|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 26
Rookie
|
Rookie
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 26 |
I dont think they do Demonize Companies, they Demonize the people who run them and in most cases its well earned on there part. IE) Bankers mess up and lose money yet they get a big bonuses this is true with most big companys. This is the big problem with so called capitalism in the USA, what happend to being compansated for your GOOD work and not for your BAD work If I do a bad job at my work I dont get a raize and might lose my job, IF I was a CEO of a large company I would Get my Bonus because it was in my contract and if they fire me for sucking at my Job I still get my money because of my Contract. and why do we have this setup now like this its because the system has been gamed, do to changes made in the 1980s. befor the 1980s there were major stock holders that had a say in CEO contracts and pay.they were rich people who held large blocks of stock.and they were on the board of dirctors who wrote the contracts for CEOs In comes the 401k and boom major stock holders become CEOs of investment firms and now there on the board of directors giveing contracts to other CEOs Thats why CEO compansation went from 150 to 200 times avg empoyee pay to 600 to 800 today. when the fox is guarding the chicken you got problems. the system need fixed CEOs of companys sitting on boads of other companys. is like having the prisoners guard the prison the out come is not going to be good. The Board of directors should be made up of major stock holders who own the stock with there own money, not a CEO who makes his money buy getting you to invest yours so he can manage it. this is why we have so much of a problem today with USA companys beeing run so poorly today. Oh and before you jump on me for saying that just look at the facts USA companies used to be buying up forien companys all the time now we are being bought out by forien companys. and whole its sad becaue the big companes on the stock exchange.there problems with poor magement are killing the smaller privite ounned companys that are well run and are the back bone of employment in this country. now for credit card companys this is the bigest scam in history 1) they go out and give credit to kids with out jobs and 10-20k to people who make 30k a year 1a) now what due they do with the people who default they sell that debt to colction agencys, but only after they increase that debt by 50 to 100% with fees and late charges 2) then hard time hit and there profits start to go down because lots more people start to default and due to more people starting to declare backruptsy coletion agecys stop buying all the debt from them, so they go to the gov and say this is not fair. 3) the gov changes bankrupsy laws so now you cant get rid of credit card debt.and now coletion agencys will buy any of the debt once more 4)so how dose this make any sense, they make bad lones to people that should not have had that much credit so they get the gov to change the rules, because of there poor busness plan. 5) and have you ever know a credit card company to lose money and you wonder why things are messed up in the USA  
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828 |
Quote:
The two must exist, but the Government should not be involved IN the business, it should be limited strictly to creating the environment in which the business operates.
In a perfect world, Gov would not have to get involved in business matters. But in the case of Healthcare, we are talking about life and death issues for a growing number of American citizens.
It is estimated that 45k Americans (1 every 12 minutes) die every year due to no healthcare insurance. NoHCstudy
Also, the problem is growing every year we fail to address the issue...in 2008 and approx. 46.3 million people in the United States lacked coverage in 2007 the number of uninsured was 45.7 million. according to this Harvard study.
With the tremendous rate hikes just announced by Anthem...up to 39%, more and more people will not be able to afford their healtcare coverage and some businesses will be forced to drop the benefit of healthcare for their employees. The number of uninsured is going to skyrocket.
Should the United States government simply stand by and watch?
Quote:
Business, on the other hand, should be limited to running its business and it should NOT be lobbying for policy changes, special tax breaks, etc...
In a perfect world, business would not be involved in the formulation of Gov policies. But as we know, more and more lobbyists, who represent all kinds of businesses, including HC, swarm the offices of our elected representatives pushing their issues.
Our elected officials take money from lobbyists, companies and corporations to help fund their re-election campaigns and pretend that the money they are given does not affect their votes on the issues.
More and more, the interests of the people in our Senators state or a Representatives district are not represented in Washington DC, but we sure know that the interests of lobbyists, who don't even reside in our states and districts, are represented.
With America's election laws, businesses have more say in our Government than ever before and it is only going to get worse as the Supreme court just allowed businesses to donate as much money as they want to "our" Senators and Representatives (political campaigns).
The United States is becoming a country controlled by business, not the people. The Democracy our forefathers envisioned is dying and in its place we have a Democracy of the wealthiest campaign donors.
How do the American people get Business out of Washington DC?
How do the American people take their Government back when the Supreme Court just allowed Business to donate as much as they want to your elected officials re-election campaign?
On Nov 19, 1863, President Lincoln ended his Gettysburg Address with these words.....
It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government: of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
Democracy is dying in America and in it's place we have Government of Business, Government by Business, Government for Business.
If Lincoln were alive today, I'm confident he would wonder what the hell this country did to the principle of government: of the people, by the people, for the people,
jmho...mac
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,861
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,861 |
The only problem with your idea ppe is human nature. Man is driven by greed and will stop at nothing to win the monoploy game. There has to be checks and balances to keep these things in control or it will be like it was in the 20's.
People working 12-14 hours a day, sometimes three or four people in one family to barely survive. We are supposed to learn from history but many wish to ignore it when it goes against what they believe.
That's why labor laws, child labor laws and minimum wage were created in the first place..........human nature.
WE all have it, just some have far more devistating power to use it against many. And that will never change.
I don't know if any of you have checked out the new show on CBS which airs on Sunday nights. Undercover Boss, but there are CEO's out there who care about their business and their people. The problem is as with everything, it's a mixed bag. Many CEO's don't.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044 |
Mac: Man man...did your school teach you anything at all? Repeat after me: THE USA IS NOT A DEMOCRACY IT IS A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC ALSO KNOW AS A REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC says who you ask? Quote:
Democracy is the most vile form of government... democracies have ever
been spectacles of turbulence and contention: have ever been found
incompatible with personal security or the rights of property:
and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent
in their deaths. - James Madison
Quote:
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin
Quote:
Democracy... while it lasts is more bloody than either aristocracy or monarchy. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide. John Adams
Quote:
A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine. -Thomas Jefferson
Quote:
"Democracy is the form of government that gives every man the right to be his own oppressor."- James Russell Lowell
Quote:
"Fifty-one percent of a nation can establish a totalitarian regime, suppress minorities and still remain democratic."- Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn
Democracy is mob rule where 51% can oppress the other 49% the founding fathers and the authors of the Constitution DESPISED Democracy with a passion.
we are a Constitutional Republic/ Representative Republic...
what did the founders have to say about "taking from one and giving to another?"
Quote:
A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government. -Thomas Jefferson
Mac you don't realise that what you speak is the very heart of the communist/social program.
proof:
Quote:
The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of “liberalism,” they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.”? - Norman Thomas (former Candidate for the U.S Socialist Party
Quote:
He went on to say: “I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democrat Party has adopted our platform.”- Norman Thomas (former Candidate for the U.S Socialist Party
I don't understand why so many folks believe they are "entitled" to something....really
Our government is "supposed" to be a constitutional Republic...the Fed government has NO RIGHT to do or legislate ANYTHING the constitution does explicitly say it can...i don't see Healthcare in there at all Mac
The reasons Healthcare cost so much is because the Healthcare market has been drastically over inflated.
The Democrats CAUSED health insurance to cost so much with:
1. social Security and Medicare
2. Welfare and Govt. sponsored health care programs
3. WIC and other social programs
4. giving illegal aliens healthcare
all 4 were done by the Democrats...
Woodrow Wilson
FDR
Lyndon Johnson (Started Welfare)
you really need a history lesson....granted the Republicans in the last 30 years are no saints either.
however there is no way you can "forcefully" take from another and ever represent private property rights or the right to carve your own way IE "pursuit of happiness"
how does me paying for someone else's healthcare help my pursuit of happiness to start my own business? If anything it prevents me from doing so by taking money away from me.
EVERY TIME the Govt. steps into the private sector and gets involved with business via regulations the price of the good goes up and less of it is available for the consumer to purchase.
mac there is NO WAY we can EVER give healthcare to everyone at the same cost..its not going to happen.
I suggest you read Adam Smith's Inquiry into the Causes and Reasons of the Wealth of Nations.
the guy was the father of capitalism and that book and its principles have held true for hundreds of years...EVERY TIME a nations have deviated from it...disaster has resulted.
MAC: Here is the facts:
1. Healthcare is a minute resource...there is only a limited supply available...ALL people can't consume the same amount at one time..not going to happen...there is not a unlimited amount of doctors, nurses, etc...man power/ human power is a limited resource in itself.
2. As demand for a limited good increases, supply decreases, and price MUST INCREASE in order to satisfy demand....
there is NO other way about it.
look at the soviets...they all had equal access...it worked out great didn't it? do you like breadlines?
why do Canadians cross the border to come here and get care?
why do Europeans come to this country to get certain operations and care?
because of waiting times, and quality of care.
quality of Care will be BETTER when Health care can operate at market demanded prices....this gives hospitals and insurance companies and incentive to compete to offer the best quality of service at the lowest cost it can in accordance to market conditions.
Health Insurance is so expensive because that is the market cost of the product.
If it makes you mad,
then go down the street and complain at your neighbours house who is getting a free ride on welfare.
if more hard working Americans would ostracise, throw stuff, scream and complain at these people who eat better on welfare then the guy who works two jobs with 3 kids at the store or hospital, maybe things would change.
the above is a "play on words" what i mean is Americans need to "quit" accepting the neighbour that gets a free ride....quit socially accepting such principles and you can give these bums an incentive to get a job when no one likes them, will talk to them, and they get looks every where they go.
and NO a 16 year old that don't have a job that has a kid has NO RIGHT to free healthcare...she should have thought about that before she did what she did...we all have a choice....she should have to suffer the consequences of that choice...maybe people would make better choices if they had to taste the medicine of that choice...
kick all these folks off welfare force them to get a job like everyone else and take away their Govt. healthcare card
in a year when hospitals don't have as much of a demand on them...health insurance rates will drop big time on their own due to market price and less demand...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
Really liked your point about Constitutional legislation of health care,....I wonder what loophole or misinterpretation Obama is following to keep banging this door,....I don't believe the Constituion mentions health care at all, unless you widen the path of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
Is health care a business, or a basic right ? (privilege, or whatever you want to call it.)
I think it is a business.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044 |
Healthcare is a business
it provides a service at a market cost.
As for Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness
that is in the Declaration of Independence not the constitution
as far as I know, the Declaration of Independence is NOT part of the Constitution and is not a govt legal binding document.
it was merely a document listing the injustices done to the colonies by King Gerorge of england and why the colonies were declaring Independence from Britian.
its still a basis for the foundation of america
however, I don't believe the founders wanted to pay for someone else's healthcare any more than I do... they believed people were not entitled to anything they didn't work for and achieve on their own.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
"Insure domestic tranquility,".... and "Promote the General Welfare," ..... and "Secure the Blessings of Liberty," all listed in the Preamble, are a pretty broad brush to paint with.
I ain't saying it's right,...I'm just saying it's a matter of interpretation, depending on what side of the fence you Twitter from.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587 |
Quote:
why do Canadians cross the border to come here and get care?
Umm....I personally never met anyone from Canada that had to go the states for care. I've heard stories but don't know anyone personally.
However I know several people from the states that come here to get cheaper prescriptions.
Personally, as an American residing in Canada, I couldn't be happier with the Health Care system up here. I haven't seen a difference in wait time or quality of care. I pay taxes for it but it's not as bad as it's made out to be and it's cheaper than paying into a health plan.
How many of you guys know young couples starting their familes being given huge hospital bills for having a baby? I know my brother and his wife's first child was born premature and they had no benefits at the time and were hit with a $25,000.00 hospital bill just so their baby could stay alive. Needless to say....the honeymoon was over. Welcome to the ever increasing world of debt. 4 years have past and they still are trying to pay this back. They have come close to having to file for bankruptcy for this and other health related issues. Of course we all know that that is the number reason for filing bankruptcy....which everyone pays for in the long run anyways.
I never have paid a dime for having a child...not only that but by law you get 1 full year paid parental leave. Everyone here (regardless of how much you make) also gets 100.00 per child for Daycare from the Gov't and also a Monthly Child Tax Benefit check. All in all I get a check every month from the Gov't for $376 for having both my boys. That pretty much covers any extra taxes plus that I pay by living here. Take into account the crime is far less and...............wait now I'm getting off topic.
Here is a couple interesting articles for you to educate yourself on before buying into the lies:
Article
Article
Article
Article
#1 reason for Personal Bankruptcy
![[Linked Image from netanimations.net]](http://netanimations.net/Moving-picture-dog-with-a-bone-animated-gif.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044 |
Yes but those are from the preamble to the Constitution
The Preamble is nothing more then an introduction of sorts.
Article 1 - Legislative
Article 2 - Executive
Article 3 - Judicial
Bill of rights
Ammendments
the above is where the Constitution lays out its powers out precisely
The Preamble is akin to the introduction of a book and its authors...many take it out of context
Its not meant to be taken as a basis for the power of government, its just an introduction to the document that lays out the power of government via the articles and bill of rights, and ammendments. In other words its giving a background as to where the Articles and Amendments were derived and get their just power from
nothing less
nothing more.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587 |
Quote:
however, I don't believe the founders wanted to pay for someone else's healthcare any more than I do... they believed people were not entitled to anything they didn't work for and achieve on their own.
Do you think the founders would want the US to have to spend more on Health Care than other all other countries? It's amazing to me how many of you buy into the lies. The reason Health Care in the US is so costly is because of Greed......bottom line. However a majority on this board support that. You would rather pay more for benefits and be satisfied that your not hellping the lazy people of this country than to pay less and say your helping someone that cannot afford it. These corporations are laughing at you.
I'm sorry but I cannot understand this way of thought.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044 |
Quote:
Quote:
however, I don't believe the founders wanted to pay for someone else's healthcare any more than I do... they believed people were not entitled to anything they didn't work for and achieve on their own.
Do you think the founders would want the US to have to spend more on Health Care than other all other countries? It's amazing to me how many of you buy into the lies. The reason Health Care in the US is so costly is because of Greed......bottom line. However a majority on this board support that. You would rather pay more for benefits and be satisfied that your not hellping the lazy people of this country than to pay less and say your helping someone that cannot afford it. These corporations are laughing at you.
I'm sorry but I cannot understand this way of thought.
If you want the best you must pay for it.
I also don't understand how a person can think its ok to demand 20%, 30%, or even 40% of another persons income to pay for their healthcare.
Ok MyDawgsBite since you must think socialised Healthcare is ok.
how bout you hand over 25% of your earnings to me every year for the rest of my life...since im entitled to live off anothers work.....thats what people like mac support (just an example)
you wouldn't like that much would you?
the govt or a person has no right to demand one person work to pay for the benefits of another.
Healthcare costs are not caused by greedy corporations, they are caused by hospitals absorbing the costs of people who "don't pay" (insert welfare/govt card) and passing it on to Insurance companies which is passed on to folks like me who pay.
plain and simple
i don't want to hand over what i work for to someone else who chooses not to work or provide for themselves.
if a person wants to give to charity fine (i do give to charities) but I don't want to hand over my wages to other people...do I not have a right to decide who I hand my wages over to, and who's care I pay for? (my families)?
social medicine will not work for the reasons stated in my post above...won't work...
if such a system is tried, this country will be so bankrupt they won't even be able to afford to pay for a road.
Ther laws of economics state:
"when you give a person unlimited access to a resource at a zero cost a person can and will consume all they can"
govt sponsored healthcare at free cost or even way below market value will result in the healthcare system being so over run you will not be able to get timely care as everyone will rush to the hospital knowing they will have to pay little or nothing at all and expect service.
not going to work...it may work in utopia..but not in practical real life.
if they try this...say good by to the United States because we will br BROKE in less then 10 years...we already have a 9 trillion dollar debt...they can't borrow or print much more money before the dollar becomes useless and interest rates are raised through the roof to contract the money supply and halt inflation....
you really need to get a sound grasp of economics, and how the capitalist and free market system works.
its the greedy corporations fault right? I mean greedy corporations and capitalism lead to the highest living standards of a nation in history (USA) but it stinks right?
The govt has driven all the jobs overseas with their crazy taxes and regulations.....made it impossible for those companies to compete in the world market as long as their base of operations was in the USA...of course mac will say tax breaks let them move
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798 |
Quote:
If you want the best you must pay for it.
By many metrics, as a whole the US does not have the best system in the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_system#Cross-country_comparisons
We spend 40-100% more than all other systems, yet our life expectancy and infant mortality are very similar or worse than these other countries.
Quote:
Healthcare costs are not caused by greedy corporations, they are caused by hospitals absorbing the costs of people who "don't pay" (insert welfare/govt card) and passing it on to Insurance companies which is passed on to folks like me who pay.
plain and simple
It is not this simple. A CBO report found that 40-65% of rising health care costs comes from advances in medical technology being accepted and widely adopted in the US without careful analysis if the newer, more expensive technologies are more effective than older, cheaper methods. Medicaid, or changes in third party payments, only accounted for 10% of rising costs.
Quote:
i don't want to hand over what i work for to someone else who chooses not to work or provide for themselves.
This myth of the lazy, welfare addicted person is not backed up by evidence, especially in the case of Medicaid. Most of what you hand over is spent on either the elderly, disabled, or children.
http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparetable.jsp?ind=182&cat=4
If you look specifically at Ohio, 12% of Medicaid payment went to adults. 88% went to the elderly, disabled, or children, three groups that cannot necessarily work or support themselves.
Quote:
"when you give a person unlimited access to a resource at a zero cost a person can and will consume all they can"
This is already the case in this country, even without govt sponsored health care.
http://www.iie.com/realtime/?p=595
Figure 2 shows that US health care consumers share the cost at one of the lowest rates in the world, very similar to the socialized European systems. The way I see it, we either need to increase cost sharing for most users of health care, ration care, or both to control exploding costs. None of these are very palatable, but I just don't see any other way.
Last edited by tjs7; 02/27/10 03:25 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,138
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,138 |
Quote:
You would rather pay more for benefits and be satisfied that your not hellping the lazy people of this country than to pay less and say your helping someone that cannot afford it.
Where in the hell did anyone, let alone the majority, say that?
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587 |
Quote:
If you want the best you must pay for it.
The best? Your kidding right?
Health Care Rankings by Country
I know this is from 2000. So show me something that changes this. I'm sure I could find it but I want to hit a few more of your statements.
Quote:
how bout you hand over 25% of your earnings to me every year for the rest of my life...since im entitled to live off anothers work.....thats what people like mac support (just an example)
I do and I'm fine with it for the reasons mentioned in my above post. I get alot back in return.
Quote:
the govt or a person has no right to demand one person work to pay for the benefits of another.
You will pay for it one way or another. Why not at least pay for something that isn't over inflated by the coorporations? The US pays more than any other country per person for health care.
Source
Quote:
Healthcare costs are not caused by greedy corporations, they are caused by hospitals absorbing the costs of people who "don't pay" (insert welfare/govt card) and passing it on to Insurance companies which is passed on to folks like me who pay.
Please Read
Quote:
i don't want to hand over what i work for to someone else who chooses not to work or provide for themselves.
You do that everyday anyways.
Quote:
social medicine will not work for the reasons stated in my post above...won't work...
Won't work for who? Seems to work everywhere else with great results.
Quote:
if such a system is tried, this country will be so bankrupt they won't even be able to afford to pay for a road.
US Health per capita is higher than everyone else. So the money that will be saved will go where?
Quote:
"when you give a person unlimited access to a resource at a zero cost a person can and will consume all they can"
That will happen regardless if they have free healthcare or if they have to pay for benefits. Hypochondriacs will always be around.
Quote:
govt sponsored healthcare at free cost or even way below market value will result in the healthcare system being so over run you will not be able to get timely care as everyone will rush to the hospital knowing they will have to pay little or nothing at all and expect service.
I haven't experienced that personally here in Canada.
Quote:
not going to work...it may work in utopia..but not in practical real life.
Hello? Works everywhere else.
Quote:
its the greedy corporations fault right? I mean greedy corporations and capitalism lead to the highest living standards of a nation in history (USA) but it stinks right?
Where do you get your information...LMAO!!!!!
Show me anything that supports the US has the highest standard of living.
Actually show me something where they are ranked in the top 5.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 294
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 294 |
Even with all the seriousness that came after your post. I couldn't help but think about this. http://www.kidstube.com/videos/1927/School House Rock - The Preamble [youtube][/youtube] excuse me guys back to the rants 
Last edited by RoosteR; 02/27/10 09:10 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
Question for you - a friend of mine, from canada, was in the u.s. last year - long story short, he had a heart attack and didn't know it - in the u.s. When he got back to canada, checked out by a doc - told he had a heart attack, etc - the put some stents in, so on, etc. (this would've been at the end of march).
He and his wife were planning on coming to our house in july - but had to cancel because they were told if he traveled outside of canada for a period of time (don't remember the exact time - somewhere in the 8-10 month range I believe) and anything happened, health wise, his insurance would not cover any bill. Does that sound right to you?
Also, 2 years ago when they were here, they were saying that his father in law couldn't get in to see a doctor for a problem for about 4 months (not a family practice doc - a specialty doc). When he finally did get in, the problem was untreatable (and they did not say, the couple, that had the father in law gotten the attention needed immediately that he would've lived - so they weren't blaming the system - but does that happen often? Granted, the couple we are friends with were 56 at the time - so it's safe to say the father/father in law was probably at least in his early 70's, maybe late 70's.
Do things like that happen often?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587 |
When I go to the states I am covered under my credit card for a small fee. I can also get it through my insurance. I have never spent more than 14 days straight days in the states since I've been in Canada so I don't know if they would cover an 8-10 month period. Alot of Canadians spend the winters down south so I'm sure they are using something. Then again that isn't 8-10 months either. I would imagine they would have to get insured through someone in the states.
As far as your friends father-in-law is concern....I have no idea. I have seen a few specialist for minor issues and I had to wait a couple weeks to get in. However it wasn't nothing remotely serious. I have been here for 10 years and have gotten to know alot of folks and I have never heard of anyone having to wait for something that might be considered life threatening. However, I can't say for sure if it has or is happening.
My Dad (lived in Florida) passed away with cancer in 2006 and his experience seemed similiar with those that have had the same issues here in Canada. That's the only comparison I have with something serious.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
Quote:
When I go to the states I am covered under my credit card for a small fee. I can also get it through my insurance. I have never spent more than 14 days straight days in the states since I've been in Canada so I don't know if they would cover an 8-10 month period. Alot of Canadians spend the winters down south so I'm sure they are using something. Then again that isn't 8-10 months either. I would imagine they would have to get insured through someone in the states.
My bad - I didn't make it clear. Dave is my friend's name. Dave had a h.a. when he was here last march. Got checked when he got back to canada.
Dave and his wife come to the states quite a bit - for 2 to 4 weeks at a time. They don't come for 8-10 months at a time.
Dave and his wife were supposed to be coming back later in the summer of last year - but decided not to because they were told that, due to his heart attack being so recent - IF he chose to go to the states within - say it was 8 months - he would have no insurance. (does that make sense?) Consequently - they decided to not come back last year.
It was only for a certain period of time - and again, i don't remember exactly how long that time was.
After whatever period of time it was - they were free to do as they wanted and Dave would be covered - and they are currently here in the states - in Arizona actually - with health insurance - but this is now past his "no insurance" time frame. (the "no insurance time frame" reference is mine - not theirs. And he was fine insurance wise in canada - just couldn't travel outside of the country.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,861
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,861 |
The "business of life and death"! Sounds very noble and humanitarian. You know, we go around the globe saying we are the beacon of humanitarianism. But our people sure don't want to live up to it. 
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587 |
I see now...I have no idea man.
Sorry couldn't give more info.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587 |
Quote:
The "business of life and death"! Sounds very noble and humanitarian.
You know, we go around the globe saying we are the beacon of humanitarianism. But our people sure don't want to live up to it.
I saw that too but couldn't even comment on that type of belief system. However, you summed it up nicely.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,861
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,861 |
You know, everybody against national health care talks about how terrible Canadas health care is. They only know the blurbs, headlines and propeganda the health care oponents spew.
From the Canadians I've talked to, the vast majority are fine with their health care system. Of course you have some that aren't satisfied with it. Many here that have had bad experiences with our health care system aren't happy with ours either.
Mistakes happen everywhere. Some seem to feel we're immuned to such mistakes which is simply a false assertion.
My dad had a major stroke in the 90's. He was hospitalised for quite some time. Luckily it was the middle of winter. Being in the concrete business I had a layoff due to inclimate weather so I happened to be able to stay with him pretty much 24/7.
Therefore I watched everything going on. He could not speak. After about five days he began having severe stomach pains. A team of specialists came in to check his stomach from a strictly "feel and observe" basis.
They looked at me and said they had no idea of what the problem was. I was the one who made the medical decisons because I'm the oldest child by eight years.
They told me they needed to do exploratory surgery to investigate the matter. I told them I would take the rest of the day to consider it. They had inserted a feeding tube so my dad could recieve nutrients as he didn't have the control to chew or swallow and I began thinking about it. Then I talked to his regular nurses inquiring about intake and output of bodily functions.
Come to find out, my dad hadn't had a bowel movement since he had been in that hospital! This "fine team of surgeons" decided it was better to "cut first and ask questions later". Of course the very nature of a "business" is the bottom line, how many surgerys and the profit margin, right?
Without going into detail, those surgeons didn't like me very much after I told them what a bunch of morons they were and how ANYONE with ANY medical experience would have looked at that the very first thing. And even though my dad couldn't talk, I wasn't simply some yes man to surgery before checking the obvious.
So just a little experience I've had with "the greatest medical system in the world". So just because you can find "some Canadians" not happy with their system, believe me I'm not sold on ours either. Funny how those oponents never show or look at the ratio of those happy with Canadian healthy care but accentuate the hell out of every mistake there. Then taught our as so far superior based on those cases they find of those unhappy about Canadian health care. lmao
BTW- My dad had retired from Chrysler and had what many consider "top notch medical insurance" at the time. Those doctors cared more about hiking up the bill than checking their bases. That's what I've seen from our medical system first hand.
And I'd like to see someone "show proof" that we have the best medical system in the world too. I hear people spout off about it, including John Boehner, but never saw their evidence to back it up. From my own personal first-hand evidence, if ours is the best, I'd hate to see the worst.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587 |
Making money off of surgeries is just half of what these guys are doing to make money. How about prescriptions? It's very well documented that physicians are more like salesman anymore. They get bonuses from drug companies for the more prescriptions they give out for particuliar drugs. Instead of saying get your fat arse off the couch they would rather keep filling you full of drugs that will destroy your body worse than your actual condition.
Where is the accountability?
The more people keep allowing this to happen the worse it will get. No one is saying that they want a socialist nation but there are times for Government. When it comes down to life or death and people taking advantage of it then that IMO it needs to be taken over by the Government. For those that don't want this then what is your suggestion? Saying to keep things as they are is not a option to me.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828 |
Quote:
Man man...did your school teach you anything at all?
THE USA IS NOT A DEMOCRACY IT IS A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC ALSO KNOW AS A REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC
knight...Did you ever hear President GW Bush say he was promoting REPUBLIC around the world?
Knight...have you ever heard any American President say they were promoting REPUBLIC in any country, around the world?
...OR... do hear American Presidents and politicians say they promote "DEMOCRACY" around the world?
From: Promoting Democracy and Fighting Terror
When George W. Bush took office two years ago, few observers expected that promoting democracy around the world would become a major issue in his presidency. web page
From: President Bush's Freedom Agenda Helped Protect The American People
"President Bush Has Advanced Liberty And Democracy As The Great Alternatives To Repression And Radicalism"
"President Bush has kept his pledge to strengthen democracy and promote peace around the world."
"President Bush helped establish an emerging democratic Afghan government and helped improve the lives of the Afghan people, especially women and children. "
"President Bush generated international pressure to end the Syrian occupation of Lebanon and helped promote democracy and restore civilian rule in Pakistan."
"The President has helped to create international organizations to promote the spread of freedom abroad and more than doubled funding to promote democracy worldwide." web page
From: Democracy, Wikipedia...
In contemporary usage, the term democracy refers to a government chosen by the people, whether it is direct or representative. The term republic has many different meanings, but today often refers to a representative democracy with an elected head of state, such as a president, serving for a limited term, in contrast to states with a hereditary monarch as a head of state, even if these states also are representative democracies with an elected or appointed head of government such as a prime minister.
The Founding Fathers of the United States rarely praised and often criticized democracy, which in their time tended to specifically mean direct democracy; James Madison argued, especially in The Federalist No. 10, that what distinguished a democracy from a republic was that the former became weaker as it got larger and suffered more violently from the effects of faction, whereas a republic could get stronger as it got larger and combats faction by its very structure.
What was critical to American values, John Adams insisted, was that the government be "bound by fixed laws, which the people have a voice in making, and a right to defend." As Benjamin Franklin was exiting after writing the U.S. constitution, a woman asked him Sir, what have you given us?. He replied A republic ma'am, if you can keep it. web page
From: Cold War and protest politics...
"The United States promoted liberal democracy and capitalism, while the Soviet Union promoted communism and a centrally planned economy." web page
From: Liberal democracy, Wiki...
"Liberal democracy (or constitutional democracy) is the dominant form of democracy in the 21st century. During the Cold War, liberal democracies were contrasted with the Communist People's Republics or "Popular Democracies", which claimed an alternative conception of democracy."
"Liberal democracies may take various constitutional forms: they may be republics, as the United States, India or France, or constitutional monarchy, as the United Kingdom, Japan, or Spain. It may have a presidential system (United States), a parliamentary system (Westminster system, UK and Commonwealth countries), or a hybrid, semi-presidential system (France)."
Liberal democracies around the world...
"There is general agreement that the states of the European Union, Norway, Iceland, Switzerland, Japan, South Korea, the United States, Canada, India, Mexico, South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand are liberal democracies, with Canada having the largest land area and India currently having the largest population among the democracies in the world."
"A presidential system is a system of government of a republic where the executive branch is elected separately from the legislative. The presidential system of democratic government has become popular in Latin America, Africa, and parts of the former Soviet Union, largely by the example of the United States." web page
Quote:
Democracy is the most vile form of government... democracies have ever
been spectacles of turbulence and contention: have ever been found
incompatible with personal security or the rights of property:
and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent
in their deaths. - James Madison
Knight...read this...
"In the United States, James Madison defined republic in terms of representative democracy as opposed to direct democracy, and this usage is still employed by many viewing themselves as "republicans".
Representative democracy is a form of government founded on the principle of elected individuals representing the people, as opposed to either autocracy or direct democracy
web page
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828 |
Quote:
Umm....I personally never met anyone from Canada that had to go the states for care. I've heard stories but don't know anyone personally.
However I know several people from the states that come here to get cheaper prescriptions.
Personally, as an American residing in Canada, I couldn't be happier with the Health Care system up here. I haven't seen a difference in wait time or quality of care. I pay taxes for it but it's not as bad as it's made out to be and it's cheaper than paying into a health plan.
mydawgbites ...I want to thank you for speaking up and telling THE TRUTH about the Canadian healthcare system. Maybe you should take what you have written here and submit it in editorial form to many of the United States major newspapers.
The American people need to understand...
Your GOP politician is using talking points...LIES...about the Canadian healthcare system to try to appeal to your "emotions"...not your "brain".
Your GOP politician is attempting to SCARE you into supporting his ideas, such as there is nothing wrong with America's healthcare system and we sure wouldn't want what Canada has.
Whose interests is your GOP politician representing?....
...YOU WANT THE TRUTH?...your GOP (and some Dems) politician is representing the interests of those who donate the most money to his or her re-election campaign...that is a fact!
Your GOP (and some Dems) are now free to take as much bribe money from HMOs and related corporations as they can shake lobbyists down for...thanks to the great US Supreme court's 5-4 vote allowing corporations to donate as much as the want to political campaigns.
Why the hell should your GOP politician tell the truth about the Canadian Healthcare system? You don't donate enough to GOP (and some Dems) political campaigns to get a face to face meeting with your elected official....fact!
Our elected officials, both Dem and GOP, are corrupt as hell, representing the interests of those who donate the most to their re-elections campaigns...rather than the people back home who they are supposed to be representing. Lobbyists who don't even live in your state, line up to funnel campaign donations to your Senators and Representatives in an effort to BRIBE them to vote for their Corporations interests...not your interests.
When your politicians try to appeal to your emotions, rather than your brain and common sense...bend over.
MyDawgBites, again I thank you for tell us THE TRUTH about the Canadian Healthcare System...mac
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587 |
No problem. Living in both countries I get to see first hand some of the corruption that goes on. I love the United States and I wish I could get my wife to move back home but it amazes me how many more issues the States has compared to here in Canada.
I see alot more people abusing the system back home then here and I try to be sympathetic to those that are tired of it. However I also think it's important to stand up for some thing I see working here in Canada. Not only does it work here but people are very proud of their health care system as well. Your always going find the unsatisfied that need a platform to vocalize about their bad experience but that happens everywhere and in every type of industry.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,123
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,123 |
Quote:
Making money off of surgeries is just half of what these guys are doing to make money. How about prescriptions? It's very well documented that physicians are more like salesman anymore. They get bonuses from drug companies for the more prescriptions they give out for particuliar drugs. Instead of saying get your fat arse off the couch they would rather keep filling you full of drugs that will destroy your body worse than your actual condition.
Where is the accountability?
The more people keep allowing this to happen the worse it will get. No one is saying that they want a socialist nation but there are times for Government. When it comes down to life or death and people taking advantage of it then that IMO it needs to be taken over by the Government. For those that don't want this then what is your suggestion? Saying to keep things as they are is not a option to me.
What makes you think a corrupt a politician cares more about you than a doctor trying to make money? Everyone seems to think having the government take control of everything is the answer. Problem is, the government does not have the best interest of Americans in mind.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 587 |
Quote:
Quote:
Problem is, the government does not have the best interest of Americans in mind.
Who does anymore? Is there anyone that is really representing the people anymore? That is the sad truth.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 70
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 70 |
Mac, we are considered a representitive republic but many also call it a representitive democracy.
Remeber the Pledge of Allegiance? It's defined as this: The Pledge of Allegiance to the United States is an oath of loyalty to the republic of the United States of America.
"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
It's all techincal and it can be called both, but the proper term is representitive republic.
"Every time that I score, I'm going to get the ball and sign it "To Holmgren" and give it to him just so he has the proof that I'm worth every penny"- JC
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,465
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,465 |
Quote:
Quote:
Someday down the road, I hope my grandson runs into your grandson as they wait for 4 hours to see the doctor to get a routine exam..
Why, because he dont think like you do and has his own opinions? Or because you cant meet him yourself and unable to do it yourself?
Nobody is mad that Halliburton took taxpayers money on contracts given to them by Bush, then Halliburton moved its base to Saudi Arabia so it wouldnt have to pay back its taxes to its country? I dont blame Republicans on that because many Democrats like the move too, as they also have stocks in the company. If they didnt, they would be raising hell. Thats why it makes me laugh when people argue D vs R. They are all in the same boat. Like the same Rs the were bashing Ds for saying "Its anti American and unPatriotic to say anything negative about a war time president." and say "If you dont like it leave the country." then turn around and bash Obama, who happens to be a war time president and guess what, none of them that dont like it are leaving the country.
Or what about that oil company CEO that got like $300 billion when he retired when we started seeing $3 gas prices. Yeah, hes now going to his grave with some secrets of illegal activities to get oil and its prices. I guess for that much, id be a sellout to. Or did he really really earn that money?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
I never heard of an oil company exec. that got $300 billion when he retired. What was his name? Have a link? $300 billion is quite a bit - I'd like to read more about it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
Pit - no person, in ANY profession is above making mistakes - you know that.
I have made them in my job. I would guess you have made them in yours. Accountants, hole drillers, construction people, attorneys, etc - mistakes are part of being human.
Serious question to you: What in this health care reform thing is going to prevent mistakes? And, more importantly - who or what is going to decide what treatment a patient gets in order to avoid mistakes and/or misjudgments?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
JC... Saw on "Sunday Morning" or whatever that new show with Charles Osgood on it. "1970 - Avg CEO made 27x what the average American Worker made, 2007 avg CEO made 250x what the average American Worker made." Found the text version: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/02/28/sunday/main6252373.shtml?tag=contentBody;featuredPost-PE
Last edited by FloridaFan; 02/28/10 06:40 PM.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,861
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,861 |
Quote:
Pit - no person, in ANY profession is above making mistakes - you know that.
Yes they will Arch and I pretty well stated as much. My point was, those who opose national health care point to "every mistake made there" as some kind of proof positive that our system is better yet never seem to point out that those very same mistakes are made in our own system.
Quote:
Serious question to you: What in this health care reform thing is going to prevent mistakes?
Nothing. They're being made under our current system and as you pointed out will happen under any system. People are human. But in my dads case, the very FIRST thing a health professional does in the case of stomach pains and/or stomach cramps is check to see if the bowels are functioning properly. It's elementary. When a patient can't communicate they check his hospital chart. And in this case it was a "team of 4 SPECIALISTS" who never even looked at my dads chart and wanted to do surgery. That's not a simple oversight Arch. That's putting profits first. I hate to break it to you, but many of the GOP politicians will tell you that one of the reasons for high health care is unnecassary tests, procedures and surgeries. It's not a secret. But when you are running a business, it really helps matters to do a lot of procedures and surgeries. It's good for the bottom line. It's the nature of the beast as with any business, more business and consumers is better. You own a business. You already know that.
Quote:
And, more importantly - who or what is going to decide what treatment a patient gets in order to avoid mistakes and/or misjudgments?
As long as humans are humans, mistakes will be made. However, there is a vast difference between a mistake, and negligently doing surgeries without checking the very most basic of questions that would easily avoid such unnecassary procedures and surgeries. Ask anyone you know in the health care profession what they would have done under identical circumstances and you will soon see that you look at bodily functions in the case of severe stomach pain first and always. That's a very basic first step. As basic as if your lawnmower doesn't start you see if there is any gas in it. Seriously.
The answer to your question overall is very basic. If you pay a doctor incentives to resolve a patients illness without having to resort to major surgery, it will be in their own self interest to exhaust every logical path to avoid major surgeries first before resorting to them. As it stands now, they get rewarded and paid based on how many they do. Our set up in that regard is bassackwards.
If I would have gotten paid more to help a person who called about having a driveway replaced how to solve their driveway issues without replacing it? You better believe I wouldn't have sold NEARLY as many driveways! 
This is how many public health care systems are ran in Europe. If they can "resolve a patients issue without resorting to surgeries they recieve a bonus". And to offset that, they are rewarded based on mortality rates so they simply don't refuse to do surgeries when they really are necassary.
What they seem to have a grasp on in such countries that it seems many of our citizens can't quite grasp is that people have a thing called "human nature".
Businesses are designed to make a profit. And in our system, there are no checks and balances that reward any hospital or health care professional to look at every avenue before doing procedures and surgeries. They only get paid and rewarded for doing them. Don't get me wrong, there are some health care professionals who do this, but not nearly enough.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
Quote:
Nothing. They're being made under our current system and as you pointed out will happen under any system. People are human. But in my dads case, the very FIRST thing a health professional does in the case of stomach pains and/or stomach cramps is check to see if the bowels are functioning properly. It's elementary. When a patient can't communicate they check his hospital chart. And in this case it was a "team of 4 SPECIALISTS" who never even looked at my dads chart and wanted to do surgery. That's not a simple oversight Arch. That's putting profits first.
I don't want to get into details of your dad - as I know nothing about the details. Hope you understand. But, as you said - people make mistakes. What was your dad in for?
Would a bowel surgery have helped him? (I'm no doctor, and if that comes across as crass, I apologize up front)Quote:
I hate to break it to you, but many of the GOP politicians will tell you that one of the reasons for high health care is unnecassary tests, procedures and surgeries. It's not a secret.
So running unnecessary testst is a GOP thing? Actually, it's a CYA thing, common among all doctors and hospitals. Can you tell me why that is? In case you can't, I'll tell you: Lawsuits.
Quote:
But when you are running a business, it really helps matters to do a lot of procedures and surgeries. It's good for the bottom line. It's the nature of the beast as with any business, more business and consumers is better. You own a business. You already know that.
I can't say that I agree with that. What I will say is doctors and hospitals do a boat load of things to cover there butt - lawsuit wise. Take that as you please, but it's true. And there is not a medical person in this country that would say otherwise.
Quote:
As long as humans are humans, mistakes will be made. However, there is a vast difference between a mistake, and negligently doing surgeries without checking the very most basic of questions that would easily avoid such unnecassary procedures and surgeries. Ask anyone you know in the health care profession what they would have done under identical circumstances and you will soon see that you look at bodily functions in the case of severe stomach pain first and always.
Now, I happen to know quite a few people in the healthcare field........quite a few -from nurses to doctors to administrators of hospitals. Without knowing the details of your dad - which I don't care to know nor do I need to know - that's not always the case. What are you, what is the patient - in for? You said your dad had been in the hospital for a while - I'm sure the doctors knew what he was in for - I don't.
Quote:
The answer to your question overall is very basic. If you pay a doctor incentives to resolve a patients illness without having to resort to major surgery, it will be in their own self interest to exhaust every logical path to avoid major surgeries first before resorting to them. As it stands now, they get rewarded and paid based on how many they do. Our set up in that regard is bassackwards.
So you reccommend paying doctors to not do surgery, pending more tests to make sure surgery isn't neccessary? Got it.
Hey - the only doctors that get paid for surgeries are the surgeons. Most docs aren't surgeons. Just saying.
Quote:
This is how many public health care systems are ran in Europe. If they can "resolve a patients issue without resorting to surgeries they recieve a bonus". And to offset that, they are rewarded based on mortality rates so they simply don't refuse to do surgeries when they really are necassary.
That's all well and good - but you assume as fact that doctors here in the u.s. just ship everyone off to surgery. And that's a wrong assumption. Plus, you apparently discount the liability doctors here in the u.s have - go in for a hang nail, doctor doesn't find the cancer - bam - you sue for a hundred million - settle for $10 million.........they do that in Europe?
Oh, also, since you bring Europe up - how many countries there are financially secure? Here's a little hint - about 0.
The U.S. is so financially insolvent we are printing money to cover our debts. You understand that, right?
So - again, I ask: what, in this health care reform bill that will cost an estimated $100,000,000,000,000.00 - what is in there to insure that doctors and hospitals don't continue to do as they see fit?
Is their liability protection? No.
Is there someone else paying the bills? Yes - taxpayers. Those that currently have insurance will not only pay for their own insurance, they will pay for an estimated 30 million more.
Is there reform in health care? No. The only reform there is is the money goes to the gov.'t.
Tell me again how this health care reform will help people. The 30 million it is calculated to help - how will it help them?
Tell me again who pays for it? Surely you can't think it's just free, can you?
Tell me how it improves health care - how does it eliminate mistakes? Misdiagnosis? How does it help?
Why is it so necessary to get it now - when it won't take effect for years? (aside from the taxes)
Tell me again how many congress people have read all 2700 pages and know what it's about.
Then tell me how many congress people know that on page "x" there is a few hundred million for them to disperse in their represented area.
Again - how is fining people for not having health care going to help people?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,660 |
Quote:
Yes but those are from the preamble to the Constitution
The Preamble is nothing more then an introduction of sorts.
Article 1 - Legislative
Article 2 - Executive
Article 3 - Judicial
Bill of rights
Ammendments
the above is where the Constitution lays out its powers out precisely
The Preamble is akin to the introduction of a book and its authors...many take it out of context
Its not meant to be taken as a basis for the power of government, its just an introduction to the document that lays out the power of government via the articles and bill of rights, and ammendments. In other words its giving a background as to where the Articles and Amendments were derived and get their just power from
nothing less
nothing more.
I think you are being entirely dismissive of the preamble. The constitution is a framework for running government, and establishing a means by which laws and are established.
The ability of Congress to establish laws regarding healthcare or social security is clearly stated under Section 8 of Article 1. "provide for common defense and general welfare"
Getting back to the topic of this discussion regarding the demonizing of American companies, this issue has evolved over 235 years. Huge multinational corporations were never contemplated in the text. We have been struggling with the power of the corporation for the past 130 years. Teddy Roosevelt greatly limited the power of the corporation in the early 1900's because he saw it as having the ability to limit the freedom of people in this country.
While many people do not like excessive government, they have the ability to change government through the election process. We have no such ability over corporations. Corporations are entities that are formed for the sole purpose of profit generation and limitation of liability in the event that they fail. In light of the recent Supreme Court decision, I do not see how corporations have the right of "personhood" and protection of free speech and the unlimited ability to influence the elections.
A strict constitutionalist should be screaming at the top of their lungs about this ruling, unfortunately it is masked in the "freedom" given to this nation, No such freedom was granted to corporations, only individuals.
It comes down to a philosophical fundemental matter of trust.. do you trust corporations, or government to protect the rights of individuals?
Me, well, I do not like government, but recognize that there is a greater potential of the individual to change government than to change a corporation.
Welcome back, Joe, we missed you!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798 |
Used this link for health care bill comparisons: http://www.kff.org/healthreform/upload/housesenatebill_final.pdf Quote:
Is their liability protection? No.
There actually is. Under the Improving Quality section, this bill offers grants to states to study and implement tort reform. This is the right move, as blanket federal reform would not necessarily help in each state, where laws can be substantially different.
Quote:
Is there someone else paying the bills? Yes - taxpayers. Those that currently have insurance will not only pay for their own insurance, they will pay for an estimated 30 million more.
While this is technically true, you will pay for it one way or the other. Now, we pay for it because of the uncovered that go to the ER for every sniffle and never pay. Thus hospitals pass the cost onto those of us who actually pay (or whose insurance pays). If you can force people to participate in health care by forcing insurance and having them share in the cost (b/c the bill provides for subsidies, NOT complete handouts), this should reduce unnecessary use of health care, thus lowering our costs in the long run.
Quote:
Is there reform in health care? No. The only reform there is is the money goes to the gov.'t.
There is quite a bit of good reform in this bill. One of the biggest problems with health care today is rising costs due to overuse of technology (up to 60% of cost increases over the period 1940-1990 were due to this). Doctors don't necessarily study new technologies before widespread implementation.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/89xx/doc8948/01-31-HealthTestimony.pdf
Table 1
The bill establishes a Patient Center Outcomes Research Institute to study whether new technologies, that can be much more expensive, actually offer a benefit over old technologies. This institute would publish findings, and if people find that certain doctors are using technologies that cost a lot more, but don't offer them any new benefit, people can change doctors. In other words, an informed consumer can help drive costs down.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,861
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,861 |
Quote:
I don't want to get into details of your dad - as I know nothing about the details. Hope you understand. But, as you said - people make mistakes. What was your dad in for?
Would a bowel surgery have helped him? (I'm no doctor, and if that comes across as crass, I apologize up front)
No Arch, my dad was simply constipated. They gave him a laxative and that took care of it. But growing up, when my stomach hurt the first question my mom asked was "have you pooped today?" lol He was hospitalised with a major stroke and couldn't talk.
Quote:
So running unnecessary testst is a GOP thing? Actually, it's a CYA thing, common among all doctors and hospitals. Can you tell me why that is? In case you can't, I'll tell you: Lawsuits.
No Arch it isn't simply a GOP thing. But I wasn't sure if you knew about what you just pointed out. So I was simply letting you know the GOP agrees with this since I know you lean very conservative. That's all.
Quote:
I can't say that I agree with that. What I will say is doctors and hospitals do a boat load of things to cover there butt - lawsuit wise. Take that as you please, but it's true. And there is not a medical person in this country that would say otherwise.
So you're saying you don't agree that if a company or business does "more business" they aren't "more profitable"? And exactly how would doing more surgeries cover someone's butt? Manyof the lawsuits you speak of are because of improper surgical procedures. Such as instruments left inside, overdosing anisteshia, etc....
As I already stated Arch, he had a massive stroke and couldn't talk. Thus if stomach pains start five to seven days after you are admitted, no matter what you state, you look at intake and output. They put a feeding tube and was feeding him regularly yet he hadn't had a bowel movement the entire time. One look at his chart would have shown them that. This fact is not really even debateable whatsoever.
Quote:
So you reccommend paying doctors to not do surgery, pending more tests to make sure surgery isn't neccessary? Got it.
Hey - the only doctors that get paid for surgeries are the surgeons. Most docs aren't surgeons. Just saying.
How many tests can you do for the same price as ONE major surgery Arch?
Yes, making SURE that surgery is necassary would be far less expencive than doing surgeries that are unnecassary.
And if you had read the thread you would have seen that I said not all doctors do this. And you would have seen that I NEVER said that I support the current health care bill. It omits many very basic things such as those I've mentioned which will not change things to the degree necassary to fix these problems.
You need to overhaul limits and guidelines on law suits too. I totaly agree with you there.
And as far as all doctors not being surgeons? You're correct there too. But I'm bringing this up specificly because major surgeries are by far and away the most expecive and overused procedures in the medical field.
I'm just using a common sense approach to helping reduce major surgeries which would help reduce insurance rates. Just like you have suggested with overhauling some of these frivilous law suits.
Do you even read the thread before posting?
So far I mentioned my dad was hospitalised with a stroke.
I mentioned he couldn't talk. I explained that a team of surgeons never even bothered to look at his chart before reccomending surgery. I mentioned that not all are like this.
Sorry you missed it. 
Quote:
Oh, also, since you bring Europe up - how many countries there are financially secure? Here's a little hint - about 0.
Like we are? It's about priorities Arch. Is the health and basic medical care to our very own citizens important enough to do or isn't it?
And your point about not all doctors being surgeons is quite correct. I have a GREAT family doctor and pain management doctor.
Point being surgeons work at hospitals who have a high overhead. Bills to meet and profits to consider. Just like any other businesses do. Surgeries pay the bills. It is what it is my friend.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
Thanks.
It does appear to me that you base a lot of your opinions on one example - your dad. Maybe I'm wrong there.
I try to base my opinion on the situation as a whole.
Here are some of my problems with this bill: The "it has to be now or never" attitude - but the reform doesn't take place for years.
-some 40 million to 55 million people don't have health insurance - yet this will only cover 30 million people. Of those 30 million - how many are voluntarily un insured? Probably not many - let's say maybe 2 million????? So these other uninsured people - why don't they have health insurance? They can't afford it. But the bill says if you don't buy insurance, they will fine you - so those that can't afford insurance will also get fined for not having it. Brilliant idea. Now - wait - yes, there will be credits, etc to help people afford something they can't currently afford - which means.................who pays for it? If they can't afford it - but they will get it - who pays for it? The gov't.? No.
There is no way this thing will save anyone money - no way - it will cost through the nose.
On a different note - I'm still curious as to how this bill will prevent doctors from making mistakes - as in not reading a chart. You seem to think it will - my question is, "how"? Who is going to decide what surgery is needed and what surgery is not needed - some panel in DC? Or, the doctors? If it's the doctors - we haven't "fixed" the problem - only made it worse - as now almost everyone will have insurance. Right?
If it's some panel in DC - count me out.
As for your dad - if he couldn't speak, how'd anyone know about the pain?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
legal - I'm still waiting for the name of the guy that - to quote you:
"Or what about that oil company CEO that got like $300 billion when he retired when we started seeing $3 gas prices. Yeah, hes now going to his grave with some secrets of illegal activities to get oil and its prices. I guess for that much, id be a sellout to. Or did he really really earn that money? "
Any word on his name? Or company? I haven't been able to find it myself.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Why does the mainstream media
"Demonize" American Companies?
|
|
