Stray Dogs and Cats....

How people can be against their own interests at every turn just blows me away.

What makes one fight so hard to keep sick people from being treated?

What makes them feel its their patriotic duty to keep preventative care from Americas children?
 
evince said:
How people can be against their own interests at every turn just blows me away.

What makes one fight so hard to keep sick people from being treated?

What makes them feel its their patriotic duty to keep preventative care from Americas children?
Click to expand...

Ignorance.
 
I cant wait until we have a real healthcare system in this country and they are on to some other idiot self abuse.

Its going to have to happen if we are going to be more than a third world country in the end.

How is the US ever going to compete in a world economy that insures its workers healthcare?

We wont and sometimes I think the people who are against any attempt to make healthcare affordable for the people is working to push the American lifestyle down to a third world level. They are easier to control when they are beaten down.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Yea and let's list so of those notorious left wing liberal communist states with national health care programs.

Japan

Of course Dixie will probably argue that we should never use notoreously liberal communist nations like Japan,... as examples on managing public health.[/sarcasm]
Click to expand...

OK, I have to wade in here. I know that there are those who would like to have "universal" health care...health care for all paid for by the government. I would like for there to be some reasonable "help" for those who cannot afford it. My question is can we as a country afford what some are proposing. I keep hearing phrases like "this plan is the tip of the iceberg" or "once we get this across we'll expand on it." Can we really afford that?

I quoted the above post because it included some countries who have universal health care, among other government provided benefits. I focused on Japan because I read an article recently pointing out how we take some things for granted in the U.S. A trip to the lake for a day of fishing in Japan costs over $500. Fuel is very expensive due to taxation, you have to pay to drive on roads that might not be 15 miles long at a rate of like $80 on a weekday and $30-$50 on the weekend. I was amazed and then I found out that "normal" folks don't do those sorts of things...or have to save up in order to be able to once or twice a year. This is just one example of what overextending the budget of this country could lead to, which has been done in the name of "compassion" among other things for many years. Life as we know it, as middle-class citizens would be forever changed. I really don't want that kind of life. I don't really want that kind of taxation. If someone thinks it will just be the "rich" that are paying or the "corporations" that are paying I think they are fooling themselves. I really want something to be done to help those who really need help. Cost control is where to start, IMO. Then there are programs that can be tweaked to further the coverage. My point is that we need to consider the cost.

The other countries mentioned are taxed similarly to Japan. Cost of living in these countries is quite a bit higher than in the U.S. Here is just one article I will include as I have been comparing things from here to there (there being a lot of different countries) for quite a while. I scares me that so many want to be like "them." Here is just one article for your perusal:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12452503/

"In most of the industrialized world, including Europe and Japan, pump prices are much higher than in the U.S. – even though the wholesale price is roughly the same. The difference is a heavy tax load those countries impose to discourage consumption.

The Dutch have the dubious distinction of paying the most to fill 'er up, according to the U.S. Deptatment of Energy. (There are various agencies that track gasoline prices, but these are among the most recent figures available.) As of April 10, drivers in the Netherlands were paying the equivalent of about $6.73 a gallon at the pump. The gas itself cost $2.61; the rest — $4.12 — represented tax. That’s a 158 percent tax. By comparison, the U.S. has the lowest tax on gasoline of any industrialized country: about 15 percent at current prices.

Elsewhere in the industrialized world, the actual cost of gasoline ranges from $2.15 a gallon (France) to $2.61 in the Netherlands. But the after-tax price is $5.80 in France and over $6 a gallon in most other major European countries. Japanese drivers get off relatively easy: taxes there only push pump prices to about $4.50 a gallon.

Can we really afford what some folks want?
 
apple0154 said:
Your ignorance concerning universal plans is astonishing. The "State" doesn't own anything. One chooses their own doctor and the bill is paid by the government.

Think of it this way. If you get medical coverage through your employer you are part of a group. A universal plan is simply a group. A large group. A group that includes every citizen. There's nothing mysterious or devious about universal plans.
Click to expand...

You completely fail to realize the government doesn't make money. Whenever you use the word "government" in a sentence, replace it with "taxpayer" and view it accordingly, because that is what you really mean. The government doesn't have any money of its own. Every penny the government spends on healthcare, comes from the pocket of a hard working American citizen, or is borrowed in the name of American citizens present and future.

So you want a system where we all pay for everyone else's health care. That means, all the hypochondriacs out there, who would visit the doctor daily if they didn't have to pay for it, WE get to pay the bill! That means all the AIDS patients out there, who will require years of expensive treatments just to keep them living, WE get to pay for it! That means the current system where we are essentially going broke trying to pay for those who can't afford health care, like the poor and elderly, will now include those who CAN afford to pay for it as well. Oh... but no worries, the "government" is paying for it, right?
 
Dixie said:
You completely fail to realize the government doesn't make money. Whenever you use the word "government" in a sentence, replace it with "taxpayer" and view it accordingly, because that is what you really mean. The government doesn't have any money of its own. Every penny the government spends on healthcare, comes from the pocket of a hard working American citizen, or is borrowed in the name of American citizens present and future.

So you want a system where we all pay for everyone else's health care. That means, all the hypochondriacs out there, who would visit the doctor daily if they didn't have to pay for it, WE get to pay the bill! That means all the AIDS patients out there, who will require years of expensive treatments just to keep them living, WE get to pay for it! That means the current system where we are essentially going broke trying to pay for those who can't afford health care, like the poor and elderly, will now include those who CAN afford to pay for it as well. Oh... but no worries, the "government" is paying for it, right?
Click to expand...

Are you saying the US can not afford to look after it's ill citizens or are you saying it's not worth it and just let the sick die?

What sparks my interest in this is hearing people say "we can't afford it" or "it can't be done". It can be done and it is affordable IF that's what people want.

I know government funds are obtained from taxpayers and I also know taxpayers have the money. It's not a case of "can't afford it". It's a case of "I don't want to spend my money helping ill people". If straight language was used instead of people making up lies and horror stories folks could make an informed decision.

Dozens of countries have switched to a universal plan and not one country even has a viable opposition running on dismantling it. Whether it's the Germans or the Italians or the British or the Scandinavians or a dozen other countries they all favor a universal plan and what people make up the majority of the population of the US other than Germans and Italians and Scandinavians and people from those dozens of other countries?

Every culture/people with a universal plan prefer it to a "pay or suffer" system. Every one. It stretches credulity to say Americans do not want a universal plan when the vast majority of Americans are composed of the very people who prefer a universal plan.

As the old saying goes, "What's wrong with this picture?" Of course, the answer is the citizens have been fed lies and horror stories put out by special interest groups who are making money off the misery of others.

Surely logic and common sense dictates that if universal plans were worse than a "pay or suffer" system one country would have switched back. At the very least there would be massive demonstrations and political figures in the aforementioned countries fighting for a return to the old system.

For those who believe society should not be obliged to help a fellow citizen in times of illness, a position it appears you favor, fine. What I have a problem with is people who believe the way you do and then proceed to lie about how universal systems operate. They don't care if they operate well or not. They are against the principal of society being responsible for helping ill people. That's why a compromise can not be reached.

It's like two people discussing what to have for dinner. If one person is not hungry they will find all sorts of excuses to disagree with the person who is hungry because the person who isn't hungry doesn't want anything, period. The people who don't want everyone to have access to medical care will never agree with any suggestion because they don't want a solution.
 
apple0154 said:
It's unfortunate folks like Dixie can't see beyond their back yard fence.
Click to expand...
That's true to most rural, small town folks. I myself hail from the small (<4,000) town and cultural center of the universe, Coldwater, Ohio. I would imagine the denizens of Pigs Knuckle, Alabama niavely feel the same way.
 
leaningright said:
OK, I have to wade in here. I know that there are those who would like to have "universal" health care...health care for all paid for by the government. I would like for there to be some reasonable "help" for those who cannot afford it. My question is can we as a country afford what some are proposing. I keep hearing phrases like "this plan is the tip of the iceberg" or "once we get this across we'll expand on it." Can we really afford that?

I quoted the above post because it included some countries who have universal health care, among other government provided benefits. I focused on Japan because I read an article recently pointing out how we take some things for granted in the U.S. A trip to the lake for a day of fishing in Japan costs over $500. Fuel is very expensive due to taxation, you have to pay to drive on roads that might not be 15 miles long at a rate of like $80 on a weekday and $30-$50 on the weekend. I was amazed and then I found out that "normal" folks don't do those sorts of things...or have to save up in order to be able to once or twice a year. This is just one example of what overextending the budget of this country could lead to, which has been done in the name of "compassion" among other things for many years. Life as we know it, as middle-class citizens would be forever changed. I really don't want that kind of life. I don't really want that kind of taxation. If someone thinks it will just be the "rich" that are paying or the "corporations" that are paying I think they are fooling themselves. I really want something to be done to help those who really need help. Cost control is where to start, IMO. Then there are programs that can be tweaked to further the coverage. My point is that we need to consider the cost.

The other countries mentioned are taxed similarly to Japan. Cost of living in these countries is quite a bit higher than in the U.S. Here is just one article I will include as I have been comparing things from here to there (there being a lot of different countries) for quite a while. I scares me that so many want to be like "them." Here is just one article for your perusal:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12452503/

"In most of the industrialized world, including Europe and Japan, pump prices are much higher than in the U.S. – even though the wholesale price is roughly the same. The difference is a heavy tax load those countries impose to discourage consumption.

The Dutch have the dubious distinction of paying the most to fill 'er up, according to the U.S. Deptatment of Energy. (There are various agencies that track gasoline prices, but these are among the most recent figures available.) As of April 10, drivers in the Netherlands were paying the equivalent of about $6.73 a gallon at the pump. The gas itself cost $2.61; the rest — $4.12 — represented tax. That’s a 158 percent tax. By comparison, the U.S. has the lowest tax on gasoline of any industrialized country: about 15 percent at current prices.

Elsewhere in the industrialized world, the actual cost of gasoline ranges from $2.15 a gallon (France) to $2.61 in the Netherlands. But the after-tax price is $5.80 in France and over $6 a gallon in most other major European countries. Japanese drivers get off relatively easy: taxes there only push pump prices to about $4.50 a gallon.

Can we really afford what some folks want?
Click to expand...
That's not a fair representation Lean. Healthcare reform is needed not because of what some people want but because it's cost is running away and is in excess of the quality we are getting in return for what we are paying. That and to many people drop through the cracks which has other long term consequences and cost.

The point of fact is that health care costs in our nation are double the costs of other developed nations based on a percentage of GDP and are still climbing at a steep rate. Right now they represent about 16% of our GDP. That means 16% of all wealth generated is being sunk into health care. Other modern nations spend about 8% of there GDP (and these are not communist or socialist nations as morons like Dixie would scare you into believing). So while we spend twich as much of our national productivity as most modern industrial nations, we get lousy results. We rank 32nd in the world. Not only that but with this cost continually rizing it is quickly approaching crises mode in the numbers of people not covered or have inadequate coverage contributes to that rising costs and substantially impacts business. For example. My company spends about 15% of it's overhead on health care for it's employees. That's double what it was 20 years ago. It's so prohibitively costly that most small busniesses now can't afford to offer their employess coverage and many large companies have had to drastically water down the level of coverage they can afford to provide their employees.

So the real question (and you can forget about the Dixies and their "Socialsm" scare tactic canard) is what can we learn from other nations that will allow us to get this cost under control and provide adequate levels of coverage for our citizens.

There are three things we can learn from these other nations and must do (or will do sooner or later).

#1. Basic Health Care must be viewed as a right and coverage be made avaliable to all persons. This must include a public option for those who can not afford private insurance.
#2. All persons must carry health care insurance. Those who cannot afford private insurance must obtain it from a public option funded by the taxpayers.
#3. Cost controls and standardized pricings for health care services need to be implemented.

These are the three basic reforms that all modern industrialized nations have adopted in some form or the other, except for the USA.

Eventually we will too because if we don't, the rising cost of health care will continue to chew up a greater percentage of our GDP and our businesses will no longer be able to operate under this financial burden. So we can reform now or we can wait until it is a full blown crises.
 
Last edited:
leaningright said:
OK, I have to wade in here. I know that there are those who would like to have "universal" health care...health care for all paid for by the government. I would like for there to be some reasonable "help" for those who cannot afford it. My question is can we as a country afford what some are proposing. I keep hearing phrases like "this plan is the tip of the iceberg" or "once we get this across we'll expand on it." Can we really afford that?

I quoted the above post because it included some countries who have universal health care, among other government provided benefits. I focused on Japan because I read an article recently pointing out how we take some things for granted in the U.S. A trip to the lake for a day of fishing in Japan costs over $500. Fuel is very expensive due to taxation, you have to pay to drive on roads that might not be 15 miles long at a rate of like $80 on a weekday and $30-$50 on the weekend. I was amazed and then I found out that "normal" folks don't do those sorts of things...or have to save up in order to be able to once or twice a year. This is just one example of what overextending the budget of this country could lead to, which has been done in the name of "compassion" among other things for many years. Life as we know it, as middle-class citizens would be forever changed. I really don't want that kind of life. I don't really want that kind of taxation. If someone thinks it will just be the "rich" that are paying or the "corporations" that are paying I think they are fooling themselves. I really want something to be done to help those who really need help. Cost control is where to start, IMO. Then there are programs that can be tweaked to further the coverage. My point is that we need to consider the cost.
Click to expand...

Leaning, you're going to have to pay for it, whether it comes out of your paycheck in insurance costs or taxes. And the fact is, the component cost for the average American that they pay for healthcare is far larger than most nations.

They may have large taxes and big expenses, but it's not because of their universal healthcare system. Doing a right-minded comparison here would put the average American at a disadvantage when it comes to healthcare costs/taxes.
 
"In most of the industrialized world, including Europe and Japan, pump prices are much higher than in the U.S. – even though the wholesale price is roughly the same. The difference is a heavy tax load those countries impose to discourage consumption.

The Dutch have the dubious distinction of paying the most to fill 'er up, according to the U.S. Deptatment of Energy. (There are various agencies that track gasoline prices, but these are among the most recent figures available.) As of April 10, drivers in the Netherlands were paying the equivalent of about $6.73 a gallon at the pump. The gas itself cost $2.61; the rest — $4.12 — represented tax. That’s a 158 percent tax. By comparison, the U.S. has the lowest tax on gasoline of any industrialized country: about 15 percent at current prices.

Elsewhere in the industrialized world, the actual cost of gasoline ranges from $2.15 a gallon (France) to $2.61 in the Netherlands. But the after-tax price is $5.80 in France and over $6 a gallon in most other major European countries. Japanese drivers get off relatively easy: taxes there only push pump prices to about $4.50 a gallon.

Can we really afford what some folks want?
Click to expand...

The gas taxes aren't ever going to be nearly large enough on their own to finance a UHC. I don't know why you're pulling them out specifically.

And, anyway, the situation is different. American cities are built around the concept of driving. You just don't have to do that nearly as much in Europe.
 
apple0154 said:
The broken record is folks like Dixie keep suggesting people won't like a universal health plan and there's no evidence of that, at all. Once a country has adopted a universal plan the citizens fight to keep it, without exception.

There is not a single country one can point to that reverted to the old "pay or suffer" system and every country started out with that system.

Let me dumb that down for you. Every country started out with a "pay or suffer" system. No exceptions. Every country started out that way.

Still with me? Great. Then countries started to change to a universal system. Every country that changed to a universal system has kept that system. Again, no exceptions. Every country has kept their universal plan.

There is only one conclusion any rational individual can come to and that is a universal plan is preferable to a "pay or suffer" system. There is nothing to debate. There isn't any facts to support a counter argument. None. Nada.

As long as some folks are misguided it's necessary to continue to lay out the facts. Perhaps if you assisted me we could end this sooner rather than later. Can I count on your support? :D
Click to expand...

Translation:
"pay or suff,,,,,,pay or suff.....pay or suff.....pay or suff.....pay or suff...."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top