US National Healthcare Debate

[The Doctor]

I have the understanding that the government-run health care system will be similar to how it's done in England, and I like that. It seems to work extremely well for them and with a few modifications would work extremely well for us.

Let me tell you something: I have a prerecognized health condition. I have an overactive thyroid. Under the current system, I won't be able to get health care coverage when I am old enough. What happens then? I'll have to pay for the medicine used to treat my overactive thyroid for the rest of my life. Out-of-pocket, tons of money wasted, just because companies don't want to cover people.

I doubt those idiots screaming at town hall meetings know what the hell they're talking about. They just want to make noise. If they really want to voice their dissent they should do it calmly and without idiocy. That woman who called Obama a Nazi and claimed the health care reform was a Nazi-ish policy had no idea what she was talking about. If she wanted to fling shit at it she could have at least compared it to Communism.

It's not Nazi-istic. It's not Communism. It's socialism, and it's a damn good thing. This country needs something like that so people can stop worrying about getting sick and start worrying about the things that matter.

I'm all for the reform.

 

[FromTheSouth]

Doc, you won't have to pay for your thyroid medicine. When you get off of your parents insurance and on to your own, you will fill out a form called HIPPA, and all of your existing condition will be transferred over.

The prediagnosed condition provisions keep someone from getting cancer and then buying insurance. You buy insurance in case something happens, not because something happened. You can't buy car insurance after you get in a wreck.

Your concerns are the perfect example of the propaganda that the left is trying to put put to get this initiative through. It is nothing but fear tactics and control. The fact is that medicaid, medicare, amtrack, welfare, and anything else the governments runs are mismanaged, rife with abuse, and overbudget. Should we really put our lives in their hands too?

The best way to make healthcare affordable is to legalize healthcare co-ops. Allow people to join an open public group plan, capped at 100,000 members per plan, with an insurance company, not the government. Private industry will be more efficient, in that they have the right and obligation to gain a profit.

 

[KKarvox]

There is absolutly, no reason for a public option. It is in-efficent, costly, and hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried. The only solution is a tax-credit to go out and buy you're own insurance from a private company. This encourages competition, which drives down prices, as opposed to driving them up with programs like medicare. The "public option", only encourages people to leech off of the system, as opposed to going out and getting their own insurance, and gives way to much power to politicians to control what kind of care we get, and the quality of the care. This policy will eventually phase out private insurance, which will drive prices up exponentially. If you don't believe me, look at how much the price of medicine has gone up due to medicare, which is on a much smaller scale than this. You really think politicians are going to be responsible, and regulate prices?

 

[Milkyway!]

Let me surprise you. I am against a government run healthcare initiative.

I didn't see that one coming.

Fortunately for me, so is America.

I don't see why. From the way Obama presented it, its going to save us more money, than anything. Just look at the prices on insurance these days. My father has to work two jobs, just to be able to pay for insurance.

According to President Obama, 40 million Americans are uninsured. Upon further review, it has been determined that 12 million of these people are illegal aliens. I honestly don't think that they deserve my tax money for anything when they are in this country illegally. There are lines around the block, so to speak, to get into this country legally, and those that usurp the rules should not be rewarded. I understand that they are here, and we need to deal with it, but until they start paying federal income tax, they shouldn't get the benefits of mine.

Funnily enough. Neither does Obama, nor his Health Care plan. If you paid attention to what was said, Obama made it clear. Citizens of the United States of America are the ONLY ones recieving this Health Care. No illigal immigrants will be offered, nor given the oprotunity to recieve the the National Healthcare benefits.

Another 15-20 million are employed 20 and 30 somethings who choose not to have healthcare coverage.

Sounds a bit silly. Insurance, and Healthcare is needed. What Obama is proposing isn't a 100% government ran Healthcare system. Its compitition to cause the insurance companies lower their extremely high rates.

The question was asked at Maryland town hall, "If I choose not to have healthcare, why am I being fined $2500 a year so that others can?" In all honesty, I agree here.

Good health insurance (family) costs up to 500$ a month. Incase she didn't notice, she would be saving about 3500$ a year.

Secondly, the CBO has scored the current initiative in the trillions of dollars. The typical US budget in the last twenty years (not including Social Security and Medicare, which are funded through a separate tax called FICA) has beena round 650 billion dollars a year.

Which Obamas plan is to cut out Medicare entirely, and his budget on the plan is 90 billion dollars a year. He'll be saving 560 billion dollars a year.

Just passing national healthcare would cost over a trillion dollars every year. How are we going to pay for this? Simple math tells me that income taxes would need to tripled across the board. Or are we going to raise a trillion dollars annually by taxing sodas and candy bars?

In 10 years time, its said to only have spent up to 900 billion dollars. Which is less than 2 years of that we spend on Medicare according to your numbers.

Third, other countries with socialized medicine have flawed plans. Canada's fastest growing industry is the private healthcare clinic. People are going to these clinics and paying for MRI's and simple procedures rather that wait years. Clinics are on the rise across Europe as well. The waits are killing people, literally. I think this quote echos my sentiments.

Canada's Healthcare plan is entirely diffrent compared to what Obama is trying to get passed through. What Obama is trying to get passed through is the ending of the monopoly set from Insurance companies of today. Hes trying to get some compitition, from the government, to lower the prices for EVERYONE.

 

[Razor]

Well, this thread was resurrected and I feel I shall input my new and improved idea on the matter. While taking a shot at one of FTS' points and another dude's as well. Because it's what I do. Bustin' the chops, as it were.

My idea, while I would like to argue was mine and mine alone, was inspired from another gentleman. Why not just expand Medicare out to everyone? The overhead of Medicare is a fraction of that of the humongous insurance companies. The system is entirely sufficient, in that you don't hear of old and poor people dying of cancer because their Medicare refused to fund their treatment. Expanding it out to whomever needs it will most likely raise costs, but that's what a Democrat does. Go into power, raise taxes, and raise funding for Education, Medicine, and the Poor. You don't have to spend outrageously like Obama is starting to, (He's only trying to channel FDR guys. Now he just needs a World War to pull us out of the funk...shit...), but damn it all. You act as if you didn't know a Democrat would spend money.

Because we don't want to wait six months for MRI's, or have a board of bureaucrats telling us what healthcare we need or don't against our doctor's wishes. Some of us want experimental procedures because they may be out last hope. If your healthcare system is so perfect, answer me two questions.

Really FTS? How is this any different from when a conglomerate tells you they dont' think you need a experimental procedure or expensive medication? This argument is so damn faulty, I'm almost insulted you used it.

There is absolutly, no reason for a public option.

The poor that have lost their homes because they broke their leg and can't afford the cast would beg to differ.

It is in-efficent, costly, and hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried.

The British, the Canadians, and France would beg to differ.

The only solution is a tax-credit to go out and buy you're own insurance from a private company.

My own solution, Medicare being given to all, is a good solution. So "the only solution" doesn't fit.

This encourages competition, which drives down prices, as opposed to driving them up with programs like medicare.

Medicare drives up prices? Medicare allows the poor who couldn't afford the prices of already outlandishly high programs to get health insurance.

Here's a story. Every 6 months or so the health insurance companies go through a process known as "purging." They find their highly at-risk or very sick patients and raise their rates to the point where they simply have to drop coverage. So these "the government is raising the prices!" stories are bullshit. The companies do it willingly to the sick.

The "public option", only encourages people to leech off of the system, as opposed to going out and getting their own insurance,

What, by having to pay for the coverage? You're making no sense. How are you leeching from the system when you're paying for the very coverage you're being accused of leeching?

and gives way to much power to politicians to control what kind of care we get, and the quality of the care.

Oh, so you want the power in the hands of that nameless CEO. As opposed to, say, a person that is appointed by the government as the head of Medical Care for that district and that you can personally visit and/or lead a public crusade against. Right. That makes sense.

This policy will eventually phase out private insurance,

Oh noes, the private insurance companies will actually have to compete with someone that won't collude with them and artificially raise rates. How dastardly!

which will drive prices up exponentially.

How? More people paying into the system should even out costs.

If you don't believe me, look at how much the price of medicine has gone up due to medicare, which is on a much smaller scale than this.

Show me this fictitious rise in cost, and how it can be inextricably linked to Medicare...the system that is in place for the people who aren't even buying into the private insurance in the first place. It's not like Medicare is poaching customers.

Or, you know, the increase in prices could be a direct result of the increase in Obesity rates amongst our population. More health problems means more people to cover, means more the insurance company has to pay out, which means more money you have to spend. Oh, and the fact that medical care is getting more expensive, because we are finding new and better ways to save people from a multitude of diseases. These new ways cost money.

How about a metaphor? A man, 15 years ago, dies of a shotgun wound to the head. Costs the insurance company all of $5,000. Today, another man gets shot in the head. However, the medical industry has come a long way since then. They can keep that man alive, damn it! They may keep that man alive, but it's damn costly. It ends up costing $30,000 to keep the man alive. THAT is what raises rates. New and improved technologies that keep patients alive longer, thereby leaving someone with the tab for a longer and more costly hospital stay.

But you can continue blaming it on the government. Everyone loves to do that.

You really think politicians are going to be responsible, and regulate prices?

You really think CEOs are going to be responsible and give everyone the healthcare they need, just because they pay a overpriced premium? Yeah, everyone else did too. That's why you hear horror stories of cancer patients having their premiums jacked up. Because those CEOs are just so nice and friendly. They definitely have our best interests at heart.

 

[FromTheSouth]

I didn't see that one coming.

Sorry about that. I just like facts. It's not that I'm against the theory of National Healthcare. It's a sound idea. It's just that for a multitude of reason, that it is doomed to failure.

I don't see why. From the way Obama presented it, its going to save us more money, than anything.

My insurance is $80 a month. With the national plan, it will be over $200 a month. How the fuck does that save me money? And this bullshit idea that we are going to be able to keep that insurance after a national switch is ludicrous. The insurance companies will lose customers and be subject to more government interference and regulation, which will force them to raise their prices. This means, that at some point, I will be forced to switch as well. Let's hope I never get terminal, because some bureaucrat will be able to decide if it it cost effective to even treat me.

Just look at the prices on insurance these days. My father has to work two jobs, just to be able to pay for insurance.

My dad is on medicare. I'm going to explain how bad this system is in a little bit. Just wait.

Funnily enough. Neither does Obama, nor his Health Care plan.

He doesn't have a health care plan. He just endoreses one of the fifteen flowing through Congress right now. A little research would do you well here.

If you paid attention to what was said, Obama made it clear.

He has never made anything clear. Just like during the campaign he uses vague and empty rhetoric to make everything sound rosy. He is good at that, but the guy dodges more bullets than Neo, and the results aren't nearly as positive.

Citizens of the United States of America are the ONLY ones recieving this Health Care. No illigal immigrants will be offered, nor given the oprotunity to recieve the the National Healthcare benefits.

That's new, and you know it. It is a response to the failure of the town hall meetings, and he's trying to make it more appealing to those of the right that, as ordinary citizens, have made him look like a fool.

Sounds a bit silly. Insurance, and Healthcare is needed. What Obama is proposing isn't a 100% government ran Healthcare system. Its compitition to cause the insurance companies lower their extremely high rates.

OK, so you think that taking customers away from insurance is going to drop prices? So, if Walmart bought less widgets, they would cost less? The bulk purchasing of medical care is how insurance companies keep prices down. The competition will last all of fifteen minutes before the insurance companies are forced to raise prices or shut down. This is what the left wants. They want to shut down industries that support the right while simultaneously making people more dependent upon the government. This is how they stay in power. Watch them lose 25-30 seats in congress next year and see how the American people are turning on this idea. Bill Clinton, who is exponentially smarter and more capable than Obama failed to pass this idea, and realized it in time to minimize the damage done politically.

Good health insurance (family) costs up to 500$ a month. Incase she didn't notice, she would be saving about 3500$ a year.

Costs me less than a $1000 a year. Public option is upwards of $2500 a year. Growing up, $2500 a year was about all my mom ever paid for me, her, and my dad, and until she moved out, my sister. A family of four will cost around $3500 a year. This, using my math skills is more. The only people paying $5000 a year are people who buy healthcare outside of a company plan. For this reason, I think the government should legalize co-ops, with no government intervention beyond removing a stupid regulation.

Which Obamas plan is to cut out Medicare entirely, and his budget on the plan is 90 billion dollars a year. He'll be saving 560 billion dollars a year.

He's not cutting medicare, he's basically extending. Do you know how Medicare works? My father, who is on medicare, deals with an insurance company, while the government pays for the insurance. He gets medication for 5% of cost, until he reaches a certain cost. At that point, he has to spend $5000 of his (my) money on medication before the government kicks back in. My co-pay for an office visit, on private insurance, is $15. His, on medicare, for the elderly, poor, and destitute, is $25. The government plan is inefficient, too costly, and quite a burden on the poor. My father's health does not allow him to work, and my mother, who was retired, had to take a job at fucking Macy's to help me help him pay for his health care. There are three months a year when they have to tap into their retirement money just to pay for medication, and this is WITH my help. Imagine if I didn't have a good job, like so many people who try to help their parents manage this inefficient system.

In 10 years time, its said to only have spent up to 900 billion dollars. Which is less than 2 years of that we spend on Medicare according to your numbers.

You are completely fucking brainwashed by that stupid fucking speech. The CBO, which scores policy initiatives for budget considerations, has estimated the cost to be roughly a trillion dollars a year. They know better than Obama and his staff of brainwashed speech writers. Believe me, this is just another instance where someone should have called him a liar. You need to do some research Milky, and not take this lying President at his word. What exactly has Obama come through on so far to make you believe that this won't be a massive failure? Milk is cheaper, that doesn't mean he can manage healthcare. Furthermore, one of his czars is the top in his field.....population control. Please don't tell me that this is the President you want running healthcare when your parents get to be as sick as mine.

Canada's Healthcare plan is entirely diffrent compared to what Obama is trying to get passed through. What Obama is trying to get passed through is the ending of the monopoly set from Insurance companies of today.

A list of American Healthcare Providers:
* AIG
* Allstate
* American Automobile Association
* American Family Insurance
* American Income Life
* American National Insurance Company
* Amica
* Arbella
* Assurant Employee Benefits
* Auto-Owners Insurance
* CapitalOne
* CNA Financial
* Colonial Life
* Commerce Insurance Group
* Country Financial
* Chubb Corporation
* Encompass
* Erie Insurance Group
* Esurance
* Evergreen USA RRG
* Farmers Insurance
* GEICO
* Genworth
* GMAC Insurance
* Hanover Insurance
* The Hartford
* Independent Health
* Infinity Auto Insurance Company
* John Hancock Insurance
* Liberty Mutual
* Merchants Insurance Group
* Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
* Mutual of America Life Insurance Company
* Mutual of Enumclaw
* Mutual of Omaha
* Nationwide Insurance
* New York Life Insurance
* OneBeacon Insurance Group
* Pemco
* Principal Financial Group
* Progressive
* Prudential Financial
* Regence Group
* Response
* Safe Auto Insurance Company
* Safeco
* Safeway Insurance Group
* Selective
* Shelter Insurance Companies
* Standard Insurance Company
* State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company
* Symetra Financial
* The Travelers Companies, Inc.
* TIAA-CREF
* Unitrin Direct Auto Insurance
* USAA
* Westfield Insurance

How the fuck is this a monopoly? Do you even fucking know what a monoploy is? How is this not competition? There is enough competition as it is. I'm sorry that some people can't afford the service, but there are ways to make it available to them without a government takeover of the industry.

Hes trying to get some compitition, from the government, to lower the prices for EVERYONE.

You don't understand what you're writing about. You're basing it all on one speech, which was full of vague misinformation and contradictory made up "evidence." There is a reason Congressman Wilson called him a liar. It's because he is.

Well, this thread was resurrected and I feel I shall input my new and improved idea on the matter. While taking a shot at one of FTS' points and another dude's as well. Because it's what I do. Bustin' the chops, as it were.

Just do better than Milky. That was entirely too easy.

My idea, while I would like to argue was mine and mine alone, was inspired from another gentleman. Why not just expand Medicare out to everyone?

Because Medicare is entirely inefficient and wasteful government bureaucracy.

The overhead of Medicare is a fraction of that of the humongous insurance companies.

That's not true. Government has never run anything as efficiently as private industry.

http://www.cahi.org/cahi_contents/resources/pdf/CAHI_Medicare_Admin_Final_Publication.pdf

This article basically states that government reports of Medicare and Medicaid ignore the administrative costs, or the money they spend running the industry and paying the insurance companies to dole out the allowed list of medications and procedures chosen by the government. Yes, Razor, the government is lying to you. The true cost of private insurance is roughly 2/3 of the actual cost of Medicare.

The system is entirely sufficient, in that you don't hear of old and poor people dying of cancer because their Medicare refused to fund their treatment. Expanding it out to whomever needs it will most likely raise costs, but that's what a Democrat does.

Why not lift the regulations that allow private companies to offer co-op style plans, which allow people to join a group plan, similar to an employer offered plan, to share costs amongst users, and allow an entity which is trying to gain profits to run an efficient system.

Go into power, raise taxes, and raise funding for Education, Medicine, and the Poor. You don't have to spend outrageously like Obama is starting to, (He's only trying to channel FDR guys. Now he just needs a World War to pull us out of the funk...shit...), but damn it all. You act as if you didn't know a Democrat would spend money.

1. FDR was a terrible President, who allowed Pearl Harbor to happen in orderto hide the failure of The New Deal.

2. Maybe if he keeps encouraging sojourns into Pakistan, he'll get his war.

3. Just because you put more money into entitlement programs does not mean that you are making them better. Democrats also like to add massive bureaucracies to run these entitlements, raising administrative costs.

Looking at education as an example, Republicans have always been in favor of giving block grants to school districts to be spent as they see fit, however, Democrats like to mandate where every penny is spent. The saying that all politics are local is never more apparent. Individual districts know where the money needs to be spent. Under Bill Clinton, who I like, billions were spent on the internet and computers in schools with not enough teachers and crumbling walls.

Really FTS? How is this any different from when a conglomerate tells you they dont' think you need a experimental procedure or expensive medication? This argument is so damn faulty, I'm almost insulted you used it.

Medicare is refusing to pay for knee surgery for my father, and instead gave him three options, a $4200 cocktail of shots that they don't cover, acupuncture, and amputation. Please, deal with the system for a bit before making generalizations about its greatness.


I'm going to let you handle your debate with someone else without helping him.

I just want you to know how inefficiently the government runs Medicare, and help you to know that Obama's speech was full of lies and misinformation, much like the rest of his administration. He doesn't want to run GM, but he is. He wants to close Guantanamo, but he won't. He ended the Iraq war by following the schedule Bush laid out before he left office.

But hey, Milk is half price, so, ummm, awesome.

 

[Razor]

Just do better than Milky. That was entirely too easy.

I like to believe I did.

Because Medicare is entirely inefficient and wasteful government bureaucracy.

Right....and so all the poor people that are getting medical care under Medicare would obviously say likewise.

If not Medicare, then why not a system like TriCARE? You know, the system that military and military dependents use. I'm under it right now, and it's pretty legit. Or is it all under the Medicare umbrella?

That's not true. Government has never run anything as efficiently as private industry.

http://www.cahi.org/cahi_contents/resources/pdf/CAHI_Medicare_Admin_Final_Publication.pdf

This article basically states that government reports of Medicare and Medicaid ignore the administrative costs, or the money they spend running the industry and paying the insurance companies to dole out the allowed list of medications and procedures chosen by the government. Yes, Razor, the government is lying to you. The true cost of private insurance is roughly 2/3 of the actual cost of Medicare.

I would go running to the hills, but the government has been lying to me for ages.

..So I suppose the old political quote about "It is the job of the government to do that which the private sector either can not do or can not do as well" really shoots me in the foot, huh?

I refuse to believe that the government can't run Health Care more efficiently or at least more honestly than the mega conglomerate businesses can.

Why not lift the regulations that allow private companies to offer co-op style plans, which allow people to join a group plan, similar to an employer offered plan, to share costs amongst users, and allow an entity which is trying to gain profits to run an efficient system.

Is that not what Obama's plan for the national option is? Give everyone the option of a multiple payer system that just happens to have payers numbering in the hundreds of millions of people?

1. FDR was a terrible President, who allowed Pearl Harbor to happen in orderto hide the failure of The New Deal.

Reagan was a horrible president, whose idea of economic reform was repealing all of the regulations we have put into place after the Great Depression. And WOW, how much good has that done us? We're seeing a repeat of what happened 70 years ago!

2. Maybe if he keeps encouraging sojourns into Pakistan, he'll get his war.

Oh Pakistan. I'm still waiting for them to "fall to the rebel Taliban forces" so that Obama can storm in and save the day. Because he's my savior and all that good stuff.

3. Just because you put more money into entitlement programs does not mean that you are making them better. Democrats also like to add massive bureaucracies to run these entitlements, raising administrative costs.

But when the workers are being paid minimum federal wage, wouldn't the numbers come out to be less than that of the overhead of the insurance companies? Hell. You don't even have to make a new department. Put the national health insurance plan under the Department of Health and all that.

Looking at education as an example, Republicans have always been in favor of giving block grants to school districts to be spent as they see fit, however, Democrats like to mandate where every penny is spent. The saying that all politics are local is never more apparent. Individual districts know where the money needs to be spent. Under Bill Clinton, who I like, billions were spent on the internet and computers in schools with not enough teachers and crumbling walls.

Of course the Republicans like to fund schools...right after we buff up a already bloated Defense budget and give yet more money to Israel. Oh, and don't forget the tax cuts to the rich that have SO helped us out.

I liked Bill Clinton too. I would, however, never claim him infallible. As I would never claim for Obama. At least they're trying to help the education system, as opposed to the Republicans, who forced Education funding out of the Stimulus Bill. Because, you know, they couldn't have shaved any of the money going to useless projects in their own districts.

Medicare is refusing to pay for knee surgery for my father, and instead gave him three options, a $4200 cocktail of shots that they don't cover, acupuncture, and amputation. Please, deal with the system for a bit before making generalizations about its greatness.

I did. Way back when I was a little dude and my mom was keeping 3 children, a baby, and herself eating on 50 dollars every 2 weeks after bills. I was really sick when I was younger, and I never once stayed home sick because we had Medicare. Then again, that was under Bill Clinton.

Does your father need the knee surgery, or is it one more in order for comfort? I mean, is it completely necessary? That could explain why Medicare is hesitant to comply with knee surgery.

I'm going to let you handle your debate with someone else without helping him.

Thanks. I don't need to argue with you over someone else's post either.

I just want you to know how inefficiently the government runs Medicare, and help you to know that Obama's speech was full of lies and misinformation, much like the rest of his administration. He doesn't want to run GM, but he is. He wants to close Guantanamo, but he won't. He ended the Iraq war by following the schedule Bush laid out before he left office.

I knew Bush was ending the war in Iraq. I also knew that towards the end Iraq was basically pushing the troops out. They tried to argue for an extension, but the government wasn't hearing it. Something silly like "We want to have our country."

Obama. I'll hold out on calling him a liar for a few more months. Because I want to get my complimentary "Blah blah blah, I cant' hear you, blah blah blah" period. Bush supporters got it for 7 years, dammit.

But hey, Milk is half price, so, ummm, awesome.

Yeah! Where's your inflation now, bitch?