Universal Health Care

RammsteinFan92 · 12-21-2007, 11:56 AM

:confused: why can't we have UHC (universal health care) here in the us it works in other countries such as Cuba,France,Great Britan,....so why wouldn't it work here[YOUTUBE="UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE"]KGpY2hw7ao8[/YOUTUBE]

~~ronald_reagan~~ · 12-21-2007, 12:12 PM

RammsteinFan92 Wrote::confused: why can't we have UHC (universal health care) here in the us it works in other countries such as Cuba,France,Great Britan,....so why wouldn't it work here

Who pays for UHC?

~~ronald_reagan~~ · 12-21-2007, 12:16 PM

Quote:One in eight NHS hospital patients still has to wait more than a year for treatment, the government acknowledged yesterday in its first attempt to tell the full truth about health service queues in England.
A Department of Health analysis of 208,000 people admitted to hospital in March showed 48% were wheeled into the operating theatre within 18 weeks of a GP sending them for hospital diagnosis. But 30% waited more than 30 weeks and 12.4% more than a year.

The above is from GB's largest news paper, The Guardian.

Anyone who says GB or Cuba is a success story is lying to me, and everyone else.

**Playboy5** · 12-21-2007, 12:17 PM

That is what I was getting ready to say...

~~ronald_reagan~~ · 12-21-2007, 12:20 PM

I'm am just absolutely convinced, the only reason that anyone would ever vote for a democrat for president (especially this group of them)..... is only doing so, because they want the government to provide for them what they should already be providing themselves.

Here's a quote.. take it to heart.

You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot lift the wage-earner by pulling down the wage-payer.
You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich.
You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot establish security on borrowed money.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative
and independence.
You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could
and should do for themselves."

**TidesHoss32** · 12-21-2007, 01:35 PM

ronald_reagan Wrote:I'm am just absolutely convinced, the only reason that anyone would ever vote for a democrat for president (especially this group of them)..... is only doing so, because they want the government to provide for them what they should already be providing themselves.

Here's a quote.. take it to heart.

You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot lift the wage-earner by pulling down the wage-payer.
You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich.
You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot establish security on borrowed money.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative
and independence.
You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could
and should do for themselves."

:Thumbs: Great post RR..

RammsteinFan92 · 12-21-2007, 01:53 PM

ronald_reagan Wrote:

Who pays for UHC?

Your tax dollars but it benifits everybody

RammsteinFan92 · 12-21-2007, 01:56 PM

TidesHoss32 Wrote::Thumbs: Great post RR..

yea but our health care system is ridiculous and it wouldn't only help "poor" people it would help everybody!

**ComfortEagle** · 12-21-2007, 01:59 PM

If they get help in time.

I see a lot of stories about people from Canada that are coming over to the U.S. to get medical care because they can't get it in time over there.

Yeah, maybe it's free, but it won't matter if you're dead before you can get help.

RammsteinFan92 · 12-21-2007, 02:04 PM

ComfortEagle Wrote:If they get help in time.

I see a lot of stories about people from Canada that are coming over to the U.S. to get medical care because they can't get it in time over there.

Yeah, maybe it's free, but it won't matter if you're dead before you can get help.

yea but look at the health care system now......wouldn't this make it a little bit better?

**ComfortEagle** · 12-21-2007, 02:17 PM

I can get health care if I need it.

Personally, I don't want to be paying for someone else's healthcare. I pay enough taxes as it is.

This crosses the line with welfare and all that crap. Welfare in E. KY isn't a support program for a lot of people, it's their profession. Professionally on welfare and disability.

If I'm already paying for people to be lazy, I don't want to pay anymore for people who don't get their own health care. And, IMO it's not that a lot of people can't get health care, it's that they don't want to pay for it.

I would really like to know how many of these people that cannot afford health care can somehow afford a DVD player, and afford a car, and can afford that new flat screen TV?

**thecavemaster** · 12-21-2007, 07:27 PM

Are you suggesting that the 48 million people without healthcare are ALL or even in majority driving Cadillacs, watching flat screens, while eating Filet Mignon? Is that your position? "Poor people are low down, no good, good for nothings" ? What about the working poor? What about those destroyed by medical bills after catastophic illness? Should they go and listen to Hank Williams Jr. sing "Country Boy Can Survive"? I'm not sure catching catfish from dusk 'til dawn is a cure for cancer...

**ComfortEagle** · 12-21-2007, 07:40 PM

No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that a lot of those people who don't have health care could probably afford it if they had their priorities straight or felt that they needed a health care plan more than some other thing. Again, not all, but a lot. And I'm not saying that I'm high and mighty, because I can be guilty of wreckless spending as well.

I'm not saying that's the case for everyone, but how many of those 48 million do you think own a DVD player, or a video game console, or chose to put spinners on their car rather than invest in something like a health care plan?

I would wager to say that there are a lot of those 48 million that could afford and have health care if they gave up another luxury in their lives, and while I believe in helping those who can't afford the luxuries the rest of us have (especially now at Christmas-time), I don't think that I should have to pay taxes for someone to sit around and play video games instead of working.

There are people who violate the system. You can't deny that and say that everyone on welfare and receiving disability deserve or need to be on it.

I've known of several people on disability that don't wear their neckbrace until they go out of their house and are in public.

And I have a friend whose mom works for the food stamp office. It's her job to determine and investigate whether someone needs to be on food stamps or not. You would not believe the amount of people who make plenty of money to buy their own food, but have found a way around the system. People that DO, in fact, pull in driving their Cadillacs and then ask for assistance.

It's that kind of thing that upsets me, and I really don't want my taxes to go up even more then they have to and the more people that abuse the system, the higher the taxes are likely to be.

The more programs out there like welfare and now health care, the more people that will find a way to abuse them as well.

**thecavemaster** · 12-21-2007, 07:55 PM

I don't think any type of welfare fraud, as a percentage, jacks up my tax bill more than a few dollars each tax season. Any system that human beings can design, a certain percentage of human beings will find a way to flaunt that system for personal advantage. It is frustrating, no question about it.

**Old School** · 12-21-2007, 10:10 PM

How would the US government manage a health care plan?

Would the Government determine the salary for all Doctors, Nurses and staff?
Would Hospitals be owned by the government?
Would the Government determine which doctor you had to see?
Would the Government determine which treatment you received?

RammsteinFan92 · 12-21-2007, 11:01 PM

Old School Wrote:How would the US government manage a health care plan?

Would the Government determine the salary for all Doctors, Nurses and staff?
Would Hospitals be owned by the government?
Would the Government determine which doctor you had to see?
Would the Government determine which treatment you received?

yes they would pay the doctors

Yes they would be owned by the Goverment...

no the Goverment doesn't determine the docter you see....

no they would not determine the treatment you recive....

JUST TO CLEAR EVERYTHING UP THE UHC WOULD BENIFIT EVERYBODY NOT JUST THE POOR.....

**phs1986** · 12-21-2007, 11:14 PM

TRUE STORY!!!

My aunt who worked EVERY DAY and was NOT offered healthcare through her job (which was at a senior citizen's center BTW) was found to have some serious health problems. When she went to see if she could get SOME assistance they told her that she made $12.00 too much to qualify for anything. They told her to go on to the doctor and incur medical bills to add up to over $12,000. and they could SEE if she would qualify for a "spenddown" card which would in turn cover all her bills. Well... needless to say as she was leaving the doctor one evening (by ambulance may I add) she told them to turn her bills in to see if she qualified. Well... she never made it home. She didn't qualify EVEN though her medical bills were well OVER $75,000 for being in the ICU unit and having to be flown out. The reason she didn't qualify..... she passed away.
This was a woman who worked hard EVERY day in her life. She had 5 children and raised all of them, had a job, did sewing and crafts on the side to make her some extra money because her job was minimun wage!!!!! She still could not get any help when she needed it. I feel that some type of insurance policy should be offered to even part-time employees. EVEN if they have to pay $10.00 or $20.00 a month for some type of small coverage. What about offering a medical card to those who are willing to hold a job and STILL pay a minimum fee?? Something needs to be done.

**Old School** · 12-21-2007, 11:45 PM

RammsteinFan92 Wrote:yes they would pay the doctors

Yes they would be owned by the Goverment...

no the Goverment doesn't determine the docter you see....

no they would not determine the treatment you recive....

JUST TO CLEAR EVERYTHING UP THE UHC WOULD BENIFIT EVERYBODY NOT JUST THE POOR.....

Since no one has developed a UHC plan how do you know that the government won't determine which doctor you would see, or that they wouldn't set certain treatment guidlines since their paying the bills. In Canada and other countries with UHC they tell them when they can have surgery, I watched a show about a month ago when a Canadian couple came to the U.S. so the husband could have a transplant, because he was going to have to wait a year before his UHC plan would schedule his operation in Canada. On a side note the U.S. Doctor who preformed this operation said that he would never survived if he had not of come to the U.S.

The Government has never handled their finances very well, what makes you think they would be able to take on this task.

Now I realize that our system is not perfect and can use some improvements, but IMO it would be disastrous if the Government took over our Health Care Program.

RammsteinFan92 · 12-21-2007, 11:46 PM

phs1986 Wrote:TRUE STORY!!!

My aunt who worked EVERY DAY and was NOT offered healthcare through her job (which was at a senior citizen's center BTW) was found to have some serious health problems. When she went to see if she could get SOME assistance they told her that she made $12.00 too much to qualify for anything. They told her to go on to the doctor and incur medical bills to add up to over $12,000. and they could SEE if she would qualify for a "spenddown" card which would in turn cover all her bills. Well... needless to say as she was leaving the doctor one evening (by ambulance may I add) she told them to turn her bills in to see if she qualified. Well... she never made it home. She didn't qualify EVEN though her medical bills were well OVER $75,000 for being in the ICU unit and having to be flown out. The reason she didn't qualify..... she passed away.
This was a woman who worked hard EVERY day in her life. She had 5 children and raised all of them, had a job, did sewing and crafts on the side to make her some extra money because her job was minimun wage!!!!! She still could not get any help when she needed it. I feel that some type of insurance policy should be offered to even part-time employees. EVEN if they have to pay $10.00 or $20.00 a month for some type of small coverage. What about offering a medical card to those who are willing to hold a job and STILL pay a minimum fee?? Something needs to be done.

I agree that's the type of stories in sicko that inspired me to post this thread......but i think that there should be Free Health care For Everybody in the U.S. Rich or Poor

RammsteinFan92 · 12-21-2007, 11:47 PM

Old School Wrote:Since no one has developed a UHC plan how do you know that the government won't determine which doctor you would see, or that they wouldn't set certain treatment guidlines since their paying the bills. In Canada and other countries with UHC they tell them when they can have surgery, I watched a show about a month ago when a Canadian couple came to the U.S. so the husband could have a transplant, because he was going to have to wait a year before his UHC plan would schedule his operation in Canada. On a side note the U.S. Doctor who preformed this operation said that he would never survived if he had not of come to the U.S.

The Government has never handled their finances very well, what makes you think they would be able to take on this task.

Now I realize that our system is not perfect and can use some improvements, but IMO it would be disastrous if the Government took over our Health Care Program.

But it's just as bad if they don't.....

**More Cowbell** · 12-22-2007, 02:13 AM

ComfortEagle Wrote:No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that a lot of those people who don't have health care could probably afford it if they had their priorities straight or felt that they needed a health care plan more than some other thing. Again, not all, but a lot. And I'm not saying that I'm high and mighty, because I can be guilty of wreckless spending as well.

I'm not saying that's the case for everyone, but how many of those 48 million do you think own a DVD player, or a video game console, or chose to put spinners on their car rather than invest in something like a health care plan?

I would wager to say that there are a lot of those 48 million that could afford and have health care if they gave up another luxury in their lives, and while I believe in helping those who can't afford the luxuries the rest of us have (especially now at Christmas-time), I don't think that I should have to pay taxes for someone to sit around and play video games instead of working.

There are people who violate the system. You can't deny that and say that everyone on welfare and receiving disability deserve or need to be on it.

I've known of several people on disability that don't wear their neckbrace until they go out of their house and are in public.

And I have a friend whose mom works for the food stamp office. It's her job to determine and investigate whether someone needs to be on food stamps or not. You would not believe the amount of people who make plenty of money to buy their own food, but have found a way around the system. People that DO, in fact, pull in driving their Cadillacs and then ask for assistance.

It's that kind of thing that upsets me, and I really don't want my taxes to go up even more then they have to and the more people that abuse the system, the higher the taxes are likely to be.

The more programs out there like welfare and now health care, the more people that will find a way to abuse them as well.

Excellent post, CE. :Thumbs:

~~ronald_reagan~~ · 12-22-2007, 10:38 AM

RammsteinFan92 Wrote:yes they would pay the doctors

Yes they would be owned by the Goverment...

no the Goverment doesn't determine the docter you see....

no they would not determine the treatment you recive....

JUST TO CLEAR EVERYTHING UP THE UHC WOULD BENIFIT EVERYBODY NOT JUST THE POOR.....

They would manage the program just as effeciently as they did Katrina! Social Security! Medicare/Medicaid! The Federal Budget! The war in Iraq! Botched Intelligence!

Now lets make sure we put the federal government in charge of our health care! Rolleyes

Look, what UHC is.. is this. and simply this ========> Its relying on SOMEONE else (the accomplished people of this nation), to provide for YOU what you should be providing for yourself. Poor kids in this country already have healthcare up to the poverty level. Those above that level have parents that should either be going to school to better themselves FOR their kids, working another job FOR their kids, or making personal sacrifices in their OWN lives to provide for their OWN kids.

Stop wanting someone else to do everything for you. Its simple. Hillary Clinton has said it many times, 'we must take away from some, to serve the common good'.

Let me show you what Thomas Jefferson said... "We must prevent the governments ability to waste the fruits of our labor... under the pretense of, taking care of us."

I seldom agree with Jefferson, but this is one time he couldn't have said it any better. Wink

**thecavemaster** · 12-22-2007, 11:33 AM

RR: your basic knee jerk reaction is that the "government" is always bad, can't do anything right, is inefficient. Private run (meaning profits over people) does NOT function as well in areas where a bit of compassion and mercy and willingness to, just maybe, pick human beings as the bottom line. Granted, there is a lot of waste in many governmental programs. However, and I suggest this emphatically, to believe that mega for profits trump governmental programs across the board is akin to a foolishness I do not wish to believe you possess.

~~ronald_reagan~~ · 12-22-2007, 08:53 PM

thecavemaster Wrote:RR: your basic knee jerk reaction is that the "government" is always bad, can't do anything right, is inefficient. Private run (meaning profits over people) does NOT function as well in areas where a bit of compassion and mercy and willingness to, just maybe, pick human beings as the bottom line. Granted, there is a lot of waste in many governmental programs. However, and I suggest this emphatically, to believe that mega for profits trump governmental programs across the board is akin to a foolishness I do not wish to believe you possess.

Believe it dude. Seriously.

And its not foolishness. The government is 54 trillion in the whole right now according to the latest financial report of the Nation..... with regards to MEDICARE. Now we won't to expand that to all 300 million citizens? :confused: Come on.

There's nothing, I mean absolutely nothing that you could say at this point that would convince me that more government is better. Nothing. They manage everything ineffectively. War on drugs, war on poverty, war in iraq, class warfare, etc. Do you think I'm going to turn over my medical freedom to them? Absolutely not.

Its a fundamental difference that you and I have... its rooted in principle. We both have logical and well thoughts ideas. And just because we didn't disgree doesn't mean I don't know what you believe, or why that you do. And as Bill Mahrer said, "Its not that I don't understand your values... Its just, I don't happen to share them."

**vundy33** · 12-22-2007, 11:47 PM

I would rather pay for my own healthcare and get it when I wanted it than to get it free and wait a month or however long we would have to wait.

crawdad · 12-24-2007, 03:35 PM

Ronald Reagan is right on the money with his quotes. The answer is not in free healthcare for everyone. The answer is in getting more doctors. If the market is flooded with doctors competition would drive down the astronomical costs of care. Right now the docs, hospitals and insurance companies are all making a killing. They blame the costs on the usual scapegoat; the lawyers. The truth is that greed is currently driving the system but I'm not sure "free anything" is the answer.

**thecavemaster** · 12-24-2007, 05:16 PM

Health care, then, is not a right, but rather a privilege that must be earned? I prefer the Canadian idea that basic healthcare is a right, a basic provided the citizenry by a responsible government.

**vundy33** · 12-24-2007, 06:17 PM

thecavemaster Wrote:Health care, then, is not a right, but rather a privilege that must be earned? I prefer the Canadian idea that basic healthcare is a right, a basic provided the citizenry by a responsible government.

Thats a good argument also...I just would rather pay for it than to get a handout.

**phs1986** · 12-24-2007, 06:31 PM

I think that if a person has documentation from a doctor stating their health problem, HAS a job, but is not offered healthcare thru their employment==== then I feel that the government should step up and offer assistance to ensure that the person gets the medical attention that they need to survive. As in my earlier post, if my aunt had gotten the medical attention she needed she just might still be here with us. Again.... this is just my opinion....

**thecavemaster** · 12-24-2007, 06:40 PM

I have a friend who has worked as a cook at Applebees for several years. On occasion, he relocates. Each time he does, and starts at the Applebees in that town, they treat him like a new employee... waiting period for insurance to kick in. I use this as an example to suggest the system is rotted because silver and gold are counted more dear than flesh and blood... and, if and when America "goes down" those words will be on the tombstone. We trust the god of the dollar...