The human right of health insurance:

[dt3]

For example cancer, as you mentioned earlier, is 25% more prevalent for blacks than whites.

Obviously that has nothing to do with what you said, but it's something interesting to point out.

And what do you blame this on? Are you saying that there's some medical way to prevent cancer that blacks don't have access to?

 

[Minor Axis]

Does this mean that neither Tim nor Minor disagree with post #1 or #2?

I ask, because neither of you actually addressed them directly.

I did not comment on those posts because I didn't see the point but since you are pushing... The first post is just conservative gobbledegook. I don't consider health care a "right" as spelled out in our Constitution, but as I told Accountable, Universal Health Care is the right thing to do.

And you continue to have this phobia that the government is going to screw you while you don't seem to be bothered by a huge for-profit health system that makes itself rich at the expense of those who can't afford it. Oh, yeah, they are good ole' capitalists making you proud.

The government, and apparently liberals are the only thing thats stands in the way of the ugly capitalist system that existed before rules, regulations, social programs, and labor laws were enacted by those who actually think "society" should really means something across the board.

 

[Accountable]

Are you a putz on purpose, or do you just lose control sometimes?
The difference between a big greedy corporation and a big greedy government is that you don't have to give your money to a big greedy corporation. You have a choice. A big greedy corporation can't put you in prison if you don't cooperate with the big, greedy, abusive, exploitive, self-enriching schemes they come up with.

 

[Minor Axis]

Are you a putz on purpose, or do you just lose control sometimes?
The difference between a big greedy corporation and a big greedy government is that you don't have to give your money to a big greedy corporation. You have a choice. A big greedy corporation can't put you in prison if you don't cooperate with the big, greedy, abusive, exploitive, self-enriching schemes they come up with.

You're calling me a putz? My feelings are hurt.
And your "pass" for the big greedy corporations is not myopic at all. Better have them than the government.

 

[Accountable]

You're calling me a putz? My feelings are hurt.
And your "pass" for the big greedy corporations is not myopic at all. Better have them than the government.

YAY!! We agree on something. :clap


Sorry for the putz comment. Your putzishness is rare.... for a lib.

 

[Gijs]

What Obame is doing really is copying the dutch, central european model. And I think, but of course I am an outsider and I haven`t really submerged myself in the subject, it would be an improvement. When I watched the news last day I heard some politician in the US call it "a dangerous experiment with our healthcare" but what Obama wants and what we have here is almost identical. And we aren`t devastated, our healthcare is fine and financially we are all okay (except for the crisis of course.) Our country functions well, and in Holland there are no people who are affraid to go to the dentist just because they are anxious about what the bill could be. It is all covered in the standard state-insurance. No rotten teeth here. (Of course that is not really treu, there are people in Holland with rotten teeth, but you know what i mean.) But of course I don`t know how the real situation is in the US I only see what I can see on the sometimes sensationalistic news. But I have to admit the speeding tickets here are very high. But the normal conveniences are of a normal price, and we in Holland, like in most europeans live in prosperity and I don`t think we would have much more value for our income if my family would move to the US. And Canada also has more or a less the same insurance model I thought, and they are`nt doing bad for themselves either.

EDIT:
Now I am reading trough the topic I see that Obama is rejecting an Canadian type of health care. Well, I am not a Canada expert either, so I don`t know if the European model (if you don`t look to the south like Spain and Portugal and to Britain, cause they have different models) is the same as the Canadian model. But maybe I was wrong about Obama wanting the same system as in The Netherland/central Europe but the dutch media sure tries to convince us of that.

 

[Alien Allen]

What Obame is doing really is copying the dutch, central european model. And I think, but of course I am an outsider and I haven`t really submerged myself in the subject, it would be an improvement. When I watched the news last day I heard some politician in the US call it "a dangerous experiment with our healthcare" but what Obama wants and what we have here is almost identical. And we aren`t devastated, our healthcare is fine and financially we are all okay (except for the crisis of course.) Our country functions well, and in Holland there are no people who are affraid to go to the dentist just because they are anxious about what the bill could be. It is all covered in the standard state-insurance. No rotten teeth here. (Of course that is not really treu, there are people in Holland with rotten teeth, but you know what i mean.) But of course I don`t know how the real situation is in the US I only see what I can see on the sometimes sensationalistic news. But I have to admit the speeding tickets here are very high. But the normal conveniences are of a normal price, and we in Holland, like in most europeans live in prosperity and I don`t think we would have much more value for our income if my family would move to the US. And Canada also has more or a less the same insurance model I thought, and they are`nt doing bad for themselves either.

EDIT:
Now I am reading trough the topic I see that Obama is rejecting an Canadian type of health care. Well, I am not a Canada expert either, so I don`t know if the European model (if you don`t look to the south like Spain and Portugal and to Britain, cause they have different models) is the same as the Canadian model. But maybe I was wrong about Obama wanting the same system as in The Netherland/central Europe but the dutch media sure tries to convince us of that.

Not familiar with what you have. So if you wish to provide info that would be great.

What we have proposed is a mess because it is a 1000 plus page bill and nobody in congress that votes has read it and they want to rush. That is a prescription for a friggin disaster

 

[Guyzerr]

Real nice system you have down there.

" "Now I have no insurance again," he said with a sigh. "

King: Uninsured 23-year-old battles leukemia, medical bills - CNN.com

 

[dt3]

Real nice system you have down there.

" "Now I have no insurance again," he said with a sigh. "

King: Uninsured 23-year-old battles leukemia, medical bills - CNN.com

But is it the sign of a broken system, when he CHOSE not to get insurance?

Rose had no health insurance because he was too old to be covered on his parents' policy and too young and seemingly healthy to think he needed it.

That's a personal decision he made. Don't point to this as an example of what's wrong with the system, he CHOSE not to be part of the system.

 

[Guyzerr]

But is it the sign of a broken system, when he CHOSE not to get insurance?




That's a personal decision he made. Don't point to this as an example of what's wrong with the system, he CHOSE not to be part of the system.

Do you suppose it's possible he chose not to be part of the system because he couldn't afford it? I'm thinking that was probably a very big factor in his decision. The media conveniently left that out imo.

 

[Accountable]

I think it more likely that he's 23 and invincible.

 

[dt3]

Do you suppose it's possible he chose not to be part of the system because he couldn't afford it? I'm thinking that was probably a very big factor in his decision. The media conveniently left that out imo.

It says he was too healthy to think it was necessary. Nowhere in the article does it say he didn't have the money.

 

[Guyzerr]

It says he was too healthy to think it was necessary. Nowhere in the article does it say he didn't have the money.

I'm aware of that but common sense and his age are clear indicators as far as I'm concerned. The media doesn't want anything unless there's drama involved hence they mention the healthy bit and leave out what most adults would consider necessary. At 19 he's an adult but in reality is still a kid with a brain the size of a Gnats.

I've been on tv 3 times in my life. On two occasions they spent an entire day with us and what made it on air was less than 5 minutes. What the hell did they do with the other stuff they filmed? No drama, no air time.

 

[dt3]

I'm aware of that but common sense and his age are clear indicators as far as I'm concerned. The media doesn't want anything unless there's drama involved hence they mention the healthy bit and leave out what most adults would consider necessary. At 19 he's an adult but in reality is still a kid with a brain the size of a Gnats.

I've been on tv 3 times in my life. On two occasions they spent an entire day with us and what made it on air was less than 5 minutes. What the hell did they do with the other stuff they filmed? No drama, no air time.

That may be true, but you can't debate based on pure speculation. All we know about the situation is what's written in the article. Based on the article, I see a bad decision, not a broken system.

 

[Guyzerr]

That may be true, but you can't debate based on pure speculation. All we know about the situation is what's written in the article. Based on the article, I see a bad decision, not a broken system.

This sounds like a broken system to me...

From the article.


" Rose initially was put on Medicaid, then at a social worker's suggestion applied for Social Security disability payments. But after he started receiving them, his Medicaid was cut off because Texas is one of a dozen states that counts such payments against its income standards for Medicaid.
"Now I have no insurance again," he said with a sigh. "







"Then you either cut services or you cut payments to providers," Floyd said. "And in Texas we have a significant problem with Medicaid. Only 38 percent of our physicians participate in Medicaid programs. ... So if we start squeezing the payment rates down or freezing them, there are fewer and fewer physicians who will want to participate in those programs."

In Canada ALL doctors must participate as far as I know.

It is beyond me why so many Americans are against a universal health care system when other countries have proven it works. It may not be the perfect system but it beats the hell out of what you have going down there. If someone, anyone, needs urgent care it's there for them without the worry of not being covered by insurance. We can choose what doctor we see, what hospital or clinic we decide to walk in to etc and nobody has the right to alter that decision.

 

[Dana]

Meh health insurance is not a human right... It might be a human NEED today but it's not a right!

 

[Guyzerr]

Meh health insurance is not a human right... It might be a human NEED today but it's not a right!

No have it all wrong. Health care may not be a right but insurance is. Think about it.

 

[Accountable]

It is beyond me why so many Americans are against a universal health care system when other countries have proven it works. It may not be the perfect system but it beats the hell out of what you have going down there. If someone, anyone, needs urgent care it's there for them without the worry of not being covered by insurance. We can choose what doctor we see, what hospital or clinic we decide to walk in to etc and nobody has the right to alter that decision.

Other countries haven't proven it works. Doctors' pay gets cut significantly, most countries have waiting lists, and most operate at a loss that politicians don't make up through higher taxes for fear of angering their constituents.

Frontline did an excellent piece, if a little slanted on the pro side. It's here online somewhere but I don't have time to post the link.

 

[dt3]

This sounds like a broken system to me...

From the article.


" Rose initially was put on Medicaid, then at a social worker's suggestion applied for Social Security disability payments. But after he started receiving them, his Medicaid was cut off because Texas is one of a dozen states that counts such payments against its income standards for Medicaid.
"Now I have no insurance again," he said with a sigh. "

If he hadn't applied for the SS disability, his Medicaid would still be valid. He got bad advice, and instead of checking out the consequences, he followed it. Again it's a personal choice, not a broken system. He didn't have to file for SS disability, he chose too.

"Then you either cut services or you cut payments to providers," Floyd said. "And in Texas we have a significant problem with Medicaid. Only 38 percent of our physicians participate in Medicaid programs. ... So if we start squeezing the payment rates down or freezing them, there are fewer and fewer physicians who will want to participate in those programs."

In Canada ALL doctors must participate as far as I know.

It's been an issue for a long time here about how little doctors make for treating medicaid patients. The gov't tries to stiff arm them by paying as little as possible, so the doctors quit treating the patients. Maybe that part of the system is broken, but it's an easy fix. Get rid of Medicaid or pay the doctors the going rate for the procedures.

If someone, anyone, needs urgent care it's there for them without the worry of not being covered by insurance. We can choose what doctor we see, what hospital or clinic we decide to walk in to etc and nobody has the right to alter that decision.

Anybody in the United States, citizen or not, has the right to walk into a hospital and be treated regardless of their ability to pay. The hospital has no option but to provide treatment.

 

[Accountable]

No have it all wrong. Health care may not be a right but insurance is. Think about it.

Insurance is a right?? Then we shouldn't have to pay for it. You're not making sense to me. Can you explain?