DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Universal Health Care: Yay or Nay?

I don't disagree that coverage should be more affordable for everybody.

Everybody should be able to buy something and be required to buy something or pay something.....even if $20 a month....but if the care is exactly the same, everybody should get the same and pay the same.

If you can afford or work somewhere that provides coverage, then you should get better choices than the guy who pays nothing or a minimal charge.

I am not talking about the care, I am talking about the choices. If you don't pay anything, you are pretty much locked into a hospital or a doctor or doctor group that may or may not be your first choice.

It's like buying a car....the person with $35,000 can get the loaded Caddy and the person with $3000 is going to have to take the used Impala.

Here we go. Thanks for posting that others will once again be taxed so that someone else can have something for free. Why do people think they are entitled to something that someone else has to pay for? This is beyond ridiculous, but sadly, the way alot of people think.

And some think we should spend 500+ billion nation building elsewhere in the world while our own people don't have any health care. Charity begins at home,not in the middle east.

Funny how some people's priorities lie elsewhere aother than here.And if you bothered to actually read the thread,most prefer a system where you do pay through tax deductions for people who are not offered health care through their employment,not a freebee. They may not be able to pay it in full,but at least part of it. Is the "happy Iraqy" higher on your priority list than Americans? Apperantly so coach. You promote helping them for free but not your own fellow citizens.

But you are right Peen,it shouldn't be top notched,high cost health care.I promote a minimum standard but not something equal to high quality private plans. I promote a choice for everyone. If you can afford and choose your own private health care that's superior to what is offered through such a program,that should be your choice.

Congrats on a ridiculous response. <img src="/images/graemlins/rolleyes1.gif" alt="" />

Iraq was something we had to do, and we have to stay resolute in doing to ensure our safety. Paying for other people's health care doesn't make us any safer at home.

Oh really? Why and how did it make us safer? Because of their nuclear weapons program we stopped? The "tons" of WMD's they posessed? Tell me how much safer we are because of a misinformed,misguided war?

The fact is,it's done NOTHING to make us safer and as of now,the region is LESS stable,not more so.

We feed the world through foreign aid. Billions upon billions. Arm foreign governments,stabilize and give foreign loans to other countries,but don't even take care of our own. Maybe you need to look at how many billions in food and foreign loans to other countries before you keep talking about things you're obviously so far off base on that you appear lost.

U.S. Financial Aid To Israel: Figures, Facts, and Impact

Summary
Benefits to Israel of U.S. Aid
Since 1949 (As of November 1, 1997)

Foreign Aid Grants and Loans
$74,157,600,000

Other U.S. Aid (12.2% of Foreign Aid)
$9,047,227,200

Interest to Israel from Advanced Payments
$1,650,000,000

Grand Total
$84,854,827,200

Total Benefits per Israeli
$14,630
Cost to U.S. Taxpayers of U.S.
Aid to Israel

Grand Total
$84,854,827,200

Interest Costs Borne by U.S.
$49,936,680,000

Total Cost to U.S. Taxpayers
$134,791,507,200

Total Taxpayer Cost per Israeli
$23,240

So you're saying our government can give foreign aid to the tune of over 23,000 dollars for every Israely citizen,but no health care for our own people? Now this is JUST foreign aid to Israel. Would you like to see the global picture? Or is this enough to show you the picture?

So we can give it away to other nations,but not to our own citizens? That's F'd up man.
<img src="/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

As long as we are in Iraq we can take an active military approach to combat extremists. We can active engage in building a democracy to serve as an example of the possibilities of life in a free country that isn't governed by a sadistic regime, nor a theocratic regime.

At the time it was the best option for us to put a large presence in the middle east, all the while getting rid of Saddam Hussein. WMD's were a pretext for the invasion--and many people were on board thinking Saddam had them--the evidence was there--therefore we invaded.

We weren't going to wait until it was too late. This is the kicker--we can't wait around waiting for another terrorist attack--we couldn't wait around for Saddam to use WMD's again because that could have been against us or our interests in the region.

Thats what this is about taking action to prevent another terrorist attack in America.

So you promote changing the rest of the world before our own people get health care? You promote a glutteny of foreign aid to other nations while people in your own town have no health care?

Read the proposal I was responding to. It was set up to further the tax burden even more of some to give something free to others. Funny how if you aren't footing the bill, it's ok.

LMAO.. Pit the stats say that is over a 48 year span (1949-1997)... so your $23,000 equates to $479 a year per Israeli citizen... <img src="/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

Its everyones personal responsibility to pursue there own health care, period. Its not my burden. I have health care that I pay for--people who can't afford health care still get assistance paying there bills.

So you promote laughing off 3k dead in the towers and giving out free medical..... And if Saddam didn't have WMD's What was that he was dropping on the Kurds?

Well in all honesty coach,I'd rather my tax money goping towards my neighbors health care than to foreign aid all over the globe given the choice. Not that I begrudge helping other countries,but I think you need to take care of your own first.

And I see what you mean by a sweeping giveaway of health care. But let's face it,those who don't work,get free health care now. The only ones we're really depriving of health care are those who are working trying to make it.

I'm a lot more willing to give people who are trying to better themselves a hand up,rather than to give those who won't work a hand out. Wouldn't you?

The thing is, Pit, that Rage was complaining he couldn't get "affordable" health care, which is understandable. Then he posts something he supports where he gets it for free while others pay the bill. This type of entitlement to things that I have to pay for is what angers me. Yes, there does need to be better health care for everyone. I agree with what you've posted for the most part. What I was taking issue with is taxing others to give to those that feel they deserve to be in my pocket. I worked hard to get where I am and to have the level of income I do (and the time to play on the computer quite alot <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> ). I take care of my employees insurance. I pay 100% of the premium and they have a $10 co-pay on scripts and OVs. That's it. So, I've done my part to help my neighbor. It's when a stranger comes over and bangs on my door demanding I pay their bills that I take issue with.

I can't afford health care and DO NOT get any type of assistance. Apparently I make too much to get a health card from the local wellfare office. Now mind you I work full time but because the person I work for doesn't offer medical in any form for anyone but his store manager, I don't have health insurance. So you are basically saying screw you to the folks that work but don't have health coverage. (that's how I am reading that) jmo (and because I am the sole provider in my family, I can't afford to go to an outside source.)

I know I worked making a crappy wage for a few years and during this time I had to get surgery--I got assistance and ended up paying 300 dollars out of a 5000 dollar bill. I believe the state covered the rest. So there is assistance available for people without insurance or a decent enough wage to cover expenses.

I think this is the program that I fell into

Program

What in the hell does 9/11 have to do with Iraq? NOTHING!

I promote and advocate the war in Afghanastan. You know,the Bin Ladin-9/11 protion of our military action? Are you still fooled into thinking Iraq had ANYTHING to do with 9/11?
<img src="/images/graemlins/rofl.gif" alt="" />

Actually,I was pretty upset when so few troops were sent to Afghanastan in the first place. I was upset that we were sidetracked in Iraq by a war that had nothing to do with 9/11 and trhe bulk of our military was saved for Iraq while Bin Ladin got away.

But why don't you address the real issue here? You propose we give billions upon billions in foreign aid all across the globe,rather than our own citizens getting heralth care? Think about that one for a minute.

We send billions upon billions in foreign aid. Just look at the stats for Israel alone. Are they destiude? Did we really need to give them enough foreign aid to equal over 22,000 dollars for every Israely citizen since their countrys inception? And we're not even considering the rest of the globe.

You promote all these "foreign giveaways" but not health care to our own citizens? Why don't you address that issue?

And hewre's the REALLY funny part! Israel HAS national health care! We have given over 22,000 per person to Israel and they have national health care! Maybe we should have kept our money and had our own national health care instead of helping to fund Israels national health care?
<img src="/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif" alt="" />
***************************************************

Reform of the health care service system in Israel 1995-2000.Hart J.
Loewenstein Hospital Rehabilitation Medical Center, Clalit Health Services (Raanana, Israel).

In January, 1995, a national health insurance law was enacted which allowed for the registration of every resident with one of the four public health funds. These funds provide medical services directly to their insured members, or purchase them from public or private hospitals or other health service providers. A basket of medical services was defined which guaranteed readily available comprehensive health care throughout the country. As part of the reform, a number of personal participation charges were established: a nominal fee for medications, and a service charge for a limited number of medical services (visits to specialist doctors, periodic fee for mother and child clinics, participation in the cost of chronic nursing hospitalization). In spite of the Government's commitment to finance the basket of services, the budget is not sufficient to cover costs, and there is an inherent shortfall deliberately introduced into the system by the Ministry of Finance. Since the introduction of the Law the sources for financing the basket of services have been eroded by 16%. Complementary health insurance programs are being developed by the health funds as well as by private insurance companies. The national expenditure on health is some 8.4% of GDP, with an average annual expenditure of $1,384 per person. 72% of health expenditures are public and 28% private. Life expectancy is continually rising, and stood at 75.9 years for men and 80.1 years for women in 1999. Infant mortality is decreasing: in 1996 the rate was 6.3 per 1,000 live births. There is an ever increasing use of new technologies, even though at the same time there seems to be somewhat of a decrease in customer satisfaction. The achievements of the reform are considerable, but there is need for improvement in the areas of budgeting, return of the employer parallel tax, and in other areas if these achievements are not to be undone.

PMID: 11858011 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query...p;dopt=Abstract

I see what you are saying coach.
But as I've shown using Israel as an example,we spend billions in foreign aid to help Israel,while they can afford a national health care plan.

Why should we be doing that when we can't afford to help our own to some extent with health care? Wouldn't it be wiser to tell Israel, "Sorry,you need to take the money you spend on national health care to protect your own country,instead of using our money to do it. Our people need health care too. And our citizens come first" Wouldn't that be wiser than funding a government who has and can afford health care for its people that we can't?

I think this program allows decent health care to those in Ohio that can't afford it.

That program work's good for people who are at or near poverty level. Last yr. I had to go on permant disablity. I was lucky enough to get my SSI and 2 pension plans. Between insurance premiums, deductable, and meds, it takes 30% of my finaces. And this is before taxes. Ya national health care has got to be cheaper than that.

nordawg

Being Canadian, I'll chime in on this.

As most of you know, public health care is one of the tenents of Canadian society. Most Canadians see it as a right, not a privilege. It has worked successfully for many many years and the Canadian medical system is considered a good one.

However, we are now faced a problem. As the baby boomers are getting older, they are requiring more and more health care. Plus the advancements in medical technology and the rapidly rising costs of precription drugs is slowly making health care unsustainable.

So this is a key debate here. Many stand staunchly behind public health care and say we just need to reorganize. Others advocate a two-tier system, where people can pay for some procedures in a private facility rather than for free in a public one to avoid waiting.

I personally see plus and minuses to each system. However, I do believe that proven essential medical services that are needed in order to save or preserve a life should be publicly covered. This is something that stands as a definite in Canada. Although there is some discussion about allowing some non-urgent private procedures, no Canadian supports fully private health care.

Coming from someone who has a salary derived from local taxes I find this amusing. I think HS football is worthless. Why should I have to pay taxes to cover your salary and program? It doesnt benefit me. ITs a game. If people want their children to play they should pay for it out of pocket. Why are my taxes paying for your football program? I want your position and program cancelled immediately, why do your kids think they are entitled to free football? Damn people looking for handouts <img src="/images/graemlins/rolleyes1.gif" alt="" /> Now tell me some more about people paying for other people.

It's nice to hear someone who actually lives in a country with national health care. That was sort of my line of thinking. That necassary health care is a "human right".

And what many keep spouting is their "opinion" of how it would work,rather than speaking from experience. It's pleasant to hear how the "gloom and doomers" that simply wish to deny others health care are so off base.

So CanadaDawg could you let us know about what your % is on your taxes? Just curious.

nordawg

It does work Pit...however, it does requrire a certain amount of innovation to keep the costs under control. And some of the "doom and gloomers" are correct in that there are those who take advantage of the system.

It's around 20% I think? I have other deductions for Canada Pension Plan, union dues, UI, etc etc but its about 20%.

This of course, is in my tax bracket. People who can afford more, pay more. People who afford less, pay less.

Me, I'm pretty middle class. Make decent cake, but nothing spectacular.

[edit] Countries with universal health care
Argentina,[6] Australia,[3][6] Austria,[3] Belgium,[3] Canada,[3] Cuba,[3] Denmark,[3] Finland,[3] France,[3][6] Germany,[3] Greece,[6][7] Ireland,[8] Israel,[9] Italy,[6][10] Japan,[3] The Netherlands,[3] New Zealand,[3] Norway,[3] Portugal,[2] Russia,[6] Saudi Arabia,[6] Seychelles,[11] South Korea[6] Spain,[3] Sri Lanka,[12] Sweden,[3] The Republic of China (Taiwan),[3] and the United Kingdom[3][6] are among many countries that have various types of universal health care systems.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_health_care

I agree with you. We have people who take advantage of our system now. The problem here is,if you're wealthy or have a good job,you have health care. Only the deductibles are so high,that often times a major illness leaves you thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars in debt WITH insurance.

And if you are out of work or don't work,you can get health care for free through the government.

The proiblem here,is the huge amount of people in the middle. People who work,pay taxes and contribute to our country,yet seem lost in the middle. They seem more discriminated against on the health care issue than those who don't work at all.

Often times,it's young familys starting out. One of their family members gets seriously ill and they simply can't pay the bill. Next thing you know,their house has leans on it,and their future is quite uncertain. See,owning a house prevents you from qualifying for most free health care here in the states.

So my concern is more for people who DO work. Who DO contribute to our country and who DO deserve health care. IMO- most abusers are just that,users and abusers. They are doing that now. I'm more concerned about young familys and the elderly in our country. I've seen people work their entire life to raise a family and retire. Only to se their property taken by our government when they die because they became ill late in life.

That just isn't the way the richest country in the world should work. Breaking the backs of those who are trying their best. A young family trying to work and be successfull should not be set back big time because of an illness in that family. And our elderly who have contributed to this country as veterans and the work force who built this nation,should not have their life's work taken from them because of an illness late in life. It's a seriously flawed system that many familys across the globe don't have to face and neither should we.

JMHO

Hold on there i didn't include my union dues <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />. But 10% of my gross would allow me to purchase all beef hotdogs <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
Bottom line is when it's all said and done it's less expensive than what i'm paying now. I could live with that.

nordawg

Sounds an awful lot like the Social Security program that we have here that is rapidly coming up on it's time of collapse.

Certainly doesn't seem right. Even if the US stays with 100% privitized health care, states should offer medical insurance at a reasonable, constant rate.

Ultimately, I think the two systems can exist together and that may be the best option for long term sustainability.

I do know, however, after two reconstructed knees, broken bones and a few other minor surgeries along the way, that I am very grateful for our health care system.

OH Pit you are a hoot...


"Yes,you are being an elitist and nobody is talking about everyone owning their own home and yada,yada,yada.
We're talking about basic human rights of health care for all Americans. You do understand the concept of basic human rights don't you?...."

If being a traditionalist is being elitist then can we agree that your social progressive ideas are socialist?

50 years ago the idea of gov't run medical care was not even considered in America...now it is the logical progression of socialist advances into American life. The Nanny State is scoffed at by Social Progressives as being a boogeyman trumped up by mean spirited conservatives and many traditionalists to keep them from paying their "FAIR SHARE"! The progression marches on with many good programs such as Head Start and several colossal failures such as the breakup of traditional families where a Mom and Dad lived together raising their kids together as one. This was the unintended consequence of the welfare state advanced during the 60s and perfected thru the early 90s.

Is it an elitist view to expect adults who procreate to provide on their own for their kids? Occassional help is needed but continuous assistance is not in their or our country's best interest.

Basic Human Rights??? I don't quite know how you qualitate or quantitate such a broad spectrum of ideals but if you consider Life,Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness being a good barometer we can discuss that.

The average American lives well into his 70s and early 80s and most of us are fairly healthy except for those of us who abuse food,alcohol,drugs and other poor life choices. We cannot protect people from themselves nor can we force adults who have kids that they can't or won't provide for to become responsible citizens. There will always be people who have life threatening conditions and childhood maladies which are devastating and this is where we should see gov't money spent to bolster catastrophic illness treatment.

Liberty is a right guaranteed by the Constitution and generally the only unliberated citizens are the ones in prison and the few ancient American women who were bypassed during the Feminist years. Oh, I forgot those people trapped in slavery to drugs and other horrible life choices deserve a helping hand if they failed to have a swift kick in the butt as they were starting their destructive life choice.

Finally Pursuit of Happiness....study,work hard, learn personal responsibility and develop good economic restraint...and you'll be OK!

Your smack about "nobody is talking about everyone owning their own home and yada,yada,yada" is a shame as the way to wealth is to own your own home. Maybe you don't realize that...but what do you expect from Social Progressives. They look in the Constitution and find a "privacy clause" that they interpret as a right to eliminate the preborn[the truly helpless].Then they read the same Constitution and assume that a letter Jefferson wrote in the 1800s stating that a wall should exist between gov't and any certain religion ...should be considered as an intention of the US Constitution written many years before Jefferson's letter.

The Yada,yada,yada is funny because National Health Care will occur and the same ones who pay 80% of the tax burden now will have to pay for the 80% who pay virtually nothing for their Basic Human Rights...it goes on and on!

Pit.....the only problem with you comparing the cost to the costs of the war is the war is temporary and we are spending money we don't really have....or are using it up quickly.

National Health Care is forever and will have to be paid for as we go. That money is going to have to come from somewhere.

How does comparing it to foreign aid suit you?
We send billions upon billions to third world countries yet have no health care for our own? I understand what you're saying about the war. But what about Israel? We've given them enough foreign aid to equal over 22,000 k to every man woman and child in Israel while they have national health care! Let them use their own money to build and buy their weapons and we can keep that money for our own people's health care.
JMHO

And Ralphie.
You didn't have a problem sending over 22k per person to Israel,a country who CAN afford national health care while our own country can't? How American of you.

So handing billions out to countries who have health care is fine. (Israel) But your own citizens having health care isn't? So us sponsoring global health care suits you fine,just not here? If and when you have a long term dibilitating disease,just remember this post Ralphie. Or your kids,grandkids and so forth. When they lose their home over an unforseen illness of one of their children,you remember this. It's a shame the world has to hit people up side the head for reality to actually sink in. But it's not the first time I've seen it. Probably won't be the last.

Maybe you need to consider your neighbor instead of people on the other side of the globe for a change. But I notice you wish to avoid that one.Our nation promotes human rights across the globe and I don't hear you screaming about that. Only when it's for our citizens.
<img src="/images/graemlins/rolleyes1.gif" alt="" />

Attitudes like yours only help the other side Ralphie. When people get so crass they don't even want their own fellow citizens to recieve health care or a decent living wage,you'll get what happenned in Nov. And it looks like that may be what it takes to straighten out the selfishness and self centeredness that seems to permiate our society. But it will change. You can bank on it Ralphie.

<img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

You can't stop foregin aid......it is the only thing that makes most nations who like us, like us. <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

As the world leader, we are strapped with the burden of helping other nations.....I hear what you are saying and don't disagree in my heart....but my brain tells me that isn't practical.

OK multiply that by 10, 20 or 30 for what we give away to other countries, and it adds up quick. <img src="/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

<img src="/images/graemlins/rofl.gif" alt="" /> OK now how about a person making 10,000 per year..... they do not qualify for that program, and guess what... thats only the hospital bill. It does not pay a dime to the radioligist, the company that does your blood wrok, the doctor, and all the others who stick there fingers into the pie.

Exactly and DC knows this. It's just a sidestep.
He knows we send billions annually to many nations.
But it was a pretty good one liner that really didn't mean much. I pointed out is was just one example,but that part was convieniantly ignored. He and I have both been known to do that. although he denies his culpability.
<img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

And I see what you mean Peen,but neglecting health care at home should IMO be as unstoppable as helping others around the globe.

I guess my problem is that I see no outcry from our population to distribute foreign aid around the globe,but to help their own people,they make it out to be some kind of crime. And I just don't get that line of thinking.

50 years ago a DR visit didn't cost you 60 to 75 bucks, your scripts didn't run you 300 to 3,000 a month, and a two asprin (that cost .02 cents) didn't run you 16 bucks at the hospital <img src="/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

Again....I hear what you are saying and can't in my heart disagree.


All I can say is sometimes, it is what it is.