Former Top Canadian Dr. Brian Day: Obamacare Will Bring Rationed Care & Skyrocketing

[apple0154]

Rubbish. People seek it right now, they go to town hall meetings to tell them "We support health care reform, we do not support the public option."

Health care reform has been talked about for decades. Nothing happens. One side (Democrat) can not talk about it if the other side (Republican) is against the idea. There can never be a consensus because one side doesn't want a consensus.

All those years wasted. All those years when people have not had adequate medical care. If the government option turns out to be lousy people will continue to buy coverage privately. What could be more fair?

Again you argue the straw man, the US can have one and the US can have the best by avoiding the pitfalls we see in the "public option" elsewhere. And they "tweak" their plans by rationing care, such as the young lady with cervical cancer in the UK that couldn't get a pap smear because each time she met the age limitation they had extended that limitation to a further age.

How many people did get pap smears who wouldn’t have been able to afford them? You’re discounting the preventive measure. Private insurance is not concerned about prevention because they simply raise rates or dump the individual. A universal plan has the incentive to prevent illness because the plan will have to pay for the patient’s full medical care.

A perfect example is stop-smoking programs. Private insurance doesn’t care if a person smokes. They simply raise the rates and if the person does contract cancer they raise the rates or drop them. Universal plans have free stop-smoking programs because if an individual contracts cancer the program will have to cover the individual. The same applies to diet. Some universal plans cover free weight consultation.

Some people miss the big picture. It’s not just about affording medical coverage. It’s about having a healthier population.

Rubbish, no changes are ever allowed to a government program. Just taking a tiny percentage of new accounts and allowing them to invest in a safe option was enough to freak every Democrat alive. There will be no changing the Government Run program only strengthening it.

Huh? Haven’t you continually said governments with universal plans are considering private options; that they have to continually tweak the system? The reason major changes do not occur is because citizens do not want major changes.

I have repeatedly stated that the first thing we need to do is survey the cause of the cost increases. You are again arguing your silly straw man.

Survey the cause? We know the cause. It’s the same reason why Wal-Mart has lower prices than neighbourhood shops. The linen shop and kitchen shop and the hardware store and the electronics store…..if every department in Wal-Mart had a manager and each manager made what the owner of each of those little stores made then Wal-Mart wouldn’t be cheaper.

Competition is vital when talking about for-profit enterprises because everyone is greedy. It keeps people in check. It is not vital, or even preferable, when dealing with things like medical care, things run by the government.

I don't say that it is too expensive, I say that it will be if we do not first reign in the cost. Without the incentive we have right now to find and fix that first there never will be a serious effort in that direction once the costs are hidden from the private sector through taxation.

What do you mean by hidden? Governments are elected every four years. It’s like having the opportunity to change the management of a company every four years.

Universal medical isn't "terrible", government run plans are inadequate, have consistently been so, and we can do better. Right now while the debate is on we have several things we need to do first.

Where you and I disagree isn't that we could cover everybody, it is how we should do it and what it would cost in more than dollars to bow down to a "government option"...

We’re right back where we started. Government run medical IS better than any “pay or suffer” system. How do we know? We know because not one country that has universal medical has reverted to the “pay or suffer” system and every country started out with a “pay or suffer” system. That’s a fact. That’s reality. There isn’t even any noteworthy political movement in those countries proposing they revert back.

 

[Damocles]

Health care reform has been talked about for decades. Nothing happens. One side (Democrat) can not talk about it if the other side (Republican) is against the idea. There can never be a consensus because one side doesn't want a consensus.

All those years wasted. All those years when people have not had adequate medical care. If the government option turns out to be lousy people will continue to buy coverage privately. What could be more fair?

Again, if it were actually a fair playing field you may have a point, however exempting themselves from lawsuits and playing with a bit of funding changes the field immensely.

How many people did get pap smears who wouldn’t have been able to afford them? You’re discounting the preventive measure. Private insurance is not concerned about prevention because they simply raise rates or dump the individual. A universal plan has the incentive to prevent illness because the plan will have to pay for the patient’s full medical care.

Almost none, they just aren't that expensive, yet women who needed them were refused in the name of savings.

A perfect example is stop-smoking programs. Private insurance doesn’t care if a person smokes. They simply raise the rates and if the person does contract cancer they raise the rates or drop them. Universal plans have free stop-smoking programs because if an individual contracts cancer the program will have to cover the individual. The same applies to diet. Some universal plans cover free weight consultation.

Interesting. My insurance not only covers the quitting programs it publishes them. They don't "just raise the rates." I think you are just making stuff up now. Shoot, my past three insurance companies all covered it, patches even when they were prescriptions, nowadays it is Chantix.

Some people miss the big picture. It’s not just about affording medical coverage. It’s about having a healthier population.

Some people miss the big picture, it isn't just about having affordable medical coverage, it's about controlling even how people act through government programs.

Huh? Haven’t you continually said governments with universal plans are considering private options; that they have to continually tweak the system? The reason major changes do not occur is because citizens do not want major changes.

It is because they are reluctant to give up power, those who "give" to you also have some say in what you do.

Survey the cause? We know the cause. It’s the same reason why Wal-Mart has lower prices than neighbourhood shops. The linen shop and kitchen shop and the hardware store and the electronics store…..if every department in Wal-Mart had a manager and each manager made what the owner of each of those little stores made then Wal-Mart wouldn’t be cheaper.

Rubbish "we know the cause". This is more just making crap up. There is real savings to be found in the system, pentagon hammer style savings, we need to find it and root it out before we start hiding the cost to people through government entitlement programs.

Competition is vital when talking about for-profit enterprises because everyone is greedy. It keeps people in check. It is not vital, or even preferable, when dealing with things like medical care, things run by the government.

Medical care is not, and should not be, run by the government. In every case they are inadequate and all are moving towards more privatization because the people realize they are inadequate.

What do you mean by hidden? Governments are elected every four years. It’s like having the opportunity to change the management of a company every four years.

One doesn't need to have a government to do that with a company nor an election cycle, but the reality is for the vast majority of the people these costs will be hidden. They will simply have insurance and these costs will not effect their pocketbook directly until much further down the road when the government program is again in bankruptcy. Government programs hide actual costs because too many people do not see it as their money.

We’re right back where we started. Government run medical IS better than any “pay or suffer” system. How do we know? We know because not one country that has universal medical has reverted to the “pay or suffer” system and every country started out with a “pay or suffer” system. That’s a fact. That’s reality. There isn’t even any noteworthy political movement in those countries proposing they revert back.

Yes we are back to this again, because people fear change is no excuse to accept the inadequate and mediocre.