|
| quote: | Originally posted by The17sss
lol... wonder if you read the story from the other day about Canada's new president of the Canadian Medical Association who said, in regards to their wonderful universal health care system:
"We all agree that the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize. We know that there must be change. We're all running flat out, we're all just trying to stay ahead of the immediate day-to-day demands."
The proposed answer? BRINGING BACK PRIVATE HEALTH CARE.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ca...D335rGu_Z3KXoQw
ANd if you have a complaint regarding cost issues with our current system, read this from the other day... about the hospital system in Las Vegas having their main cost overrun problem being illegal immigrants sucking the life blood from it: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ca...D335rGu_Z3KXoQw
Boy, our broken sub-par health care system must suck, since the CDC just raised our life expectancy again.
http://www.mydesert.com/article/200...t+all-time+high |
We'r not trying to copy Canada. We'r trying to set up a uniquely American healthcare system where all citizens have some form of health insurance.
| quote: | | It is in the best interest to allow the system to operate by free market principles like any other industry, which by definition will lower prices for service and improve quality. I noticed you followed Obama's lead with your Post Office vs. Fed Ex and UPS thing somewhere back in this thread to justify the public option as competition. Let's apply that to healthcare. The post office lost $2 billion last year, and its just been announced that they are going to lose $7 billion this year... yet they are still allowed to operate because they don't have to show a profit. This is good? Hilarious though, that Obama was off teleprompter and made that comparison saying the public option will be like the Post Office compared to Fed Ex. LOL! |
Insurance companies sole function is to return profits to shareholders by denying and watering down coverage. Insurance demand is inelastic. They can raise prices, but demand won't change much. They really don't give a flying fuck about anyone but their stock holders. Why should we give our health to these companies?
Additionally, I don't advocate "government-run" healthcare, neither does the healthcare reform bill. What I'd like to see is insurance co-operatives, where profit is returned in the form of increased coverage and saving to policy holders. In the most developed countries with healthcare systems such as Switzerland, Japan, etc., profit is actually illegal in healthcare insurance. That is the way it should be.
| quote: | | Edit: wait a second... I just realized the other half of what you said. Sure, the utopian idea of universal education sounds great as does universal healthcare, but look at how our government currently manages our education system! These are the same people you want running healthcare? Wow. |
Universal education and healthcare is not "utopian". Education is managed by state governments and is relative to how well each state runs them. The public school system has many great school, and many sucky ones. So what? That is to be expected. I advocate school vouchers so schools compete for funds, instead of having guaranteed funds from the state.
As for universal insurance coverage, everyone with a car must have car insurance. Is that also "utopian"?
| quote: | | let's stick to elected Republicans. The problem is, they have been shut out of most discussions in regards to crafting this legislation. It was farmed out to Pelosi and Reid, then to their minions to craft it. The problem is within the democrat party... the Democrats can't stop whining about the GOP's stance against the bill, yet they have more then enough votes to pass it by party line. Krypton, please- look at the DMV, Social Security, Medicare, Public Schools, etc... everything government run. TELL me that you think, when they can't even manage a $3 billion cash for clunkers program that they will "fix" our healthcare system by passing this thing. |
You have a misconception that the government is going to "run" healthcare. What's being proposed is universal insurance coverage. Preferably by co-operatives. I also don't want the government to run anything like this, but it's better than nothing at this point. Everyone should have health insurance and it's reprehensible in a country of our status, we don't have it.
| quote: | No man, you're wrong. People will become budget items, nothing more. It absolutely IS a government takeover of the health industry because the public option will force employers to drop their coverage, including taxing the balls off them through IRS mandate. Individuals will also be taxed by health care mandate (which Obama said he was against during the campaign- another lie) through IRS monitoring. How can you say denying people for existing illneses would be stopped under universal coverage, when the only way to control costs is to ration coverage? People will get denied all the time for things. Plus a looming Obamacare disaster will be a shortage of doctors... which is (shockingly) reported by the USA Today:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health...-shortage_N.htm |
The public option sucks. So does the private option. I'd like to see all private insurance completely done away with. Obama has also compromised on this, and insurance cooperatives looks to be the best solution. I'm all on board with that.
| quote: | | Well, I've had family on both sides deal with VA hospitals as well as regular ones, and there is simply no comparison in terms of efficiency and quality. |
So what are you advocating? Closing down VA hospitals? Privatizing them? That's ludicrous.
| quote: |
HAHAHA!! How did you miss this one? From my earlier discussion with Opus, explaining WHY they are on board (while reading, keep in mind the screams from your side regarding Halliburton-Cheney):
Are you aware that Obama accepted $150 million from pharmaceutical companies in exchange to go easy on them with drug pricing? Are you also aware he executed a back room deal in private (where are those promises to show all health care negotiations on C-SPAN?)where Pharma would committ to $80 billion in savings if Obama agreed to not let Medicare set drug prices? Sounds like a mix of extortion and our president getting in bed with big business to shape legislation.... another broken promise.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...9081102810.html |
And if Obama did have Medicare set drug prices, you'd be screaming "socialism!"...in your eyes, he's damned if does, damned if he doesn't.
| quote: | haha... yeah and then right after that part, it says this:
And that's correct- did you read further about the Hyde Ammendment? The Democrats are basically trying to get around it... either way, tax dollars will fund them. But take it a step further. Obama lied again, saying such claims are a "distraction", a "fabrication", and "untrue". If Planned Parenthood is supporting this legislation, do you seriously think goverment funded abortions aren't part of it? You gotta wake up dude. From 2007, Obama speaking to Planned Parenthood was asked by their CEO Brian Howard:
Bam. What you do think the "safety net" is that Howard was talking about? And what you you think "all essential services including reproductive care" means? If he was going back on it, Planned Parenthood wouldn't be supporting the House bill right now. Obama is a fucking liar man... people keep finding clips of him in his own words saying the opposite thing now compared to what he said 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years ago. |
All this is moot because the public option won't be passed.
| quote: | | Right but the point is, what business do they even have in the first place to enter a private home and instruct parents on who to be parents, based on values THEY deem appropriate? And, what on earth does that provision have to do with universal health care? |
Again, it would have been fully voluntary. This is probably also moot because the public option won't be passed.
| quote: | | Again, you think government intervention is the answer when time and time again it proves not to be. I see what you're saying, but if you think it's going to change for the better if the government is running it.... dude, use the Cash for Clunkers program again. The exact same thing is happening- dealerships are now rejecting the program because some of them are out millions of dollars that the government hasn't reimbursed them in the alloted time they promised. Their excuse? "We didn't forsee this problem and haven't hired enough people to handle all the applications." And they don't have to be held accountable. Imagine 1/6 of the economy being handled by the same entity... efficiency can't possibly increase. |
Again, the bill is not advocating government run insurance.
| quote: | No, they won't. Not when the public option destroys the private industry... which Obama, Barney Frank, and several others have STATED on the record is the ultimate goal of the public option. Page 16 of the bill... when your current coverage expires, or you make a single change on it before it expires, you will not be able to get private insurance again. Read it for yourself:
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArt...332548165656854 |
You don't need to worry about the public option. In fact, if this bill passes, insurance companies will have millions new policy holders. Additionally, cooperative insurance companies will be formed, who will work in the best interest of its members, instead of stockholders.
___________________
|
