Government-run health care

[eagl]

Moray,

You know just as well as I do that the question is not about "rights", it's about people who share your thoughts placing an obligation on ME to pay for someone else's health care.  The constitution does not guarantee anyone the right to have others take care of them or pay for their life/liberty/happiness.  That's an invented extrapolation from the guaranteed rights.

That said, there is value inherent in convincing people that it is a good thing to help out those in need.  The barrier to making any progress however is that the "far left liberals" (for lack of any better description of people who want wage-earners to pay for people who want stuff they haven't earned) are so intent on forcing everyone to pay for universal health care that even reasonable people who would like to help out are violently opposed to those proposals.  A solution that offers basic care to everyone yet does not turn wage earners into slaves for those who demand free stuff has not, and probably will not, be proposed.  Ever.

You and people like you demand that the compensation I receive for my work be diverted to those who cannot pay for their own health care, yet I am to have no say in how much I give away, nor do I have a voice in saying what sort of services ought to be "free".  This is because I am a reasonable person, and in the US the reasonable people do not have a voice.  If they state their opinion, they are mercilessly villified by both extremes in the debate.  The left-wingers call me a heartless, selfish, evil person, and the right-wingers call me a commie who is in cahoots with either the drug companies or the left-wing, take your pick.

So nothing will be done so long as the rhetoric is out of control, and this is why the current deliberations on US national health care are being done behind closed doors instead of out in the open.

Well, that's probably too close to political discussion but we'll see.  It touches on the reality behind free health care, the fact that one group of people are forced to pay for goods/services given to another group.  And demand for such "free" goods/services is quite literally infinite.

[Dago]

Moray,

You know just as well as I do that the question is not about "rights", it's about people who share your thoughts placing an obligation on ME to pay for someone else's health care.  The constitution does not guarantee anyone the right to have others take care of them or pay for their life/liberty/happiness.  That's an invented extrapolation from the guaranteed rights.

That said, there is value inherent in convincing people that it is a good thing to help out those in need.  The barrier to making any progress however is that the "far left liberals" (for lack of any better description of people who want wage-earners to pay for people who want stuff they haven't earned) are so intent on forcing everyone to pay for universal health care that even reasonable people who would like to help out are violently opposed to those proposals.  A solution that offers basic care to everyone yet does not turn wage earners into slaves for those who demand free stuff has not, and probably will not, be proposed.  Ever.

You and people like you demand that the compensation I receive for my work be diverted to those who cannot pay for their own health care, yet I am to have no say in how much I give away, nor do I have a voice in saying what sort of services ought to be "free".  This is because I am a reasonable person, and in the US the reasonable people do not have a voice.  If they state their opinion, they are mercilessly villified by both extremes in the debate.  The left-wingers call me a heartless, selfish, evil person, and the right-wingers call me a commie who is in cahoots with either the drug companies or the left-wing, take your pick.

So nothing will be done so long as the rhetoric is out of control, and this is why the current deliberations on US national health care are being done behind closed doors instead of out in the open.

Well, that's probably too close to political discussion but we'll see.  It touches on the reality behind free health care, the fact that one group of people are forced to pay for goods/services given to another group.  And demand for such "free" goods/services is quite literally infinite.

Well said Eagl, well said. 

Sadly, some lose sight of the fact that "the government" doesn't buy anything, doesn't pay for anything, it is the taxpayer, the average working citizen who pays for the handouts, the freebies, the pork barrel projects.

We work to earn money to live, to feed our families, and with any left over, to pursue happiness.  The gov't just takes away from us what we have worked to earn.   Maybe we don't care to support those who haven't worked, haven't struggled to achieve an education.  We certainly have a right to voice an opinion, one of the rights our forefathers fought, bled and died for was representation in matters of taxation.

[MORAY37]

Moray,

You know just as well as I do that the question is not about "rights", it's about people who share your thoughts placing an obligation on ME to pay for someone else's health care.  The constitution does not guarantee anyone the right to have others take care of them or pay for their life/liberty/happiness.  That's an invented extrapolation from the guaranteed rights.

That said, there is value inherent in convincing people that it is a good thing to help out those in need.  The barrier to making any progress however is that the "far left liberals" (for lack of any better description of people who want wage-earners to pay for people who want stuff they haven't earned) are so intent on forcing everyone to pay for universal health care that even reasonable people who would like to help out are violently opposed to those proposals.  A solution that offers basic care to everyone yet does not turn wage earners into slaves for those who demand free stuff has not, and probably will not, be proposed.  Ever.

You and people like you demand that the compensation I receive for my work be diverted to those who cannot pay for their own health care, yet I am to have no say in how much I give away, nor do I have a voice in saying what sort of services ought to be "free".  This is because I am a reasonable person, and in the US the reasonable people do not have a voice.  If they state their opinion, they are mercilessly villified by both extremes in the debate.  The left-wingers call me a heartless, selfish, evil person, and the right-wingers call me a commie who is in cahoots with either the drug companies or the left-wing, take your pick.

So nothing will be done so long as the rhetoric is out of control, and this is why the current deliberations on US national health care are being done behind closed doors instead of out in the open.

Well, that's probably too close to political discussion but we'll see.  It touches on the reality behind free health care, the fact that one group of people are forced to pay for goods/services given to another group.  And demand for such "free" goods/services is quite literally infinite.

Eagl, I truly do not disagree with what you have posted.  In fact, I agree with most all of it.  I am not one of those "far lefters" that this board vilifies to such extreme.  I simply feel that, at this point, the privatized health care system in this nation is making decisions for this country already, and those particular decisions are based upon shareholders and balance sheets, not my elected representation.  I don't see health as a free hand out, though.  I'm sorry, I see it as a right, like basic K-12 education. It may not be written into the constitution, but it is still a right. There is a minimum standard that should be applied to citizenry and citizenship.  As it stands, your position would be not to back military spending as well, because defense would then be a "freebie" which I enjoy.  Your position rests that it is the individual's responsibility for his own.... well, everything.  Let's keep it going ad infinitum...it's my responsibility to provide for my own roads and maintenance etc etc.... Your position becomes untenable rather quickly.  Government exists for and by the people, otherwise lets all go back to the caves.

Can the government system do better?  I don't know, but at least I'm not just a number then.  I still have the power of my vote, and if it fails miserably, people will get elected to change it.  As it stands now, get really sick with any insurance carrier and they'll find any reason to drop you on the spot, if they figure they can't recoup the expense of your care (read: you're too old or too sick to effectively repay it) .  And from there you have absolutely no recourse, but debt and bankruptcy.  You can't get the CEO of CIGNA removed with a public vote.  I mean, look at France.  Seriously.  Number 1 in Healthcare.... with a strong movement by the people that says... "Screw up and you're out of office. End of story"  Do you think those two things are coincidence?

It's on both sides of the issue, research as well.
Why do you think cancer research is at a standstill?  It is because they make 3-5 times the money just keeping you alive and treating you, no matter what suffering, than they would to find a "cure".  As someone in research, I know for a fact they are funneling most all research grants into simply treating the disease, rather than eradicating it in a causal way. 

[Dago]

If we continue down the road we are traveling, many are going to choose the handout road.  Soon, you can choose not to work, but given money to live on, food stamps for food, free health care.  Why work?  Too many are choosing that path now, lets not make it more enticing and rewarding.

[jimson]

I expect you to deny your social security when you retire then, if this is how you truly feel.  Nobody will be making you take that money.

I've heard this argument before, but I was never given a choice in the matter, so, I may be willing to deny it, as long as the government is willing to refund me all the money I was forced to pay into that system plus interest.

Where does it stop? Since people can't be healthy without nutritous food, then that needs to be provided as well, and how can anyone be healthy without good housing, so we need to give everyone that too.

It's a slippery slope right into marxism.

As far as the assurances that "if you are happy with your health care you can keep it."

THAT IS A LIE!!   You can't keep what is no longer available.

How many employers are going to continue to offer health care benefits once they are able to dump everyone onto the "public option"?

[Dago]

If I have a right to happiness, and I feel the only way I can be happy is to have the gov't give me a fully restored P51, isn't it my right to a P51?   

[narsus]

Reminds me of a fellow teacher at the high school I work for. Her husband has been unemployed for about a year. His idea for looking for a job is to sit on his bellybutton all day and not do anything. They came up with the idea to get pregnant (husband no job remember). Myself and another coworker would ask him every time he stopped by the school, "how's the job hunt going?" His reply was always he had better things to do (no exaggeration).

A few months ago he started a part-time job working one day a week. His third day of work he took off to go to the wife's baby shower, and then quit the next week saying he didn't like the boss. He received an hourly wage on the books.

Their solution, his wife quit after her first year of teaching. They decided that government handouts were better than either of them having a job. Did I mention she had full medical and dental as a teacher for her family. Moral of the story, if people get handouts what's the point of being a productive member of society.

If people want government run health care, have them opt-in to it. They can give a portion of their pay check to the government before taxes.

[eagl]

Moray,

Realize you're buying into the vast medical conspiracy theory.  My wife is a doc and here primary concern is not how much money she's getting paid, it is how she can cover her butt to not get sued.  I think the docs aren't out to rip everyone off, rather it's the opposite.  They are running scared.  Yea some are flat out liars and thieves (and some are in cahoots with the lawyers who exist for no reason but to sue other doctors) but I think most would like to do their job and try to help people without risking being sued.  They can't do ANYTHING without covering their butts, and that is why you see so many "unnecessary" studies, unnecessary prescriptions, and what sometimes seems to be a rushed attempt to pigeon-hole a patient as having a particular known disease or problem so they can avoid the legal liability of trying to actually treat the patient instead of following a checklist.

The vast conspiracy you speak of probalby exists in the world of insurance and pill pushers, but it certainly doesn't exist with most doctors or hospitals.  They're running scared and the last thing we need is to make things worse by arbitrary salary caps (for example).

[zack1234]

what have you done to spiderman

[eagl]

what have you done to spiderman

He's a happy happy guy.  Loves dancing even though he's not very good at it.  Most people don't know that.

[Tac]

Eagl,

I think the whole issue is that one has to choose either of 2 options. One being a private company which is in the race for profits ... or the government which is in the race because it was ordered to.

In a gov. run system, there is the inevitable abuse of the system by both the people (plenty of examples of this in this thread already) and by the gov. officials (corruption). However, a gov. run system mandates equality of services to society by LAW.

In a privately run system, the people do not have the protection of the law and are completely at the mercy of an organization who'se sole purpose is to maximize profits. Business 101 : maximize profits by minimizing costs. Costs in a healthcare system means simply NOT providing the service yet taking payment for it. Sound familiar?

Its exactly what Cigna/humana/etc companies do and they do post record profits each year. And, since those companies make you sign documents releasing them of any wrongdoing (or else you don't get approved for their service) they can literally deny you medical treatment to save your life because it cuts into their profit margins. In a privately run system, the people become numbers and have no voice nor options (all healthcare providers are the same and fancy that, they're owned by the same investors too!).


Personally, I think that there should be two parallel yet separate healthcare systems in the US:

1- gov.- run healthcare system in the US which should match France's or the UK's .. but be available only to US citizens/nationals & their immediate family (parents/kids as long as they are US residents not uncles/etc should the parents/kids not be US citizens yet). Think of it as a Veteran's healthcare system but expanded to all citizens.

2- Privately owned healthcare similar to what is available now but with much stronger regulations and laws mandating these companies that the health of their clients is THEIR legal responsibility if they are under their system.

This would clearly define the responsibility of the gov. and that of the private companies when it comes to healthcare. non-citizens/nationals can choose to have a US company-based health insurance or use insurance from their country of origin.

[sluggish]

I expect you to deny your social security when you retire then, if this is how you truly feel.  Nobody will be making you take that money.

If even today I were given the option to opt out of the program I would.  But, I have been compelled to pay in my entire adult life.  As people continue to live longer, they continue to raise the age of eligablility.  Although I know I'll never get all of the money out of SS that I've put in, you can bet the farm that I'll damn well try.

[uptown]

I don't need the government for anything. They can stay out of my business and life. It's already been proven that congress can't run a post office,cafeteria or the DMV. Does anyone really believe they can run our medical care? 

[Stoney]

My wife is a doc and here primary concern is not how much money she's getting paid, it is how she can cover her butt to not get sued.

This is a key point that is being absolutely ignored by those that are pushing this bill.  Malpractice reform has to be part of the solution.

[spammer]

LOL,

They can take our Freedom, We'll take it back.

spammer (I'm not looking forward to be counseled on my end of life decisions by the Government.)

Life is a gift.