Universal Healthcare?

[Astor]

So work to afford the doctor you need. Universal health care doesn't give you that option.[/Quote]

 

No, but it gives everyone an option, one that many wouldn't have otherwise.

 

Everyone gets the same.[/Quote]

 

Id rather everyone get the same as opposed to only the rich being able to afford healthcare.

 

That's not good enough for someone waiting for a hearth transplant. That's why they come here because they know they'll get the heart quicker rather than waiting for the insurance company to make a move.[/Quote]

 

So the rich can lead, happy, healthy lives while the poor die or spend a lifetime on dialysis because they can't afford to pay a good doctor?

 

We are humane.[/Quote]

 

That's at odds with almost everything else you've said.

 

Guys Universal Health care may sound good on paper, but it's not when actually implemented.[/Quote]

 

As i've said, when I needed preventative surgery, I got it.

 

My grandfather needed heart surgery, he got it.

 

My uncle needed a new hip, He got it.

 

See where i'm going? All of that was with this universal healthcare you dislike so much.

[El Sitherino]

Just so you know, you're usually referred to a doctor because of the type of treatment you need. If they happen to be located in America, there ya go.

[EnderWiggin]

Also, with ourcurrent economy when you have the government having to bail out companies like AIG this in my opinion would only make our troubles worse.

 

Nothing to do with the topic.

In my opinion I believe the doctor should be the one in charge of when you get the care you need. Not some insurance company.

 

Wow. You do realize that this is what's happening in AMERICA, right? If the insurance company tells you you can't get the care, then you don't get the care. In AMERICA.

 

 

Yes everyone may be getting some kind of care, but not really what they need.

 

This is just plain bull****.

You can never be sure of everyone. But you learn more about the physician and talk to them. Get to know them as a person.

 

Oh, you need a life saving surgery? Hold on, let me shop around for a month to find you one with a good bedside manor.

Other countries like you've mentioned guys don't provide care well. We've given money to countries like Kenya and Africa.

Countries like Africa? Wow.

 

Pay attention, friend. The reason that Kenya doesn't provide care well is because it doesn't have a Universal Health Care System. And it's poor.

 

Throughout all of this, you haven't said anything that actually pertains to the topic. Your words are meandering about and have no factual basis.

 

We live good lives in the US better than many third world countries. We are a rich nation. Money has gotten to the right places. We are humane. Some countries are not.

 

NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE!

 

Dag nab it, saying that we live lives better than some doesn't mean that we shouldn't work for progress.

So work to afford the doctor you need.

Some people don't have that option.

That's not good enough for someone waiting for a hearth transplant.

 

Transplants are determined by how many viable hearts are gotten. If no donors die that month, then it's impossible to get you a heart. Plus, America has huge wait times for transplants, so I'm not sure where you're going with this.

Guys Universal Health care may sound good on paper, but it's not when actually implemented.

Source?

Compare the mortality rate of a capitalism health care system and an universal health care system. And look at who has had less deaths under which system.

 

Double-source? Because I know that this one is ****.

I can speak on this type of medical topic well in that my father is a retired Nurse Anesthetist.

I can speak about how to fly because my great-uncle was a pilot. Oh wait, that's bull.

These are the guys that put you to sleep. The I V's, gas mask, that kind of thing. You need several in the room to deal with how much of this and that medicine they need while under surgery. Theirs another anesthetist watching the EKG and such.

 

Not to be confused with Anesthesiologist. That is a type of doctor that oversees the work of the nurse anesthetists under him. He's the one who says give this or that to the nurse anesthetists. The Anesthesiologist will write on the paper work saying he administered this medication or that even though it was his underlings who did.

 

My father retired due to his hearing getting bad. If not for his hearing loss he says he'd continue to work. But when you can't hear as well in the surgery room that can put the patient in more danger. 40yrs he worked.

 

Nothing to do with anything.

So this just shows guys like my Dad do care for the patient and cared enough to know when it was time to quit.

 

All that tells me is that your Dad retired because he couldn't hear as well. It says nothing on his motives, and is really irrelevant as to why universal health care is a "bad system". The doctors in Canada/the UK/Sweden (and etc) still care about their patients.

 

_EW_

[SD Nihil]

No, but it gives everyone an option, one that many wouldn't have otherwise.

 

Again with capitalism you have choice of level of care. Universal you all get the same level of care. Nothing better than the current level. With your condition that might not be adequate.

 

Yes you have to work for it. Why should I have to pay more taxes for someone else who didn't put forth the effort to work hard. You didn't choose to work hard sorry I'm not going to award your laziness. That may sound cold, but I don't believe in awarding those that choose to work the minimum and expect to get more for little.

 

If you work hard you should get what you deserve. If you work little you should get little. I think that's fair.

 

So the rich can lead, happy, healthy lives while the poor die or spend a lifetime on dialysis because they can't afford to pay a good doctor?

 

That's right it's their fault they are poor. They wouldn't be if they applied themselves. So what it's hard. Heck my Dad started out living in someone's garage. So you can do it if you work at it. So yes those that worked hard get to have more and those that are lazy get little. To some I may seem like a monster. But this is how some conservatives believe. And I'm not ashamed or feel guilty in the least. When I go to sleep I sleep like a log. I just don't care that the poor man is dying in a ditch. I may feel pity or sympathy for his pain, but at the same time I know he could have helped himself not to have had that pain.

 

That's at odds with almost everything else you've said.

 

We are. We are the country that has given more aid and money to other countries that any other country has.

 

My grandfather needed heart surgery, he got it.

 

My uncle needed a new hip, He got it.

 

See where I'm going? All of that was with this universal healthcare you dislike so much.

 

I'm glad you got the care you needed. What I was talking about were those patients who needed emergency surgeries. Ones that couldn't wait like yours.

 

Nothing to do with the topic.

 

It is on topic. It's me reinforcing my point of why Universal is bad is because with our current economy and high taxes we can't afford more taxes to pay for such a universal health care system. That's how it ties in.

 

Wow. You do realize that this is what's happening in AMERICA, right? If the insurance company tells you you can't get the care, then you don't get the care. In AMERICA.

 

That's right insurance companies also in America hold care back from you. You'd also have that same problem with Universal Health Care with a side of government involvement and higher taxes to pay for the system of Universal Health Care.

 

This is just plain bull****.

 

Oh. Please elaborate.

 

Oh, you need a life saving surgery? Hold on, let me shop around for a month to find you one with a good bedside manor.

 

Our technology is very good compared to some other countries. Some research doesn't take very long. In the hospital you might get recommended to a good surgeon.

 

You don't get that in an Universal Health Care System.

 

EnderWiggin]Pay attention, friend. The reason that Kenya doesn't provide care well is because it doesn't have a Universal Health Care System. And it's poor.

 

Throughout all of this, you haven't said anything that actually pertains to the topic. Your words are meandering about and have no factual basis.

 

It's because they're corrupt. When we're giving them the money and they don't choose to fix problems and get the money where it's needed in my opinion that's corruption.

 

NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE!

 

~snipped~ saying that we live lives better than some doesn't mean that we shouldn't work for progress.

 

It does have to do with the topic. It means we have more because we strived to work hard and make progress. In an Universal Health Care System your incentive to work harder, make new health care improvements, and do more than the minimum is hampered because you will not make more, get advancement, or get rewarded for doing more than the set by the government standard of care quotient.

 

Some people don't have that option.

 

We all in America have choice. Choice to be a bum or a choice to live wealthy. If your stuck in a slum. If your city doesn't have jobs move. Work out of your car if you have to.

 

If my father started out living in someone's garage to now have over a couple million in investments that right there shows in America you can make it if you try.

 

All that tells me is that your Dad retired because he couldn't hear as well. It says nothing on his motives, and is really irrelevant as to why universal health care is a "bad system". The doctors in Canada/the UK/Sweden (and etc) still care about their patients.

 

It shows his motives real well. If he didn't care about the patients and only about profit he would have continued to work despite his hearing loss. He may have bad hearing, but heck with the fact it might cause a problem in the surgery room money would've mattered more.

 

But my Dad doesn't think that way. He said he quit because his hearing was interfering with the work. He couldn't hear what medication he was being told to give. Each medicine matters. If you give the wrong one you can harm or kill the patient. He said he didn't want to cause harm to a patient.

 

Transplants are determined by how many viable hearts are gotten. If no donors die that month, then it's impossible to get you a heart. Plus, America has huge-ass wait times for transplants, so I'm not sure where you're going with this.

 

You'd wait longer in UHC System.

 

Source?

 

Double-source? Because I know that this one is ****.

 

Look it up yourself if you want. Google capitalism health care system. Google Universal Health Care System. This isn't one of those things you need to give a source for. It's not like something just heard on the news that's new. The definitions, explanations, and the evidence of it's use and statistics are on the internet. You should look it up yourself. They're facts out there waiting for you to find them.

 

Again this is just simple. It's like someone saying give me a source when I explain what democracy is and they don't believe that's what it is. Well look it up yourself. It's not hard to find.

 

Like with capitalism Health Care you do your own work, your own research, and pull yourself up by your own bootstraps. This is not Universal Health Care System where another person is paying for your level of care. Meaning I'm not going to do your research for you.

 

I can speak about how to fly because my great-uncle was a pilot. Oh wait, that's bull.

 

This isn't a topic about flying is it. It's a medical topic. If it was about flying you could speak with a little more experience. I can speak about this better because I have yes what my father did, learned from stuff he'd talk about. Even this. And I can ask him stuff.

 

It almost sounds like you were calling what my father did bull. You said your great uncle flew or something and then said no wait that's bull. Anyway the quote is right there. Trust me my father did what he did for 40 years. That's not bull. It's fact.

[jrrtoken]

Again with capitalism you have choice of level of care. Universal you all get the same level of care. Nothing better than the current level. With your condition that might not be adequate.

Yes, but you get it without having to get your insurance company to sign forms, and other nasty bureaucratic stuff that allows you to get treatment. Therfore, the insurance company is really the one who decides on whether you live or die in a critical operation; When I went to the ER when I got my lip badly cut up in a skiing accident, the first thing they asked me at the sign in desk was: "Proof of insurance?" In a nation with Universal Health Care, that wouldn't happen, as the nation will pay for it right there and then, and the money will only come out of your taxes. Or something like that.

 

That's right it's their fault they are poor. They wouldn't be if they applied themselves. So what it's hard. Heck my Dad started out living in someone's garage. So you can do it if you work at it. So yes those that worked hard get to have more and those that are lazy get little. To some I may seem like a monster. But this is how some conservatives believe. And I'm not ashamed or feel guilty in the least. When I go to sleep I sleep like a log. I just don't care that the poor man is dying in a ditch. I may feel pity or sympathy for his pain, but at the same time I know he could have helped himself not to have had that pain.

So you're saying that the reason that people are poor is that they're always lazy? I know from personal experience that this is a lie. If people are living in poverty, a number of factors put them there, they could have been born into it, but it's definitely NOT laziness.

 

We are. We are the country that has given more aid and money to other countries that any other country has.

I can't tell you how so wrong you are. Do some research on America and you'll find out we're really a horrible nation, and that we've done the exact opposite of what you believe throughout history.

 

Other unimportant ramblings that have already been stated...

The point is clear: Would you rather have a COMPANY decide if you have enough money to get healthcare or would you rather have the government give it to you automatically whenever you needed it?

[Jae Onasi]

That's why they come here because they know they'll get the heart quicker rather than waiting for the insurance company to make a move.

Yes, insurance companies here have a vested interest in denying transplants--the high costs for that (as opposed to the patient dying) means their shareholders lose revenue. Insurance companies in the US regularly deny medical treatments they don't want to pay for. At least with a government run system you have some more transparency, and you can vote out the people who don't run it right. People in the US have very little ability to fight insurance company corruption, even with the state insurance commissions.

 

Compare the mortality rate of a capitalism health care system and an universal health care system. And look at who has had less deaths under which system.

I don't know about mortality rates overall because I haven't researched that, but I do know maternal and infant mortality rates are lower in a number of countries with universal healthcare than they are in the US. That's because all pregnant women get care in those countries, not merely those who can afford it.

 

As i've said, when I needed preventative surgery, I got it.

My grandfather needed heart surgery, he got it.

My uncle needed a new hip, He got it.

Just out of curiosity, how long did you all have to wait for the surgery? While I'm generally in favor of universal health care, it's not without its flaws, and long waits can be one of those flaws. When I needed gall bladder surgery, it got done within 3 weeks of the visit to the surgeon. My friend in Canada had to wait 7 months for an opening, and she was quite sick the entire time. I consider that long of a wait to be both medically inappropriate and ethically questionable.

 

let me shop around for a month to find you one with a good bedside manor.

Is 'bedside manor' the new name for a bed-and-breakfast?

[mimartin]

I really love how people assume we will pay more in taxes for Universal Health Care than we are paying now for private insurance. Everybody does understand that we are paying for the uninsured now. It is not just those that can’t afford insurance that are the problem, it is also those that would rather spend their hard earned money elsewhere and leave the responsibility with the rest of us.

 

I sell health insurance and this would hurt my income, but I would rather have everyone covered than to make a profit.

 

 

I also find it funny that people defend our current health care system as been superior when the United States of American is ranked 37 in by the World Health Organization’s World Health Report. France, The United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and 33 other countries rank higher than the U.S. I just don’t understand why if we have such a wonderful system do we rank behind Costa Rica and just in front of Slovenia and Cuba.

[EnderWiggin]

It is on topic. It's me reinforcing my point of why Universal is bad is because with our current economy and high taxes we can't afford more taxes to pay for such a universal health care system. That's how it ties in.

 

I think you're muddying the waters.

 

It's because they're corrupt. When we're giving them the money and they don't choose to fix problems and get the money where it's needed in my opinion that's corruption.

 

The question is, what does corruption in Kenya have to do with socialized medicine in the USA?

 

Look it up yourself if you want. Google capitalism health care system. Google Universal Health Care System. This isn't one of those things you need to give a source for. It's not like something just heard on the news that's new. The definitions, explanations, and the evidence of it's use and statistics are on the internet. You should look it up yourself. They're facts out there waiting for you to find them.

 

Again this is just simple. It's like someone saying give me a source when I explain what democracy is and they don't believe that's what it is. Well look it up yourself. It's not hard to find.

 

Like with capitalism Health Care you do your own work, your own research, and pull yourself up by your own bootstraps. This is not Universal Health Care System where another person is paying for your level of care. Meaning I'm not going to do your research for you.

 

When someone asks you to cite your sources in a debate, you do so, in the interest of furthering the conversation.

 

Here's one that I just found:

http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/_m...kofactoids.pdf

 

But that's besides the point. I've actually done a term paper on this topic, so I've done all the research, including census data reports and other boring government documents. I'm just calling you on claims that I know to be false.

 

 

 

This isn't a topic about flying is it. It's a medical topic. If it was about flying you could speak with a little more experience. I can speak about this better because I have yes what my father did, learned from stuff he'd talk about. Even this. And I can ask him stuff.

 

It was an analogy.

 

_EW_

[SD Nihil]

So you're saying that the reason that people are poor is that they're always lazy? I know from personal experience that this is a lie. If people are living in poverty, a number of factors put them there, they could have been born into it, but it's definitely NOT laziness.

 

I assume you mean in another country where you don't have the same capitalistic freedoms we have in America. If your living in a bad place in America then move to where you can get a job.

 

I can't tell you how so wrong you are. Do some research on America and you'll find out we're really a horrible nation, and that we've done the exact opposite of what you believe throughout history.

 

Proof other than maybe a few instances of bad care here or there. If we are such a horrible nation why are you still living here. Maybe because we are better than many other countries.

 

Yes, but you get it without having to get your insurance company to sign forms, and other nasty bureaucratic stuff that allows you to get treatment. Therefore, the insurance company is really the one who decides on whether you live or die in a critical operation; When I went to the ER when I got my lip badly cut up in a skiing accident, the first thing they asked me at the sign in desk was: "Proof of insurance?" In a nation with Universal Health Care, that wouldn't happen, as the nation will pay for it right there and then, and the money will only come out of your taxes. Or something like that.

 

Again you'd have to deal with the insurance company in a UHC system too. With a CHC system you can choose your insurance company that might have better options and is quicker than the other.

 

The point is clear: Would you rather have a COMPANY decide if you have enough money to get healthcare or would you rather have the government give it to you automatically whenever you needed it?

 

UHC that might not be adequate for your condition. Whereas CHC system you can work to afford the care that is adequate to your needs.

 

Heart surgery can wait now?

 

Go figure.

 

It depends on the condition and prognosis.

 

And what does corruption in Kenya have to do with Socialized Medicine?

 

I was simply answering a quote.

When someone asks you to cite your sources in a debate, you do so, in the interest of furthering the conversation.

 

Here's one that I just found:

http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/_m...kofactoids.pdf

 

But that's besides the point. I've actually done a term paper on this topic, so I've done all the research, including census data reports and other boring government documents. I'm just calling you on claims that I know to be false.

 

 

Your choosing to continue to debate, quote, and egnoledge me.Moore is just a guy commenting on what he thinks. Like you.

[El Sitherino]

I think you're missing the fundamental reasons a Universal Healthcare program will be beneficial and affordable.

[Inyri]

Stow away on a boxcar if you don't have enough money to travel because you can't get a job where you currently live!

 

Man, did that sound as stupid to you as it did to me?

[Web Rider]

Our system of capitalism isn't perfect. Not by a long shot. But in my opinion it's better than universal health care where you have to pay a lot more taxes wise to have universal care for everyone. Yes everyone may be getting some kind of care, but not really what they need. Where as with capitalism type care you have choice.

It's not like with universal care we're all going to start getting treated for broken legs and impotency when we clearly don't have those problems.

 

You research the best physician.

This is not always an option. There are not a half a dozen physicians within emergency distance of the average person. Sometimes there isn't even 1.

 

You learn what kind of doctor they are. Are they for money or do they really care for the patient.

When all you can afford is $1000 dollars or less, you'll go to the doctor who charges the least, not the one who provides the best care.

 

Yes there are bad ones. They are more easily identified by their success rate. Let me also add there are some that will not perform a risky surgery on a patient for if the patient dies their stats go down.

Which means good and bad doctors can't be identified by their success rate as a doctor who avoids risky things will have a higher rate than one who does not but may be a better doctor.

 

This is why you need to research your doctor and find out who he or she is person wise. When you talk to them do they seem sincere. Are they negative. Are they overly positive. Are they just blunt. Are they with their attitude showing signs that they are just a business man or do you see compassion in their tone and words.

referring back to the point where I stated that choosing your doctor is not always an option, especially for much of poor and rural America.

 

So work to afford the doctor you need. Universal health care doesn't give you that option. Everyone gets the same. That's not good enough for someone waiting for a hearth transplant. That's why they come here because they know they'll get the heart quicker rather than waiting for the insurance company to make a move.

You don't get it do you? If I break my leg because I don't have a college education and I have to work 12 hours a day 6 days a week just to make ends meat, I can't "keep working" after that. I need my leg fixed NOW. There is no work, no money until that happens.

 

Look I pay for my own health coverage, and I STILL have to wait for an insurance company to tell me I can get my whatever.

 

Guys Universal Health care may sound good on paper, but it's not when actually implemented. Compare the mortality rate of a capitalism health care system and an universal health care system. And look at who has had less deaths under which system.

The answer would be: capitalist, also, as other say, proof?

 

And don't bring poor defunct nations into the picture here, keep the comparisons kosher by sticking to other western nations.

 

I can speak on this type of medical topic well in that my father is a retired Nurse Anesthetist.

My Aunt is a doctor, my mother is a therapist, my uncle works for a pharmaceutical corporation researching different kinds of drugs. Appeal to authority please.

 

So this just shows guys like my Dad do care for the patient and cared enough to know when it was time to quit.

that's nice but I don't really see the point of the story. Some medical practitioners care? yeah I know. Some don't. tis life.

 

You do realize that national healthcare only means there is a government run system that provides care for everyone, and then anyone who wants to start a private medical practice can do so right? Universal healthcare does not strip the right to free enterprise.

[Astor]

If you work little you should get little. I think that's fair.[/Quote]

 

That's right it's their fault they are poor. They wouldn't be if they applied themselves. So what it's hard.[/Quote]

 

Some people (even in American) can work all their lives and never earn enough to pay for medicine for their spouse or children - is that fair?

 

Ones that couldn't wait like yours.[/Quote]

 

Actually mine couldn't wait.

 

Just out of curiosity, how long did you all have to wait for the surgery?[/Quote]

 

Well, my surgery was to remove a cancer, so that was rushed in as soon as they could do it, only a few days after i'd seen a doctor (it wasn't too far along to be too urgent, but still important).

 

My Grandfather had had a heart attack, and he recieved a bypass a few days afterwards.

 

My Uncle, though, he got ran over by a dump-truck, and he had to wait about a month before they could do it, because of all the other damage he'd recieved.

 

While I'm generally in favor of universal health care, it's not without its flaws, and long waits can be one of those flaws.[/Quote]

 

Oh, it can have it's flaws, but mostly, both me and my family's experience of Universal healthcare has overwhelmingly positive - up until I needed surgery last year, i'd been unsure about UHC systems, but it changed my mind becuse I saw how quick it can work.

 

My friend in Canada had to wait 7 months for an opening, and she was quite sick the entire time. I consider that long of a wait to be both medically inappropriate and ethically questionable.[/Quote]

 

Although I don't know the Canadian Healthcare system, that still seems like an extreme - maybe it's a one-off? I don't know anyone who's ever had to wait as long for a procedure, but I am aware it can happen.

 

Did your friend not recieve any support from consultants/surgeons during this time?

 

EDIT:

 

Our technology is very good compared to some other countries. Some research doesn't take very long. In the hospital you might get recommended to a good surgeon. You don't get that in an Universal Health Care System.[/Quote]

 

Excuse me? I needed surgery, and I was cared for by both a Urologist, and an Oncologist. I was assigned a Specialist Nurse to help me understand what I was going through, and I recieved care and assistance when I needed it.

 

It's thanks to those doctors and specialists that i'm alive, so I i'd say they were pretty damn good doctors.

[Bee Hoon]

I can speak on this type of medical topic well in that my father is a retired Nurse Anesthetist. These are the guys that put you to sleep. The I V's, gas mask, that kind of thing. You need several in the room to deal with how much of this and that medicine they need while under surgery. Theirs another anesthetist watching the EKG and such.

Your father may have worked in the medical field, but I hardly expect diffusion of knowledge to occur.

 

Yes you have to work for it. Why should I have to pay more taxes for someone else who didn't put forth the effort to work hard. You didn't choose to work hard sorry I'm not going to award your laziness. That may sound cold, but I don't believe in awarding those that choose to work the minimum and expect to get more for little.

That's right it's their fault they are poor. They wouldn't be if they applied themselves. So what it's hard. Heck my Dad started out living in someone's garage. So you can do it if you work at it. So yes those that worked hard get to have more and those that are lazy get little. To some I may seem like a monster. But this is how some conservatives believe. And I'm not ashamed or feel guilty in the least. When I go to sleep I sleep like a log. I just don't care that the poor man is dying in a ditch. I may feel pity or sympathy for his pain, but at the same time I know he could have helped himself not to have had that pain.

Your definition of "humane" is inaccurate. Please revise your self-perception.

 

Please see my post regarding poverty and subsistence farmers. Perhaps you will continue harping on the USA situation, but has it ever occurred to you that others are stuck in similar cycles of poverty? It's good that your father has improved his financial standings, but at least your grandfather was skilled labour (presuming that you were referring to your paternal grandfather), and would earn much more than a janitor, a clerk, etc.

 

Again with capitalism you have choice of level of care. Universal you all get the same level of care. Nothing better than the current level. With your condition that might not be adequate.

Our technology is very good compared to some other countries. Some research doesn't take very long. In the hospital you might get recommended to a good surgeon. You don't get that in an Universal Health Care System.

Let's have a little lesson on community medicine. Primary care is where the patient makes first contact with the physician. Where further care is needed, the patients are referred to the appropriate hospitals or to specific specialists. And yes, I have seen this firsthand.

 

It does have to do with the topic. It means we have more because we strived to work hard and make progress. In an Universal Health Care System your incentive to work harder, make new health care improvements, and do more than the minimum is hampered because you will not make more, get advancement, or get rewarded for doing more than the set by the government standard of care quotient.

A good medical practitioner will *always* want to improve.

 

It shows his motives real well. If he didn't care about the patients and only about profit he would have continued to work despite his hearing loss. He may have bad hearing, but heck with the fact it might cause a problem in the surgery room money would've mattered more.

If he could continue to work (regardless of motivation), it implies a serious problem with the hospital if they are willing allow a situation which may endanger patients.

 

Your choosing to continue to debate, quote, and egnoledge me.Moore is just a guy commenting on what he thinks. Like you.

It amuses me that you do not seem to acknowledge that you are also merely airing your opinions.

 

You'd wait longer in UHC System.

Proof?

 

Other countries like you've mentioned guys don't provide care well.

According to UNICEF, as of 2006, USA and Malaysia have the same neonatal mortality rate--one of the standards of measuring healthcare. It may be that rather than reflecting well on my country, it reflects badly on yours; as Jae mentioned, expectant mothers who cannot afford it are deprived of antenatal care. In Malaysia (which has universal healthcare under the Ministry of Health), all expectant mothers are given free antenatal and postnatal care, regardless of socioeconomic background, race or religion.

[SD Nihil]

I think you're missing the fundamental reasons a Universal Healthcare program will be beneficial and affordable.

 

I believe I've explained things well.

 

jmac7142's Avatar

 

Join Date: Mar 2005

Location: `(•.°)~

Posts: 5,973

Blog Entries: 12

Send a message via AIM to jmac7142 Send a message via Skype™ to jmac7142

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by SD Nihil View Post

I assume you mean in another country where you don't have the same capitalistic freedoms we have in America. If your living in a bad place in America then move to where you can get a job.

Yeah you ****ing scrubs just move someplace else and get a job

 

That's right. I do not believe in hand outs. I believe in pull yourself up by your own bootstraps.

 

It's not like with universal care we're all going to start getting treated for broken legs and impotency when we clearly don't have those problems.

 

Less options with UHC.

 

This is not always an option. There are not a half a dozen physicians within emergency distance of the average person. Sometimes there isn't even 1.

 

Less likely to have that option on UHC. In both PHC and UHC there might not be a good doc for your condition. But in PHC if there is money to be made there will be someone working on a treatment.

 

With UHC there is less incentive to do that. No reward. Unless the country's UHC government designates a doctor to work on this condition. Again the care you get in America isn't hindered by a level of care level set by a UHC system.

 

When all you can afford is $1000 dollars or less, you'll go to the doctor who charges the least, not the one who provides the best care.

 

That's right. You try to find the best doc that is good for your budget and good for you medically. UHC you can't choose level of care.

 

Which means good and bad doctors can't be identified by their success rate as a doctor who avoids risky things will have a higher rate than one who does not but may be a better doctor.

 

That's why if it's a risky surgery and the doc refuses to do it even though you are paying them then find another.

 

referring back to the point where I stated that choosing your doctor is not always an option, especially for much of poor and rural America.

 

Then take another job, more hours, that kind of thing. If I die because I don't have the money due to not working hard enough to afford it then it's my fault and I deserve the consequences for my laziness.

 

You don't get it do you? If I break my leg because I don't have a college education and I have to work 12 hours a day 6 days a week just to make ends meat, I can't "keep working" after that. I need my leg fixed NOW. There is no work, no money until that happens.

 

Life is tough. It shouldn't be easy. Struggle makes the end result more worth while. There are always jobs, opportunities, chances for advancement.

 

I'm not giving the dying beggar who's spitting up blood a dime if he didn't try by moving, working multiple jobs, and busting his hump.

 

If your expenses are higher than your wages maybe that is something you should take up with the government and your elected officials. Wasteful spending could very well be the cause of why that money isn't in your pocket to pay for your care.

 

My Aunt is a doctor, my mother is a therapist, my uncle works for a pharmaceutical corporation researching different kinds of drugs. Appeal to authority please.

 

Ask your aunt if she wants just a set pay and not the ability to grow in pay like with our PHC system.

 

Yes, of course. We are, after all, "The Great Satan."

 

well, at least there's "great" in front of "Satan". plus I hear Hell has a universal healthcare program. it's really simple, everyone gets the same care...that is, none.

 

How does this great Satan stuff have anything to do with UHC. I believe the calling the US great Satan is what the terrorists call us because we are so immoral. I have to say I really don't care what anyone thinks about anything about me or us.

 

 

 

Some people (even in American) can work all their lives and never earn enough to pay for medicine for their spouse or children - is that fair?

 

Tough. How do I know they tried everything.How do I know if they worked their brains out or not. The majority of America isn't the option you gave.

 

Actually mine couldn't wait.

 

Totally unacceptable flame, calling someone a liar over a subject as sensitive as cancer is not allowed. Please indicate where people said something similar to you. Don't do this again; else an infraction will be issued. you have been warned! - j7

 

What country are you from?

 

Your father may have worked in the medical field, but I hardly expect diffusion of knowledge to occur.

 

Diffusion of knowledge? What do you mean>

 

Your definition of "humane" is inaccurate. Please revise your self-perception.

 

Please see my post regarding poverty and subsistence farmers. Perhaps you will continue harping on the USA situation, but has it ever occurred to you that others are stuck in similar cycles of poverty? It's good that your father has improved his financial standings, but at least your grandfather was skilled labor (presuming that you were referring to your paternal grandfather), and would earn much more than a janitor, a clerk, etc.

 

I believe I have used the right term for humane. Your opinion against mine. Definitions can be interoperated any way someone wishes. Also your post. Your not an authority on poverty. Your the level of blogger with that experience. Like me.

 

Let's have a little lesson on community medicine. Primary care is where the patient makes first contact with the physician. Where further care is needed, the patients are referred to the appropriate hospitals or to specific specialists. And yes, I have seen this firsthand.

 

We are humane. When the bum who can't pay for his gun shot comes in we take care of him. Even though he has no insurance to pay for the work. We the tax payer end of paying for the work done to him.

 

A good medical practitioner will *always* want to improve.

 

I doubt after 20 or 30 years of work without a pay raise or advancement you'll still be providing above the UHC set standard of care.

 

If he could continue to work (regardless of motivation), it implies a serious problem with the hospital if they are willing allow a situation which may endanger patients

 

And I said he didn't do that. I said he quit due to his hearing on his own. He didn't choose to continue to work.

 

It amuses me that you do not seem to acknowledge that you are also merely airing your opinions.

 

Which is what we all are doing here. You included.

 

According to UNICEF, as of 2006, USA and Malaysia have the same neonatal mortality rate--one of the standards of measuring healthcare. It may be that rather than reflecting well on my country, it reflects badly on yours; as Jae mentioned, expectant mothers who cannot afford it are deprived of antenatal care. In Malaysia (which has universal healthcare under the Ministry of Health), all expectant mothers are given free antenatal and postnatal care, regardless of socioeconomic background, race or religion.

 

A comparison to one country which happened to be the same mortality rate. Doesn't seem like UHC has a better mortality rate or less than PHC system.

[Astor]

Tough. How do I know they tried everything.How do I know if they worked their brains out or not. The majority of America isn't the option you gave.[/Quote]

 

I didn't see you giving that option either, unless you speak for America?

 

No one seems to believe what I said about my father. They called it bull.[/Quote]

 

Nobody said that they didn't believe you. They said that simply being related to a medical professional does not make you an expert on medical matters.

 

What country are you from?[/Quote]

 

The United Kingdom, not that it has anything to do with the topic.

[jonathan7]

Please consider very carefully any posts from this point on, I find some "questions/points" very bad form, and furthermore some posts are offensive, consider this thread under a very short leash, some previous posts are under review, and if you are unsure about a post, please send it to a mod to review to check it is ok to post to avoid getting in trouble. Thanks - j7

[Bee Hoon]

For the record, I am not Qliveur:p

 

Less options with UHC.

Proof?

 

I'm not giving the dying beggar who's spitting up blood a dime if he didn't try by moving, working multiple jobs, and busting his hump.

What a conundrum! You cannot move without money, employers will not hire you unless they have no other choice, and especially not if you are ill.

 

Diffusion of knowledge? What do you mean>

What your father knows is not what you know.

 

I believe I have used the right term for humane. Your opinion against mine. Definitions can be interoperated any way someone wishes. Also your post. Your not an authority on poverty. Your the level of blogger with that experience. Like me.

humane ( according to the Free Online Dictionary)

Adjective

1. showing kindness and sympathy

2. inflicting as little pain as possible: a humane method of killing minke whales

3. considered to have a civilizing effect on people: the humane tradition of a literary education [variant of human]

 

Please note meanings 1 and 2. Not much room for misinterpretation there, imho. Definitions are precisely that--to define a word and to leave as little room for ambiguity as possible. If you look back at what you have posted, especially your evident lack of sympathy to those suffering (because you judge them deserving of every iota of pain and misery), you should realise that my request for you to stop abusing the word is really quite reasonable.

 

I may not be an authority on poverty, but I have witnessed it, whereas you give no indication that you have. Or perhaps you are simply not interested in *why* poverty exists and would prefer to simply live with the presumption that all poor people are lazy. I also do not live with the delusion that my life would have turned out the way it has even if I was born to a poor family.

 

I do not see what being a blogger has to do with the topic.

 

We are humane. When the bum who can't pay for his gun shot comes in we take care of him. Even though he has no insurance to pay for the work. We the tax payer end of paying for the work done to him.

This has no relevance to the point which it was supposed to address. Even so, while you are on this tangent, I would like solid proof.

 

I doubt after 20 or 30 years of work without a pay raise or advancement you'll still be providing above the UHC set standard of care.

As doctors accumulate experience and expertise, their pays are adjusted accordingly. Even so, I hope that the doctor would want to improve, whether to better serve the patients or as a matter of professional pride.

 

And I said he didn't do that. I said he quit due to his hearing on his own. He didn't choose to continue to work.

That is all well and good, but again, it does not address my point.

 

Which is what we all are doing here. You included.

I acknowledge that fact.

 

A comparison to one country which happened to be the same mortality rate. Doesn't seem like UHC has a better mortality rate or less than PHC system.

All along, you have been arguing that universal healthcare provides inferior care to patients. So what is your stand now? Is the same level of healthcare restricted to those who can afford it a better system than one where an equivalent level of care is offered to all?

 

Edit: SD Nihil, you might find this and this interesting.

[SW01]

I fully support our National Health Service, this 'Universal Health Care system'. To me, it has always been a source of fascination that one of the wealthiest governments on the planet made their people pay for basic healthcare.

 

Now, from experience...

 

A member of my family is seriously disabled. He requires a long list of medicines, along with visits from a nurse and, occassionally, emergency admittance to a hospital, not to mention equipment to administer medicines, and meetings with consultants. Now, as a UK resident this all comes to us free. NHS costs are (if I understand correctly) part of our national insurance contribution from taxes.

 

If I was a part of a 'capitalist' healthcare system, I believe that this kind of extensive healthcare would be well out of range, due to financial restrictions. Of course, correct me if I am wrong, bearing in mind that I am not from a particularly wealthy family.

 

The universal healthcare systems may not necessarily provide the absolute pinnacle of available medical care, but at least we don't need to resort to 'back-street' physicians, or worse go without. The physicians that we see are approved by a system controlled by the government - which guarantees a certain level of ability. The private care system is still there in Britain and France (I can't attest to the others) for those who really want it, but we all have the access we need to care at all times.

[SD Nihil]

I didn't see you giving that option either, unless you speak for America?

 

I was speaking of America. If you are in a different country then that country if it has UHC in my opinion you don't have many options.

 

What I've been saying is with CHC the majority get good care as long as the work hard. Yes in minor cases I believe people sometimes don't get what they need. In UHC everyone is subject to a set standard of care that cannot be set higher. Those that happen to provide care higher than the standard in my opinion probably doesn't happen very much. Make no mistake if it does I'm glad. My point is CHC is not hindered by a set standard of care that does not allow for advancement or increased income. UHC yes everyone gets some level of care. But all have the disadvantage of not having the best care money can buy. Or have some of the best docs I believe are in the US.

 

In small instances here and there yes I'm happy those of you under UHC have received care quickly. Understand the majority in CHC Believe have gotten it quicker more times than not by my opinion and by what I've seen.

 

You've seen instances where care was quick. So have I. In the end it is our own opinion and how we interoperate what we see and our encounters. These are my views of CHC and my view of UHC. And Respect your views against CHC and support for UHC.

 

But these are my views which I'm sticking to. You've proven to un waiver in yours.

 

Nobody said that they didn't believe you. They said that simply being related to a medical professional does not make you an expert on medical matters.

 

Your correct. I was simply talking about those that did. Their posts have been removed. I appreciate that.

 

The United Kingdom, not that it has anything to do with the topic.

 

It does in that it lets me know what kind of health care system you are speaking from. Thank you for your answer. Compared to us your taxes are lumped together according to some British I've talked to on a recent cruise.

 

Which supports what I've been saying. To pay for a government run system like UHC the people have to pay high taxes for it. That's my opinion.

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by SD Nihil

Less options with UHC.

Proof?

 

Guys it's right there to look up online. But okay here: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=less+options+with+universal+health+care&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=

 

Here's some about mortality rate. Make your own opinions. I have: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=mortality+rate+on+Universal+Health+Care+versus+Private+Health+Care&spell=1

 

busting his hump.

What a conundrum! You cannot move without money, employers will not hire you unless they have no other choice, and especially not if you are ill.

 

If your car is out of gas hike, ride a bike, and when you go for an interview show your willing to work hard. Let them know your motivated. Appeal to them with your plight. They might show sympathy on you and your situation.

 

Attitude really does count as well

 

What your father knows is not what you know.

 

I do know what he knows when I talk to him. I learned his medical knowledge when he'd talk about it. I learned of his experiences. And I know he's a caring father. I know this because his brother was a diabetic who had a brother up in Pennsylvania didn't help him to drive him or help him with anything. Don dad's brother is the one with diabetes. Tom was the brother that did nothing for him.

 

I do know he's compassionate. He helped Don move where I live states away. He got Don care. Paid for surgeries, Don had a hard time doing much so my father even took care of cleaning him. He got the man a nurse. Got Don in an independent living place. A fulfilling life Don spoke he had. Friends, he loved the dollar store, he was funny with jokes. And we enjoyed him while he was alive.

 

Without my father's compassion Don would've died due to his do nothing brother Tom not taking care of Don. Don lived 9 years down where I live because I know my father and that he cares.

 

Don had to go on dialysis. My father drove him there and back home. He took care of Don's shots. With Don's mental state sometimes Don wasn't himself.

 

My father did all this without a thank you or money. He cared for his brother. He cares for his patients when he worked. He cares for what he did.

 

So you don't know my father. I do.

 

This is on topic because it shows those in the private health care system are compassionate and I do know my father and what he knows.

 

humane ( according to the Free Online Dictionary)

Adjective

1. showing kindness and sympathy

2. inflicting as little pain as possible: a humane method of killing minke whales

3. considered to have a civilizing effect on people: the humane tradition of a literary education [variant of human]

 

Please note meanings 1 and 2. Not much room for misinterpretation there, imho. Definitions are precisely that--to define a word and to leave as little room for ambiguity as possible. If you look back at what you have posted, especially your evident lack of sympathy to those suffering (because you judge them deserving of every iota of pain and misery), you should realize that my request for you to stop abusing the word is really quite reasonable.

 

I may not be an authority on poverty, but I have witnessed it, whereas you give no indication that you have. Or perhaps you are simply not interested in *why* poverty exists and would prefer to simply live with the presumption that all poor people are lazy. I also do not live with the delusion that my life would have turned out the way it has even if I was born to a poor family.

 

I do not see what being a blogger has to do with the topic.

 

Those in the medical field take the Hippocratic oath which is to do no harm. We show kindness and sympathy for those good people who worked and bad things happened to them. We don't for those that didn't try.

 

literacy. Yes we have that too. Though I'm not sure how that has to do with UHC. We allow all citizens to have access to being literate. We are humane. Our hospitals are clean.

 

I do not see what being a blogger has to do with the topic.

 

Those that do not help themselves I have no sympathy for. That's my right to have that opinion.

 

As doctors accumulate experience and expertise, their pays are adjusted accordingly. Even so, I hope that the doctor would want to improve, whether to better serve the patients or as a matter

 

Which system of health are are you saying they get higher wages on experience? If you mean CHC then yes. For UHC not for doing a better surgery I believe.

 

That is all well and good, but again, it does not address my point.

 

Because someone said that he continued to work despite his hearing issue. I said he didn't and why he quit.

 

The post may have been deleted now. I don't feel like reading every previous post to find it. It's not relevant to the topic anyway. This and your comments on it anyway in my opinion.

None of your posts to date in this thread have been deleted. --Jae

 

All along, you have been arguing that universal healthcare provides inferior care to patients. So what is your stand now? Is the same level of healthcare restricted to those who can afford it a better system than one where an equivalent level of care is offered to all?

 

Edit: SD Nihil, you might find this and this interesting.

 

No because it was one instance that only told about a country that matched CHC's mortality level. Not one that was better. Even if there was. The majority of countries that have CHC and those that have UHC II believe CHC have overall better results for the majority.

 

I really wish more conservatives would post on this topic. I feel very alone much of the times while posting on this forum. I would appreciate their findings and incite. I've heard the liberal and world incite heavily.

[Astor]

In UHC everyone is subject to a set standard of care that cannot be set higher.[/Quote]

 

Yes, it can be set higher. In fact, with our system, standard of care is determined on a case by case basis.

 

UHC yes everyone gets some level of care. But all have the disadvantage of not having the best care money can buy.

 

The best care I recieve is that which makes me healthy - I recieve this without having to pay large amounts of money.

 

Or have some of the best docs I believe are in the US.

 

The 'best' doctors are those who will care for a patient without thinking of fees, or other such nonsense.

 

Guys it's right there to look up online. But okay here: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=less+options+with+universal+health+care&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=

 

Here's some about mortality rate. Make your own opinions. I have: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=mortality+rate+on+Universal+Health+Care+versus+Private+Health+Care&spell=1

 

Posting a list of links on Google is not providing a source, nor is it proving your point. You can't simply say 'here's the evidence, if you can find it'. If you want us to see proof, provide a direct link.

 

Those in the medical field take the Hippocratic oath which is to do no harm. We show kindness and sympathy for those good people who worked and bad things happened to them. We don't for those that didn't try.[/Quote]

 

A Doctor's first, and only duty, is to care for the sick, no matter what their circumstances are, or who they are.

 

A doctor shouldn't care if the person they're caring for has no money to pay for treatment - anyone who enters the medical profession to make money has entered the wrong career.

 

Those that do not help themselves I have no sympathy for. That's my right to have that opinion.

 

Yes, it is your right to hold that opinion, however flawed we may think it is, but you should consider those who can't help themselves - such as the mentally or physically disabled. Do they deserve to die because it's impossible for them to help themselves?

[SD Nihil]

Levels of care and increase of pay yes can be changed. But it's only if the government feels it needs to be changed. Those that got their procedure done quickly that was because the government determined it was necessary and urgent.

 

With CHC you are not subject to the government telling you when you can advance or gain pay. The only limiter is you and how hard to work you want to work.

 

And it depends also on the type of UHC government. If it is socialistic or communistic. Here's a search results source: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=universal+health+care+government+determines+level+of+care+and+advancement&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=

 

The 'best' doctors are those who will care for a patient without thinking of fees, or other such nonsense.

 

We do think of care first, but fees yes we think of also. Food on the table means you have to get paid.

 

Posting a list of links on Google is not providing a source, nor is it proving your point. You can't simply say 'here's the evidence, if you can find it'.

 

If you'd click on the links and read you'd learn. I'm not about to post so many links. I just don't care to. You can easily click on them. I'll do what I want when posting my sources anyway.

If you're wanting to support your argument, you really need to provide the specific sources to support your claim. Others do work for their claims, please do the work for yours, or there's no point to your argument. --Jae

 

A Doctor's first, and only duty, is to care for the sick, no matter what their circumstances are, or who they are.

 

A doctor shouldn't care if the person they're caring for has no money to pay for treatment - anyone who enters the medical profession to make money has entered the wrong career.

 

Later we think of the patient's lack of income if they don't have it. But at the time we think only of the patients care. We later think that patient had no money and that my tax dollars have to pay for his lack. But not the first thing we think of.

 

Look at the results. I feel that no matter what I post as a source it won't get approved of if it supports and proves what I've been saying because you guys I feel won't change your views anyway. Well neither will I. That's my right too.

[Lance Monance]

I think your stance on poverty (and how to get out of it) is wrong on a fundamental level, SD Nihil.

You stated repeatedly that hard work and effort will always enable you to beat poverty. But that's only one factor, out of many. You have to consider all of those. Surely you agree that chance, luck and circumstances are important as well? What about talent and intelligence? Either you're born with those traits or you're not. They affect your success, just like effort does.

 

Long story short, some people will not be able to afford healthcare, no matter how hard they try.

[Astor]

Those that got their procedure done quickly that was because the government determined it was necessary and urgent.

 

No, they got their care quickly because a Doctor deemed it necessary and urgent.

 

The Government provides funding, and leaves the Doctoring to those who are qualified.

 

If you'd click on the links and read you'd learn. I'm not about to post so many links. I just don't care to. You can easily click on them. I'll do what I want when posting my sources anyway.[/Quote]

 

I'm not clicking them because those links provide more links to hundreds of pages - how am I supposed to know which pages are supporting your viewpoint?

 

 

I feel that no matter what I post as a source it won't get approved of if it supports and proves what I've been saying because you guys I feel won't change your views anyway. Well neither will I. That's my right too.

 

I haven't got a set stance, and i'm willing to see things from another angle, but you haven't said a single thing that convinces me that a CHC is better.

 

Also, you didn't address the question at the end of my last post.

[SD Nihil]

think your stance on poverty (and how to get out of it) is wrong on a fundamental level, SD Nihil.

You stated repeatedly that hard work and effort will always enable you to beat poverty. But that's only one factor, out of many. You have to consider all of those. Surely you agree that chance, luck and circumstances are important as well? What about talent and intelligence? Either you're born with those traits or you're not. They affect your success, just like effort does.

 

Long story short, some people will not be able to afford healthcare, no matter how hard they try.

 

And you have right to your view. I've never said always you can get out of poverty. Maybe it's the government, maybe you continue to have bad luck no matter what, or maybe a둸 way to get out of it came along, but you didn't see it would work.

 

I'm not saying always. I said if you work and try and do your best in your life, in a capitalistic society more times than not you'll succeed. I believe this.

 

No, they got their care quickly because a Doctor deemed it necessary and urgent.

 

The Government provides funding, and leaves the Doctoring to those who are qualified.

 

That's what we have in CHC. The doc determines care. UHC government has ultimate control over levels of care and advancement.

 

And the funding comes from high taxes on the people.

 

I'm not clicking them because those links provide more links to hundreds of pages - how am I supposed to know which pages are supporting your viewpoint?

 

And how can you expect me to pick out from so many links either. There is too much evidence on it. Look yourself at the many links. I know what I believe and you know what you believe. Your not going to ever change me. I bet neither I am not going to change you.

 

I haven't got a set stance, and I'm willing to see things from another angle, but you haven't said a single thing that convinces me that a CHC is better.

 

Also, you didn't address the question at the end of my last post.

 

In my opinion you sure don't act like it. And that's your opinion that you think I haven't answered it.