the hospital? Millions upon millions can be saved per child. Plus the children and adults with disabilities are happier when they can have a life.
So everybody wins.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/28/2008 9:02:05 PM
|
|
|
bzirk
Posts: 2920
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Where the deer and antelope play
Status: offline
|
I don't doubt what you're saying, but the sad fact is that government programs cannot be run efficiently -- even if they start off that way. There are too many political forces at work to mess with it. I hate that it's that way, but it is.
_____________________________
Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1)
Great quote: I just ain't God and don't know it all. -- SonInMe1
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/28/2008 10:26:12 PM
|
|
|
Lizahana
Posts: 975
Joined: 4/20/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: whos_your_dolly
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lizahana
quote:
ORIGINAL: whos_your_dolly
quote:
ORIGINAL: Stronger2day
Wow, there is some ugly rhetoric in here...
"Pearly white gates", "stumbling blocks", "sweetie pie"????
Now WHO said "pearly white gates" ... you talking about BILL ? 
That was actually me - I have a tough time with humans judging others - I was taught not to - that only God can judge us. So, I asked John if he lived in a house with pearly white gates.
Peace and God bless,
I'm sorry Liz... I was saying that with a smile but maybe it came across as a criticism. My family has a tendency to be sarcastic in their attempts at humor, and since I was the one who said "stumbling block" I ffigured we were in the same boat ["controversial" phrase wise]and was just needling you in good humor.
Why shouldn't we use phrases like those? We all run upon stumbling blocks in our lives, and I for one can't WAIT to see the "pearly gates". I was accused of sending a negative "sentiment" by using the phrase "stumbling blocks".
I was just sitting here shaking my head in wonder and actually amusement at that quizzical conclusion and decided someone else [the dreaded "pearly gates" perpetrator] was being subtly chastised as well, so decided to commiserize with you.
I agree 100 % and want NO part of judging anyone... Im still working out my OWN way, and trying to help others if I can. I thought I was merely making an observation based on what John was posting in here, not judging him...
No need to apologize at all - I had just hoped that I did not make anyone angry with my comment.
And I'm in total agreement with you - I was told by the same person that my opinion had no validity - whatever that means! I mean it's an opinion - so it has validity to me! And, I am pretty shocked by the judgement by some, on these forums - and it's hard to shock me!
Anyway, no worries...take care,
Peace and God bless,
< Message edited by Lizahana -- 6/28/2008 10:32:50 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/29/2008 5:22:44 AM
|
|
|
whisper
Posts: 163
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
I really want to read this whole thread and am quite certain that I soon will, but I'm an insomniac at the moment and realize that that's likely not a wise choice for me at 3 in the morning.
I'm a nursing student in Canada and have been slowly seeing what is fabulous and what is wrong with the Canadian health care system. There are a few things that I wouldn't give up for the world (though I understand that there are legitimate counter-thoughts, and I've been discussing these with my co-workers):
* I never count the equipment I use or the procedures I elect to use on my patient. If you need an ECG, I go get the machine. If I need another piece of sterile gauze for your dressing, I go get it. I don't think about whether or not you can afford it - the only question is if you need it.
* The person in greatest need gets care first.
* If you're travelling from B.C. to Nova Scotia, and you need medical care - the province is billed, not you. You don't need to "front" anything.
We've got some serious gaps, and I'm seriously considering the potential benefits of a public-private partnership, much to the chagrin of many boo-privatism coworkers. But I want nothing to do with denying needed care to patients based on financial ability.
_____________________________
You can't make footprints in the sands of time if you're sitting on your bum. And who wants to make bumprints in the sands of time?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/29/2008 5:04:27 PM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 1859
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
* I never count the equipment I use or the procedures I elect to use on my patient. If you need an ECG, I go get the machine. If I need another piece of sterile gauze for your dressing, I go get it. I don't think about whether or not you can afford it - the only question is if you need it.
In the states I think it works something like this: If the person has private insurance it is up to the insurance company and it will probably be a no. If the person has a government insurance program then you milk them for as much as you can get. If they have no insurance you just wonder why they are in your hospital in the first place.
quote:
I don't doubt what you're saying, but the sad fact is that government programs cannot be run efficiently
At this juncture in our nations history I believe it is more like the government programs that your political party didn't create cannot function properly but the ones that your party were responsible for work just fine.
I still think their are only two solutions the government has to get completely out of it 100% or it has to take everything over 100%. I'm getting to the point that this half in and half out is worse then if they had complete control.
_____________________________
-Roger
1 Thess 5:20 do not treat prophecies with contempt. 21 Test everything. Hold on to the good. (NIV)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/29/2008 6:03:48 PM
|
|
|
Sophie11
Posts: 720
Joined: 1/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rlj
At this juncture in our nations history I believe it is more like the government programs that your political party didn't create cannot function properly but the ones that your party were responsible for work just fine.
As much as the news may lead some to believe that, when I talk to people face to face about healthcare it has nothing to do with politics. Whether ideas belong to republicans or democrats is not even a topic. Most people worry more about the type of care they get now and the type they would expect to see under such a program as universal healthcare, and how it would affect others as well.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/29/2008 6:20:32 PM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 1859
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
As much as the news may lead some to believe that, when I talk to people face to face about healthcare it has nothing to do with politics. Whether ideas belong to republicans or democrats is not even a topic. Most people worry more about the type of care they get now and the type they would expect to see under such a program as universal healthcare, and how it would affect others as well.
I know of many people who have lost their coverage or who have worse coverage now than they did 5 to 10 years ago who would be happy with the care in Canada, England, France etc. Almost 25% of what my employer spends one me is for health coverage. The percentage goes higher and lower. It has been said that if GM didn't have to pay for retirees health coverage - that they worked for and earned - it would save 3k off the price of a new vehicle. It comes down to the cost though. Either the government has to get out completely and not spend $.01 on anyone's coverage or else they need to competely control it. If they are incapable of doing this then it looks like our government is worse then the myriad of other western nations who can do it.
_____________________________
-Roger
1 Thess 5:20 do not treat prophecies with contempt. 21 Test everything. Hold on to the good. (NIV)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/29/2008 6:32:19 PM
|
|
|
Sophie11
Posts: 720
Joined: 1/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rlj
I know of many people who have lost their coverage or who have worse coverage now than they did 5 to 10 years ago who would be happy with the care in Canada, England, France etc. Almost 25% of what my employer spends one me is for health coverage. The percentage goes higher and lower. It has been said that if GM didn't have to pay for retirees health coverage - that they worked for and earned - it would save 3k off the price of a new vehicle. It comes down to the cost though. Either the government has to get out completely and not spend $.01 on anyone's coverage or else they need to competely control it. If they are incapable of doing this then it looks like our government is worse then the myriad of other western nations who can do it.
My family's coverage is worse now than it was 5 years ago as well. But I still am not looking forward to the government having complete control over it. If I had to choose for them to be in or out 100%, I choose out. It would hurt worse in the short term, but in the long term it would be better IMO. Otherwise, the short term may seem better, but in the long term it would get worse as every other government run program seems to. Only I doubt once the government has control they will ever hand it back over to the people even if it is failing miserably.
As far as the other countries getting it right, I have heard otherwise. Yes you can find good stories and people who say it's great, but you can also find horror stories that Americans would never even dream of having to deal with.
The reality is is that there is never going to be a healthcare system that can be 100% "good".
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/29/2008 7:04:11 PM
|
|
|
ElmerFishpaw
Posts: 137
Joined: 7/18/2007
Status: offline
|
I still am thinking of a sort of Government/Private combination. I don't want my health care decided by bean counters in a corporation or CEOs. I don't want it decided by politicians either.
I think 90 plus per cent of health care is pretty routine stuff.......strep throat, broken wrist, various minor ailments that just require some home rest.
I'd like to see inexpensive access for everybody for routine stuff...and I can't say it enough...but screenings!!
Sarcasm on.......if you suspended the Iraq "war" for a few days, it'd be paid for......sarcasm off.
Yeah, let the private sector make big bucks on triple bypasses (deserved when you woof cheeseburgers and fries for 30 years and you go 280lbs). Could be a free cholesterol screening and a good yelling at and a $10 fee lets say, for cholesterol meds could have warded it off....
I think the easy stuff/screenings available on the cheap for all, and with the money saved have lower premiums on insurance for more serious stuff. How about a $5000 deductible for the fancy stuff? It'd keep the premiums down too, besides providing more incentive to keep healthy.
Just random thoughts.....
< Message edited by ElmerFishpaw -- 6/29/2008 7:11:23 PM >
_____________________________
"Aurora Borealis is Latin for flying saucer headlights"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/29/2008 11:01:04 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 3750
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lizahana
quote:
ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lizahana
Now, I asked you what your solution is - please stop dodging the question.
My solution is not to let the government be involved... Please stop bearing false wittness against me because you don't like my answer...
John
John, I have repeatedly shown that the majority of Americans live in a 100% privatized healthcare system, and that most agree that this is a broken system.
You have come on this thread, one would assume, to offer solutions to this problem, or to advocate the current healthcare climate in the US is agreeable to you. I am simply asking what your solution would be, or, if you think it is agreeable, why this is. It seems that you do not take a position - which is the reason for the questions.
If you think the current healthcare climate in the US - that being that 45-47 million Americans are without heath insurance; that hard working people face bankruptcy to pay for healthcare; that these private clinics, pharmaceautical companies, insurance companies are getting wealthy at the expense of other people's health - if you find that this is a good situation, by all means - please say so.
Or, if you have another solution, please offer it.
Otherwise, why did you come on this thread?
To pass time and do my part in regards to keeping the goverment out of health care. As for my position... No government... I believe I have made that clear... I am here to counter those who believe the government is the answer... I don't have to any more reason than that to be here...
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialized Medical Care - 6/29/2008 11:15:12 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 3750
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lizahana
Well, perhaps some of us were taught differently. I was taught not to judge - that only God can judge us.
You were taught wrong... What you were taught wouldn't allow you to leave false teaching like that Obama sat under for 20 years...
quote:
BTW, the person j | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
