Do people 'deserve' universal health care?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr_BuzzCzar

I've been studying this subject off and on for a few years. I'm a long way from an expert, but I've done some reading.

According to the World Health Organization the U.S. has the 37th best health system in the world.

According to the CIA World Factbook the United States is 46th in the world in life expectancy at birth (expected life span in years) and 40th in infant mortality (deaths/1000 births).

In an earlier post someone bashed the Canadian system (I don't recall who at the moment). Canada is ranked higher than the U.S. in all phases of health care except $$/capita. Careful about that rock throwing.

A country that intrigues me is Japan. They significantly out perform the U.S in those three metrics I listed and have an aging population as do we. Their health care system is a Universal plan covering 100% of their population using a mixture of private and public insurance systems. Since we have the baby-boomers getting very close to retirement and putting tremendous strains on our Medicare and Social Security systems watching how Japan deals with this similar problem will be educational.

Here's some trivia for ya'll:

Cuba has lower infant mortality rates than the U.S. as does Bosnia, per the CIA World Factbook.

France has the best overall health care system per WHO, while being #4 in health care expenditures per capita. (The U.S. is #1 in expenditures per capita for health care.)

There is no doubt in my mind that our present system can and should be improved.

---

Thanks again for this research. I was going to mention Japan but didn't have the statistics to back up my thought that their system was VERY good.

Thanks again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thorne

I'm going to play some Devil's Advocate here. (If I believed in hell I'd probably be condemned to the seventh circle for this. And some here would be more than happy to escort me there!;) )

Why?

I can think of quite a few people who don't deserve health care. I can think of quite a few who don't deserve to live!

Should a junkie who poisons himself with toxic chemicals every day of his life be entitled to the same quality of health care as hard working citizen? Should someone who drinks himself into a stupor night after night, destroying his own liver in the process, be given the same chance for a new liver as the young mother who's liver was damaged in a car accident? And what of the doctors and nurses who might no longer be able to set their own fees for services rendered. Don't they deserve better than that?

Everyone deserves healthy foods, too, don't they? So why not devise a Universal Food Service System, so anybody who's hungry can walk into any restaurant and get the most expensive meal for free? Just trash the food stamp program. That only lets people get the cheapest foods. We all deserve to eat steaks, every night!

And people need transportation, too, don't they? Why not give everyone a brand new luxury car, so they can get around when they have to? And don't forget the gas! Everyone needs free gas, too. And heating oil. And housing. We DESERVE it! Don't we? Hell, the government's paying for it. They have plenty of money!

All right, all right, I realize I'm bordering on the ridiculous here (if I haven't already crossed that border.) But my point is that nobody deserves anything. We have to EARN our way in this world. Nobody has to give anything to anyone.

As I understand it, Universal Health Care brings everyone to the same level (theoretically) so that the bum from the Bowery and the millionaire from Park Avenue get the same quality of medicine, the same quality of nursing care and the same quality of hospital care. While I'm sure that the bum sees nothing wrong with this, I'm also sure that the millionaire does! And so do I.

Should we provide health care to those who cannot afford it? Certainly! That doesn't mean it has to be the greatest quality health care, though. A certain basic level of care and treatment would be called for. Beyond that it's pretty much pay as you go.

And yes, I realize that condemns the children of poor families to lower quality health care simply because of their parents position in society. Short of raising all children in a central creche system until they are old enough to earn their own way, I don't see any cure for this. Life's a bitch!

(Geez, I'm gonna get crucified for this!)

---

Maybe not crucified, but I do take exception to much you have said, LOL.

I DO believe that people deserve to be fed. Just on what we Americans throw out every day we could feed the hungry. And there are too many people going hungry in this country.

Granted the car thing aside (a bit far out there :-) ). I believe, yes the Junkie needs to have the OPTION of getting care for his addiction. And Life may be a bitch but that is no reason we can't strive to make it better.

And true socialism is supposed to do as you say. Everybody is equal and gets equal care. And in a perfect world maybe that would work. But if you look at the USSR, China, etc. Corruption wins out and the Commisars and leaders live VERY well while the populace suffers. But we have our OWN share of corruption in this system as well.

I believe that what Obama proposes is that if you don't like the government plan you can opt out and have your own plan. The socialistic, we are going to ruin your health care bugaboo, is a scare tactic from the Health Insurance industry.

Dr. BuzzCzar's explanation of the German system is probably what we would build here.

But we have to get past all the scare tactics and misrepresented facts I believe.

Mr O'Neil. I have to say, I do like to provoke people. I can't help it, I like a good rumbustuous debate. If a poke won't get one, I'll try a prod.

Nevertheless, it does seem to people outside USA that the value of everything to Americans is measured in dollars, and if a thing has no dollar value, then it is utterly worthless. A misconception, possibly, but almost as universal as some healthcare systems. Vide other Americans' comments in this thread.

The fact that a poor person owns his own house doesn't necessarily mean much. How much equity does he own in that house, by the way? And is that house no more than a timber construction twice the size of my potting shed, or is it a vast mansion set in grounds that expand over many acres? To get to the point, if he sells it, will it cover his medical bills, and, if it does, will he have somewhere to live after he has paid them?

But if, as you say, even the poor of America are wealthy, then why do you fear helping them out. They will be able to afford to contribute to the system as much as you will. They will be scrounging off you no more than you will be leeching off them. Please understand, despite what detractors say, national healthcare services are not free handouts to the dregs of society: everyone pays into it and everyone is entitled to draw upon it when they need to.

Furthermore, I believe that dubbing the American Health Care System (or the proposed one) as Kevorkian is a gross slander on the medical profession in America. If they are operating a triage system, it is to prioritise treatment by the degree of urgency, it is not to filter out those who can be "helped to die".


And that brings me on to Thorne's comments. Oh Thorne! What can I say? Should I say it in German? Wer sind die Untermenschen, die verdienen, zu sterben*?

OK - I'm not fluent, but I think you get my point.

How would you decide who gets healthcare and who doesn't? People without jobs don't? Or blacks, jews or communists, maybe. Perhaps you hate women. Or people earning less than $50,000. What is your criterion when you say there are people who deserve to die?

There but for fortune, Thorne. You do deserve to be crucified

And you also need to get it out of your head that you are being asked to give up any of your ill-gotten gains just to give other people who you consider beneath you a free ride. You are being asked to make a payment similar to a health care plan's premium - and instead of it - in order to obtain a full health care service run by or on behalf of everyone who participates. It's co-operation, not communism, and it's probably cheaper than what you pay Medicare - and you won't be excluded on the grounds of your parents' medical history, or because you have suffered from a particular illness before, or simply because your policy doesn't run to that much cover. You'll be entitled to the best the heath system can afford. I can see nothing wrong with the bum and the millionaire getting the best. But if the millionaire can afford even better, then let him have it, so long as he maintains his contribution into the health service.

It should be available to all, but the choice whether to use it must be a free one.

Likewise with a healthy food service or a public transport service. If these were thought desirable, then everyone would contribute to a food tax or a transport levy, and then everyone would leave their cars at home and ride to work for "free" eating "free" organic sandwiches. These ideas, have their merits, Thorne: good thinking!

I personally think there should be a national legal service where everyone could get legal representation, free at the point of delivery.

Finally, I think Belgarold has made a very pertinent point when he highlighted government's responsibility to look after the health of the nation as a whole, and that includes controlling the spread of disease.

Perhaps they should be eliminated.

Or they could be cured.


* Who are the subhumans who deserve to die?

Just more info on the houses of the poor. Many are houses that have been in the family for years and years. Some from the Homestead act, when members of the family could afford houses, and such like that. Many of these houses are not worth much, unfortunately and if they were sold would mean the owners were probably left homeless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DuncanONeil

Y'all do realize that the current plan of "Universal Health Care" is not really "Universal Health Care". It is more like "Universal Triage". An analysis will be made of the cost of the treatment versus the value of the patients remaining life expectancy.
One could claim that this is "Universal Kevorkian Care"

---

I'd like to research this some. Can you tell me where you found the information on triage-type analysis? I would appreciate it.

Let me pose a health care story. He's worked in American industry for over 30 years rising through the ranks to an executive position. This means he's maintained his health care through work-place insurance. He has a wife and two boys. Sent both boys to college. The wife is a stay-at-home because they live their version of an M/s life. He has accumulated some of the trappings of success; a house on a river, near the ocean, drives a luxury auto, has a 401K, an IRA, some mutual funds, a decent stock portfolio, plus some cash. Not rich, but comfortable. The wife gets a surprise diagnosis of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia after a yearly exam. There's no cure, but there's treatment to buy time waiting on technology to find that magic bullet. Her version of the disease is aggressive. She doesn't react well to the treatments and ends up with multiple hospital stays while they chase the causes. The economy goes in the tank. The division of the privately-owned business he's been running begins to struggle. Owner gets scared, decides he's closing that division down. Our subject is going to lose company insurance in a couple more months, COBRA will add another 18 months. After that he'll be paying for treatment out of those investments that have been decimated by the fall in the stock market. To put things in perspective her meds are expensive; shots that cost $4-$7k each, pills that cost $1k a month, lab tests that cost over $10k that need to be done a couple times a year, regular bi-weekly office visits, other shots, pills, tests, transfusions, etc. etc. Maybe the chemo she's taking will buy 20-24 months, maybe not. There's always the ultimate chance for this type disease, a bone marrow transplant that may offer full remission. Those cost about $500k not counting the cost of continuing care for a year or two after, and most importantly, depending on several factors, the survival rate is only about 58%.

Maybe he'll find work and regain insurance, maybe he won't. If he doesn't, 30 years of saving for a comfortable retirement will be consumed due to selling investments at these depressed prices in order to pay medical bills.

This isn't a fantasy, this is our life. The reason I have so much time to play on these forums is I have my laptop in the hospital and can get online while I sit by her bed. The rest of the time is doing the work involved in job searching.

I'm not looking for a bunch of sympathy, just pointing out that this debate on health care has a human face. A couple things going wrong can ruin lives very easily. Now odds are that I can find a decent job as I'm pretty good at what I do ( he says modestly) and we'll be fine, but there's a lot more out there that won't. Don't we deserve health care?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr_BuzzCzar

I'm not looking for a bunch of sympathy, just pointing out that this debate on health care has a human face.

---

You do have my sympathy, sir. I know some of what you are going through as my brother is also undergoing treatments for cancer. He has recently had stem cell treatments and hopefully has turned the tide on his disease, but there are no guarantees.

Fortunately, his bills are largely covered by his disability insurance, which he earned by working for most of his life, paying his taxes, paying his dues, just like you and I and the vast majority of people in this country. Have we earned the right to health care? Certainly! We have done our bits to help society and both live and protect our ways of life.

Quote:

---

As I understand it, Universal Health Care means that basic health care is available to everyone. Germany, for instance, has a Universal Health Care that covers 85% of their population that covers basic health needs. The other 15% opt for private insurance as they can afford it.

---

This is more in line with what I think UHC should be, as there is always the option for better coverage if desired. And as long as everyone pays into the system, more or less, that's fine.

But what of those who don't pay in? What of those who opt out because they need that extra few dollars a week in their paycheck and can't afford alternative care. Do we still provide them with free health care? And those who never pay into the system at all, are they eligible? While these may be a relatively small percentage of the population, probably more than the liberals would admit to but less than the conservatives will whine about, it is still a significant number of people, all living off the hard work of other people.

As Belgarold says in his post above, in a perfect world these kinds of systems would work well. But in a perfect world I guess these systems wouldn't be needed. This world is far from perfect, though. Unless I can get full reassurances that hard-working, law-abiding people can be treated well without having to be dragged down by hangers-on who will not work and will not abide by the law, I will remain suspicious of these kinds of systems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MMI

And that brings me on to Thorne's comments. Oh Thorne! What can I say? Should I say it in German? Wer sind die Untermenschen, die verdienen, zu sterben*?

How would you decide who gets healthcare and who doesn't? People without jobs don't? Or blacks, jews or communists, maybe. Perhaps you hate women. Or people earning less than $50,000.

---

Thankfully I don't have to make those decisions, but my first choice would be those who prey on innocent people, taking anything they want because they are too lazy to work for it. I don't hate blacks or Jews. And I don't even hate communists, though I think they are deluded in their beliefs. And I definitely love women! And I respect them. And for the record, I earn less than $50,000.

Quote:

---

What is your criterion when you say there are people who deserve to die?

---

Well, to start with, I'd have to say child molesters would be at the top of my list, followed closely by drug dealers/importers, especially those who sell to children. Spouse beaters and general bullies who blame everyone for their own failings might make the list, though perhaps just being the recipients of the kind of abuse they hand out would be enough. And rapists. I cannot tolerate them. Put them up with the child molesters.

Quote:

---

There but for fortune, Thorne. You do deserve to be crucified

---

While I will admit that some of what I have in my life may be due to luck, most is due to my own hard work and that of my wife. We have always looked to the future, saving when we could and skimping when we had to. Not letting ourselves get into debt over luxuries we could live without.

Quote:

---

And you also need to get it out of your head that you are being asked to give up any of your ill-gotten gains just to give other people who you consider beneath you a free ride.

---

The unkindest cut, here. Anyone who manages to save and make something of themselves must be depending upon "ill-gotten gains". Well I can honestly say that none of what little I have in this life has been gained at the expense of someone else. Unless you think I should give up my job of 25 years to someone who needs it more.

I think everybody debating health care on this thread is interested in improving health care and supports as much universal health care as possible. Yet, there is much disagreement on how to deliver health goods (medicine) and services (attention of medical professionals). We all need to be convinced of the need to improve health services to the needy but we do not need to be duped into accepting another form of government. Socialism does not have to replace capitalism to achieve our collective goal of better health care for all.

Communism, a good example of socialism, has failed both in the distribution and production of goods and services throughout the world. Communist and socialist do not like to admit failure. In fact, in spite of their obvious failures in providing health care, they claim great success. In some socialist countries, they do have good health care. I am not trying to say that these systems never deliver but any American that believes that Cuba has a better quality of life than is offered in America has been greatly duped.

I know of no country in Asia that has better health care than the USA offers universally to its citizens. Japan may be an exception to this statement. The other socialist states in Asia suck in terms of health care. In Africa, what country provides health care to the same level as our citizens have in the USA? I do not see any great health systems in South America anywhere. In Western Europe there may be countries that offer adequate health care but Eastern Europe there is plenty of room for improvement. The USA is still the country that sets the standards for public health care by which the rest of the world judges itself. Yes, there are a few smaller counties that do well, maybe better, in public health care than the USA but make no mistake about it, the USA is the world leader in health care. The USA is also the world leader in sharing health care to the entire world. What health care system in the world can boast of the great production and world distribution of health services like American capitalism has provided.

Yes, let us improve health care for all but let us not be duped into thinking socialism or communism offers a better deal than what Americans have had in its past history with capitalism. Socialism uses issues like health care to make strides in promoting their way of life but they ultimately fall way short of delivery.
wmrs2

I apologise, Thorne. I let my ideas run away with me. I did not really mean to imply that your savings were ill-gotten. I was over-descriptive and you are right to pull me up for it.

wmrs2: Socialism does not have to replace capitalism to achieve our goals.

Well said, that man.

But it will involve a certain change of attitude. An appreciation of the fact that everyone benefits under a state-sponsored health system, and no-one should be denied access to it, at least, not on grounds of wealth or income.

as for the rest of your post, I haven't read it properly yet, but it looks like cant ... I'll respond later if it deserves any.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wmrs2

I think everybody debating health care on this thread is interested in improving health care and supports as much universal health care as possible. Yet, there is much disagreement on how to deliver health goods (medicine) and services (attention of medical professionals). We all need to be convinced of the need to improve health services to the needy but we do not need to be duped into accepting another form of government. Socialism does not have to replace capitalism to achieve our collective goal of better health care for all.

Communism, a good example of socialism, has failed both in the distribution and production of goods and services throughout the world. Communist and socialist do not like to admit failure. In fact, in spite of their obvious failures in providing health care, they claim great success. In some socialist countries, they do have good health care. I am not trying to say that these systems never deliver but any American that believes that Cuba has a better quality of life than is offered in America has been greatly duped.

I know of no country in Asia that has better health care than the USA offers universally to its citizens. Japan may be an exception to this statement. The other socialist states in Asia suck in terms of health care. In Africa, what country provides health care to the same level as our citizens have in the USA? I do not see any great health systems in South America anywhere. In Western Europe there may be countries that offer adequate health care but Eastern Europe there is plenty of room for improvement. The USA is still the country that sets the standards for public health care by which the rest of the world judges itself. Yes, there are a few smaller counties that do well, maybe better, in public health care than the USA but make no mistake about it, the USA is the world leader in health care. The USA is also the world leader in sharing health care to the entire world. What health care system in the world can boast of the great production and world distribution of health services like American capitalism has provided.

Yes, let us improve health care for all but let us not be duped into thinking socialism or communism offers a better deal than what Americans have had in its past history with capitalism. Socialism uses issues like health care to make strides in promoting their way of life but they ultimately fall way short of delivery.
wmrs2

---

A couple of points here. Someone hasn't been listening. Cuba was said to have better HEALTH care than most. Most of Western Europe has Universal Health Care and have not turned Socialistic or COmmunistic becasue of it. I think a good bit of Eastern Europe would take exception to your spurious characterization of their care.

Japan is NOT a Socialistic country and its Health care is top-notch. And did you READ BuzzCzar's post? Our System is sadly in need of overhauling. So the Rah-Rah attitude is unwarranted until we FIX the system.

Universal Health Care is NOT a communist plot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr_BuzzCzar

Let me pose a health care story. He's worked in American industry for over 30 years rising through the ranks to an executive position. This means he's maintained his health care through work-place insurance. He has a wife and two boys. Sent both boys to college. The wife is a stay-at-home because they live their version of an M/s life. He has accumulated some of the trappings of success; a house on a river, near the ocean, drives a luxury auto, has a 401K, an IRA, some mutual funds, a decent stock portfolio, plus some cash. Not rich, but comfortable. The wife gets a surprise diagnosis of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia after a yearly exam. There's no cure, but there's treatment to buy time waiting on technology to find that magic bullet. Her version of the disease is aggressive. She doesn't react well to the treatments and ends up with multiple hospital stays while they chase the causes. The economy goes in the tank. The division of the privately-owned business he's been running begins to struggle. Owner gets scared, decides he's closing that division down. Our subject is going to lose company insurance in a couple more months, COBRA will add another 18 months. After that he'll be paying for treatment out of those investments that have been decimated by the fall in the stock market. To put things in perspective her meds are expensive; shots that cost $4-$7k each, pills that cost $1k a month, lab tests that cost over $10k that need to be done a couple times a year, regular bi-weekly office visits, other shots, pills, tests, transfusions, etc. etc. Maybe the chemo she's taking will buy 20-24 months, maybe not. There's always the ultimate chance for this type disease, a bone marrow transplant that may offer full remission. Those cost about $500k not counting the cost of continuing care for a year or two after, and most importantly, depending on several factors, the survival rate is only about 58%.

Maybe he'll find work and regain insurance, maybe he won't. If he doesn't, 30 years of saving for a comfortable retirement will be consumed due to selling investments at these depressed prices in order to pay medical bills.

This isn't a fantasy, this is our life. The reason I have so much time to play on these forums is I have my laptop in the hospital and can get online while I sit by her bed. The rest of the time is doing the work involved in job searching.

I'm not looking for a bunch of sympathy, just pointing out that this debate on health care has a human face. A couple things going wrong can ruin lives very easily. Now odds are that I can find a decent job as I'm pretty good at what I do ( he says modestly) and we'll be fine, but there's a lot more out there that won't. Don't we deserve health care?

---

Dr. BuzzCzar, I also have sympathy for your position and situation. And as you have so eloquently posted on numerous ocassions, you are not the only one in a similar situation. I will hope you find support for what you need.

Thorne, although I don't think ANYONE deserves to die I am with you on child molesters and the like. I don;t think many would have sympathy for the users and abusers and criminals of the world. But wealth doesn't seem to care. Being poor does not mean you are a criminal. Being poor does not mean you are lazy.

Many child molestors and criminals can afford health care. Most criminals can afford health care. Look at Bernie Maddoff, ruined countless lives, but he can "afford" to get Cancer and have experimental treatments.

And even though conventional wisdom and the braying of talk radio and the corporate interests may differ, MOSt poor or those that cannot afford health care are NOT lazy. They are in Dr. BuzzCzar's situation, or circumstantially are unemployed or underemployed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thorne

But what of those who don't pay in? What of those who opt out because they need that extra few dollars a week in their paycheck and can't afford alternative care. Do we still provide them with free health care? And those who never pay into the system at all, are they eligible? While these may be a relatively small percentage of the population, probably more than the liberals would admit to but less than the conservatives will whine about, it is still a significant number of people, all living off the hard work of other people.

As Belgarold says in his post above, in a perfect world these kinds of systems would work well. But in a perfect world I guess these systems wouldn't be needed. This world is far from perfect, though. Unless I can get full reassurances that hard-working, law-abiding people can be treated well without having to be dragged down by hangers-on who will not work and will not abide by the law, I will remain suspicious of these kinds of systems.

---

Have you ever been into a hospital emergency room on a Saturday or Sunday? Unfortunately, I've had that experience and we have socialized medicine. Its already here. A significant number of people that don't have insurance go to emergency rooms. According to an experienced (read:Gray haired) Infectious Disease doctor I was having a conversation with this week, her estimation is 50% of the people that come to emergency rooms are uninsured.

We in the U.S. spend fantastic sums on health care and our results lag well behind most other developed nations. That's a proven fact. It isn't conjecture. Our system needs repair and it needs it quickly. I think we need to get the system in place that is an umbrella coverage for all and then work on how to weed out the cheats from both the providers and participants. I am under no illusion that there will not be those that try to beat the system but I can't see punishing the majority because of the failings of the few and our fear of rewarding bad behavior.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MMI

I apologise, Thorne. I let my ideas run away with me. I did not really mean to imply that your savings were ill-gotten. I was over-descriptive and you are right to pull me up for it.

---

Apology accepted. To be honest, I wasn't really upset by the statement. I didn't believe that you actually meant it literally. I mean, who really uses the term "ill-gotten" in real life anymore. Only the same people who regularly use the phrase "unkindest cut" would be my guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Belgarold

Being poor does not mean you are a criminal. Being poor does not mean you are lazy.

---

I never meant to imply this. I'm sorry if anyone thought I did.

Quote:

---

Many child molestors and criminals can afford health care. Most criminals can afford health care. Look at Bernie Maddoff, ruined countless lives, but he can "afford" to get Cancer and have experimental treatments.

---

I agree, and this is one area where there perhaps should be changes made. Why should convicted felons be "entitled" to better healthcare than honest working people? Yet if they don't get it their lawyers will have a field day with the justice system.

Quote:

---

And even though conventional wisdom and the braying of talk radio and the corporate interests may differ, MOSt poor or those that cannot afford health care are NOT lazy. They are in Dr. BuzzCzar's situation, or circumstantially are unemployed or underemployed.

---

I understand this as well, and tried to say that, I thought. Working people, whether rich or poor, and even those who want to work but cannot, deserve better treatment than those who are only willing to work long enough to qualify for unemployment benefits and then quit, or those who are willing to live off the welfare system for their whole lives. I've seen these kinds of people. I've had people come into the office where I work, supposedly looking for jobs, and they are dressed in ragged clothes, with unkempt hair, and invariably say, "You're not hiring, are you?" instead of asking if we are. Then they want you to sign their paper for the unemployment office, so they can keep getting their checks.

And again, I know it's not a large percentage of the unemployed, it's not any one race or religion or even gender. But they are there, and they will leach onto any government handout or subsidy until honest taxpayers get so fed up that they want all the handouts and subsidies cut out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr_BuzzCzar

Have you ever been into a hospital emergency room on a Saturday or Sunday? Unfortunately, I've had that experience and we have socialized medicine. Its already here. A significant number of people that don't have insurance go to emergency rooms. According to an experienced (read:Gray haired) Infectious Disease doctor I was having a conversation with this week, her estimation is 50% of the people that come to emergency rooms are uninsured.

---

And except in some of the more elite hospital systems, they are all taken care of. Perhaps they don't get the best quality care, but there are very few who are ever turned away.

And yes, I have been in a hospital emergency room on a Saturday morning. Fortunately, it wasn't an emergency. My son had received stitches in an earlier emergency and was supposed to have them removed. I took one look at all the people crammed into that emergency room, saw that many were drunk, some were wounded, most were sick, and all waiting for their turn at the "free" treatment, because they could not be turned away. I was fortunate to be able to say "Fuck it!" And I took my son to his pediatrician, who removed the stitches for his usual fee. I was happy to pay it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thorne

I never meant to imply this. I'm sorry if anyone thought I did.


I agree, and this is one area where there perhaps should be changes made. Why should convicted felons be "entitled" to better healthcare than honest working people? Yet if they don't get it their lawyers will have a field day with the justice system.


I understand this as well, and tried to say that, I thought. Working people, whether rich or poor, and even those who want to work but cannot, deserve better treatment than those who are only willing to work long enough to qualify for unemployment benefits and then quit, or those who are willing to live off the welfare system for their whole lives. I've seen these kinds of people. I've had people come into the office where I work, supposedly looking for jobs, and they are dressed in ragged clothes, with unkempt hair, and invariably say, "You're not hiring, are you?" instead of asking if we are. Then they want you to sign their paper for the unemployment office, so they can keep getting their checks.

And again, I know it's not a large percentage of the unemployed, it's not any one race or religion or even gender. But they are there, and they will leach onto any government handout or subsidy until honest taxpayers get so fed up that they want all the handouts and subsidies cut out.

---

I agree with some of what you here Thorne, but it goes back to my "perfect world" theory. There will always be those that attempt to 'game' the system, but you discuss (And I understand only because talk radio and corporate interests discuss one side as well) only one side of the issue.

The rich, the corporations, the powerful, game the system EVERY day to gain MORE wealth. And they certainly affect a lot more people and destroy lives with their gaming the system. Maddoff, Abramoff, AIG, Enronn, Blagojevich, DeLay, Ted Stevens, The banking industry, the Auto industry, etc etc etc.

And one of the biggest 'gamers' of the system is the Health Care Insurance Industry and with arguments much like yours. And one of the reasons we see such full Emergency rooms is because of the Insurers 'cash cow.' And they limit treatment or play god by choosing who will live and die every day. And how do they make their decision, the bottom line. That I find immoral and disgusting.

I have waited in emrgency rooms for hours of time as well. And in the city of Los ANgeles county hospital. Sure I have seen a few of the drunk but not 'many.' I have mainly seen sick people desperate for care.

And you talk about government handouts. The corporate interests and the rich are the biggest beneficiaries of handouts. And flying in corporate jets to get those handouts.

When I weigh someone getting a $400 check a month for a year or so that they don't deserve and someone getting a $400 Billion dollar check AND a 7 or 8 figure bonus AND laying off thousands of hard-working people after running a company into the ground out of greed and criminal neglect, I KNOW which 'gamers' I would rather support.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Belgarold

A couple of points here. Someone hasn't been listening. Cuba was said to have better HEALTH care than most. Most of Western Europe has Universal Health Care and have not turned Socialistic or COmmunistic becasue of it. I think a good bit of Eastern Europe would take exception to your spurious characterization of their care.

Japan is NOT a Socialistic country and its Health care is top-notch. And did you READ BuzzCzar's post? Our System is sadly in need of overhauling. So the Rah-Rah attitude is unwarranted until we FIX the system.

Universal Health Care is NOT a communist plot.

---

Strange thing, the President just concluded the national forum on health care not twenty minutes ago. The members of the forum, both Democrats and Republicans took a non combative attitude towards each other, in their efforts to "find an American solution" to the health care problem. Everybody was on board with this idea of an American solution and if they had suggested we look towards Cuba for the solution, then that person would have appeared to be very non American.

Most world wide solutions to our political and economic problems have come from the USA. I personally have every right to be Rah-Rah towards America. The problem with too many liberals and socialist in America have been their listening to their own propaganda. They enjoy criticism of America and accuse any person who praises our country as narrow minded, selfish and too Rah-Rah. Your point of view is not friendly to Americans who do care and although you may not be a Communist, your rhetorical response to my praise of the USA is surely in line with the communist and socialist propaganda theme.

I know, you are going to say that anybody that disagrees with me, I call a Communist! I do not yet think you are a Communist and I think you want to be a loyal American but you appear to have swallowed hook,line and sinker the Communist propaganda when it comes to your political philosophy. As an American you should be proud to praise the history of the USA. You should be quick to stand with our past warriors and leaders who have guided us to the place we hold in the world. Sadly to say, too many liberals and socialist think this way of disliking the American way of doing things. (note, many liberals do not feel this way.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Belgarold

Dr. BuzzCzar, I also have sympathy for your position and situation. And as you have so eloquently posted on numerous ocassions, you are not the only one in a similar situation. I will hope you find support for what you need.

---

I hope you are not suggesting that his crisis situation is the fault of America. We as a nation are moving in the direction of better health care for all Americans. I was glad to see that Belgarold still has a strong faith in America and says he will be fine. Our country is trying to come through for all Americans.This is the best place in the world to be sick. I for one would love to hear you admit this too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wmrs2

I hope you are not suggesting that his crisis situation is the fault of America. We as a nation are moving in the direction of better health care for all Americans. I was glad to see that Belgarold still has a strong faith in America and says he will be fine. Our country is trying to come through for all Americans.This is the best place in the world to be sick. I for one would love to hear you admit this too.

---

Well put, this is an ugly siutation for ALL, something has to be done children deserve medical coverage they can't pay for it themselves

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wmrs2

I hope you are not suggesting that his crisis situation is the fault of America. We as a nation are moving in the direction of better health care for all Americans. I was glad to see that Belgarold still has a strong faith in America and says he will be fine. Our country is trying to come through for all Americans.This is the best place in the world to be sick. I for one would love to hear you admit this too.

---

I will be ignoring your narrowminded ranting from now on, you have no selfwareness and hash over the same tired old adages.

Here, I was giving sympathy to someone in a very difficult situation as a true Human Being would. ANd you STILL have not been listening or reading. Many people have died, leaving their loved one's in grief and IMMENSE debt because of the current System. But where in the Heck did I say anything political in my statement.

But you have taken what I have said, to someone living through one of the problems with health care and taken my sympathy for them and twisted it for your own SICK aims.

You are not worth my time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wmrs2

Strange thing, the President just concluded the national forum on health care not twenty minutes ago. The members of the forum, both Democrats and Republicans took a non combative attitude towards each other, in their efforts to "find an American solution" to the health care problem. Everybody was on board with this idea of an American solution and if they had suggested we look towards Cuba for the solution, then that person would have appeared to be very non American.

---

I used the infant mortality rate in Cuba and Bosnia to make a point that our health care system has weaknesses. I don't for a moment believe that a communist or socialist government is better than a representative democracy. Facts are facts though, there are better health care systems than ours. We can and should have a better one. I'm not saying we should copy anyone's health care system but we would be foolish to not investigate those that out-perform ours and learn from them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wmrs2

Most world wide solutions to our political and economic problems have come from the USA.

---

Sorry, I don't understand that sentence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wmrs2

I personally have every right to be Rah-Rah towards America. The problem with too many liberals and socialist in America have been their listening to their own propaganda. They enjoy criticism of America and accuse any person who praises our country as narrow minded, selfish and too Rah-Rah. Your point of view is not friendly to Americans who do care and although you may not be a Communist, your rhetorical response to my praise of the USA is surely in line with the communist and socialist propaganda theme.

I know, you are going to say that anybody that disagrees with me, I call a Communist! I do not yet think you are a Communist and I think you want to be a loyal American but you appear to have swallowed hook,line and sinker the Communist propaganda when it comes to your political philosophy. As an American you should be proud to praise the history of the USA. You should be quick to stand with our past warriors and leaders who have guided us to the place we hold in the world. Sadly to say, too many liberals and socialist think this way of disliking the American way of doing things. (note, many liberals do not feel this way.)

---

I'm as proud of being an American as anyone, as is the vast majority of those liberals you speak of in such a demeaning manner. Just an FYI, I'm sitting here looking at the shadow box on the wall behind this computer with my unit patches and my medals from my Army service. Among those is a Purple Heart with Oak Leaf Cluster. You don't have to be a right-wing neo-con to have fought for your country. One of the things I take great pride in as an American is the right to criticize what I see as shortcomings and wrongs performed by my country. One of my favorite paintings is by Norman Rockwell and it is of a boy looking admirably up at his father, a man in work clothes, who is standing up in a town meeting and speaking. That personifies this country to me. We all have that freedom of speech and failing to see her shortcomings is much more dangerous than blindly backing the status quo all the time, in my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wmrs2

I hope you are not suggesting that his crisis situation is the fault of America. We as a nation are moving in the direction of better health care for all Americans. I was glad to see that Belgarold still has a strong faith in America and says he will be fine. Our country is trying to come through for all Americans.This is the best place in the world to be sick. I for one would love to hear you admit this too.

---

I am a Liberal and I have a much Faith in the Country as any Liberal or Conservative, we WILL as a Nation get through this crisis just as we have others crisises we have been in, in the past, it may time time but we will weathe this storm, some may not ike the solution but you are no going to please 100% of the people 100% of the time

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wmrs2

I hope you are not suggesting that his crisis situation is the fault of America. .....This is the best place in the world to be sick. I for one would love to hear you admit this too.

---

If it isn't the fault of America's health care system where does the fault lie? with me?

How do you know this is the best place in the world to be sick? Every metric I can find says we're near the best, but not the best.

Take my wife's disease. The best treatments in the world for that disease (and if you knew me personally you'd know I've researched the hell out of this) are in Barcelona, London, and Houston (MD Anderson). Two of those are in what you sneeringly refer to as socialist systems and the third is here in the USA. There are some folks in Canada, Australia, and Singapore that appear to be gaining on these three as is Jewish Medical Center on Long Island and the Ohio State Medical Center in Columbus. Our system isn't lousy. It's great if you can afford it. We can be so much better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wmrs2

What I said was a very general statement and realize it may not mean much to others. If the government does everything for you and all planning for the future, the individual is free to pursue happiness within a very limited domain. You could be forced to accept less than you can individually afford. I don't want to support people who, for example, buy too much of a house but I don't want the government to tell me how big of a house I can purchase either. That may not be good enough answer for the person that can not afford any house or health care at all but it is the best I can offer at the present. I do have an open mind to suggestions. I do think the answer lies within the discussion of capitalism vs. socialism.

---

ok thank you for clarifying it as a general statement, that is why i asked what you mean, the way iot was worded I simply did not know which "Freedoms "were referenaced, it was NOT meant a a sligt to you, just asking for clarification thats all

thank you

Originally Posted by wmrs2
I hope you are not suggesting that his crisis situation is the fault of America. .....This is the best place in the world to be sick. I for one would love to hear you admit this too.

yes it is The Medical Proffesion has alowed prices to skyrocket out of control, tosee a docotor, an MRI ect ect and Pharactial Companies control the prices on their medications, espcizaly the new one, that is why most peole now try to use generics, if avaialble but some medications are is still under patent to the companies and genenrics if i am not misaken can not be created or developed for 5-7 years to do patent rights on new drugs.
If Pharmcutiacal Compies do not have control over thier pricing and Docotors and or Hosptials do not control what they charge who does?? the Goverment doesn't, the Governement does not set the prices for Medication or Meidical Services, the Pharmacutical Companies set thier own Price sand Hosptial do the same, our Medical Industry, Pharacutial Companies and Doctors a swell as Hospitals in this ocuntry are100% UNREGULATED by the OUR Goverment, which allow all 3 to charge what ever they want for goods and servies
You go to a Pharmacy to buy say tylonol and pay $5.50 or slightly more for 100count bottle of Tylynol, if you into a Hosptial and askfor one, your bill will showed they charged you $5.00-$10 for 1 pill, which is what you pay for a whole bottleif you buy one
Why, because they are all unregulated, no that does not mean the Govemrent should "Socialise" these Companies orDoctrs or Hosptial, what it does mean is at Goverment does not control what Pharmacutical Compies, Doctors nd Hosptial can charge or their good and services, so we pay what they want to charge us and ger away with it, th Goverment does not intervene

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Belgarold

I will be ignoring your narrowminded ranting from now on, you have no selfwareness and hash over the same tired old adages.

Here, I was giving sympathy to someone in a very difficult situation as a true Human Being would. ANd you STILL have not been listening or reading. Many people have died, leaving their loved one's in grief and IMMENSE debt because of the current System. But where in the Heck did I say anything political in my statement.

But you have taken what I have said, to someone living through one of the problems with health care and taken my sympathy for them and twisted it for your own SICK aims.

You are not worth my time.

---

Ignore me, do whatever you like. By acknowledging the history of the USA of having been great does not diminish Cuba, Asia, or any other country that provides health care for their people. It does not constitute narrow minded ranting as you suggest. My initial post to which you apparently disagree was not a criticism of the world but it was intended to point out the disdain that so called liberal wisdom has for America. It pleases me that several countries around the world provide good health care for their citizens.

The disdain you feel for capitalism and your refusal to give capitalism credit for America's achievements is well marked by your statement"WHile most Americans suffer." Your vision is not correct. Most Americans do not suffer. Some do and that is what we are trying to cure. But your vision is wrong and that is the frame in which you criticize my praise of the USA and call it narrow minded.

There is nothing sick about my aims. Your criticism of me is really based on the fact that your liberal and socialistic ideas have a tent of left wing conspiracy attached to them. The fact is, the billions of people around the world that have been promised by socialist and communist that to follow their way guarantees a healthier way of life has not panned out. I want our friends who are suffering lose of jobs and medical care to have better. But, it is not a sick way to point out your hidden agenda to make the USA smaller in the eyes of the world. You promote a different American way of life than our history illustrates. As the President and fellow patriots pointed out today, we will find an American way to solve our problems. Do you think the new President has taken your sympathy and twisted it for his own SICK aims?

I am only guilty of saying something positive about the country. Yet, you show unmeasured resentment of what the President and I both said. If you would say something good about our country, I think I could listen to your ranting a little better. I now leave this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr_BuzzCzar

I used the infant mortality rate in Cuba and Bosnia to make a point that our health care system has weaknesses. I don't for a moment believe that a communist or socialist government is better than a representative democracy. Facts are facts though, there are better health care systems than ours. We can and should have a better one. I'm not saying we should copy anyone's health care system but we would be foolish to not investigate those that out-perform ours and learn from them.


Sorry, I don't understand that sentence.



I'm as proud of being an American as anyone, as is the vast majority of those liberals you speak of in such a demeaning manner. Just an FYI, I'm sitting here looking at the shadow box on the wall behind this computer with my unit patches and my medals from my Army service. Among those is a Purple Heart with Oak Leaf Cluster. You don't have to be a right-wing neo-con to have fought for your country. One of the things I take great pride in as an American is the right to criticize what I see as shortcomings and wrongs performed by my country. One of my favorite paintings is by Norman Rockwell and it is of a boy looking admirably up at his father, a man in work clothes, who is standing up in a town meeting and speaking. That personifies this country to me. We all have that freedom of speech and failing to see her shortcomings is much more dangerous than blindly backing the status quo all the time, in my opinion.

---

We would be very foolish if we copied Cuba's model of health care. What might be good for a small country can not be compared to a large country like the USA. Also, the statistics coming out of a communist country like Cuba can not be trusted. Their facts are not facts.

Sorry if you think I speak of liberals in a demeaning manner. My intention is to point out the Hegelian logic the liberals use. The term a right-wing neo-con is sarcastic and demeaning but liberals indiscriminately use it whenever a conservative praises his country.

"We all have that freedom of speech and failing to see her shortcomings is much more dangerous than blindly backing the status quo all the time, in my opinion." I agree with this statement but it also applies to liberals when they back communist and socialist propaganda. Socialist and capitalist are consistently making this charge of each other. Which side do you come down on? That would be interesting to know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr_BuzzCzar

If it isn't the fault of America's health care system where does the fault lie? with me?

How do you know this is the best place in the world to be sick? Every metric I can find says we're near the best, but not the best.

Take my wife's disease. The best treatments in the world for that disease (and if you knew me personally you'd know I've researched the hell out of this) are in Barcelona, London, and Houston (MD Anderson). Two of those are in what you sneeringly refer to as socialist systems and the third is here in the USA. There are some folks in Canada, Australia, and Singapore that appear to be gaining on these three as is Jewish Medical Center on Long Island and the Ohio State Medical Center in Columbus. Our system isn't lousy. It's great if you can afford it. We can be so much better.

---

Yes, we can do better and I side with you in trying to do better. As to being your fault for being sick, of course it is not your fault. God has seen fit to rain on all men equally. Bad is going to happen to us all and it is none of our fault. We also receive good and that is not our fault either.

Maybe I should amend my statement to say that this is the best country in the world for me in which to be sick. Many Americans feel this way and that does not make us mean spirited. You have my sympathy and prayers. I certainly hope you well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wmrs2

We would be very foolish if we copied Cuba's model of health care. What might be good for a small country can not be compared to a large country like the USA. Also, the statistics coming out of a communist country like Cuba can not be trusted. Their facts are not facts.

Sorry if you think I speak of liberals in a demeaning manner. My intention is to point out the Hegelian logic the liberals use. The term a right-wing neo-con is sarcastic and demeaning but liberals indiscriminately use it whenever a conservative praises his country.

"We all have that freedom of speech and failing to see her shortcomings is much more dangerous than blindly backing the status quo all the time, in my opinion." I agree with this statement but it also applies to liberals when they back communist and socialist propaganda. Socialist and capitalist are consistently making this charge of each other. Which side do you come down on? That would be interesting to know.

---

I have NEVER backed any Communist or Social Propoganda or Philosophy and again do not apprciate being label A Communist or Scialist simply because I am a Democraitc, you seem to have this intense need to label all Democroats Socialists and Communists,simply because their or my views are not the same as yours, some may be communisrts, never met A Communist so i do not know,I have no Idea, I most Ceratinly are not, never have been never will be and do not apprciate being Labeled one becuase my views differ from yours, feel free to disagree with my views if you want, only without Reffering to me and Democrtas all time as Communist/Socialist, we aren't, we simply have different view onthings then you do, butthat does not make a a Communist or Socialt, it makes me an American Citize who view differ fro tohers, no more no less
I also have never seen you post any actual documentaion of any kind showing that all Democrats are Communists and Socialsts,you keep saying it but do not doucment where you saw this, where it was published or printed to show written documented and proof that They/We are all Communists

fini

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mkemse

I have NEVER backed any Communist or Social Propoganda or Philosophy and again do not apprciate being label A Communist or Scialist simply because I am a Democraitc, you seem to have this intense need to label all Democroats Socialists and Communists,simply because their or my views are not the same as yours, some may be communisrts, never met A Communist so i do not know,I have no Idea, I most Ceratinly are not, never have been never will be and do not apprciate being Labeled one becuase my views differ from yours, feel free to disagree with my views if you want, only without Reffering to me and Democrtas all time as Communist/Socialist, we aren't, we simply have different view onthings then you do, butthat does not make a a Communist or Socialt, it makes me an American Citize who view differ fro tohers, no more no less
I also have never seen you post any actual documentaion of any kind showing that all Democrats are Communists and Socialsts,you keep saying it but do not doucment where you saw this, where it was published or printed to show written documented and proof that They/We are all Communists

fini

---

First, I have never said all Democrats are communist. I don't believe that either. I said I would not call you a communist. As far as I know I have kept that pledge. Here you have your feelings hurt for no reason.

As far as "some" Democrats having leanings to the political left, that is a fact. Many Democrats will admit that. In discussing political positions and philosophy, it is a recognized fact that communism, socialism, and liberals have political philosophies that lean to the left. They have much theory in common. Liberal Democrats are on the political left and they are more socialistic than other Democrats. It is not a sin to be a liberal. Most communist claim to be liberal. If you keep saying you are a liberal, many people will think you have communistic and socialistic tendencies. I can not help that. That is your fault, not mine.

If you are interested in not being labeled with socialist or communist, you should do some reading about the Blue Dog Democrats. These people are conservative Democrats. They often vote with Republicans on conservative issues in Congress and this angers the liberal Democrats. The liberals who lead the Democrat Party do not care for the Blue Dogs but in order to keep control in Congress, they tolerate them. But, that is the nature of politics. If you are going to participate on a political forum, you will have to operate within the frame of these categories or nobody will understand to what you refer or what you believe.

Right wing, left wing, liberal, conservative, socialist, communist, capitalist, fascist, democratic, etc. are just words. You remember this old statement don't you? "Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me." I don't know how true this is because I have seen words do a lot of damage when they are used to insult and accuse others of wrong doing but on this particular forum, if we do not use these words, what ones do you suggest we replace them with?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wmrs2

first, i have never said all democrats are communist. I don't believe that either. I said i would not call you a communist. As far as i know i have kept that pledge. Here you have your feelings hurt for no reason.

As far as "some" democrats having leanings to the political left, that is a fact. Many democrats will admit that. In discussing political positions and philosophy, it is a recognized fact that communism, socialism, and liberals have political philosophies that lean to the left. They have much theory in common. Liberal democrats are on the political left and they are more socialistic than other democrats. It is not a sin to be a liberal. Most communist claim to be liberal. If you keep saying you are a liberal, many people will think you have communistic and socialistic tendencies. I can not help that. That is your fault, not mine.

If you are interested in not being labeled with socialist or communist, you should do some reading about the blue dog democrats. These people are conservative democrats. They often vote with republicans on conservative issues in congress and this angers the liberal democrats. The liberals who lead the democrat party do not care for the blue dogs but in order to keep control in congress, they tolerate them. But, that is the nature of politics. If you are going to participate on a political forum, you will have to operate within the frame of these categories or nobody will understand to what you refer or what you believe.

Right wing, left wing, liberal, conservative, socialist, communist, capitalist, fascist, democratic, etc. Are just words. You remember this old statement don't you? "sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me." i don't know how true this is because i have seen words do a lot of damage when they are used to insult and accuse others of wrong doing but on this particular forum, if we do not use these words, what ones do you suggest we replace them with?

---

fini

OK - this debate is meant to be measuring capitalism against socialism, by comparing various countries' healthcare systems with each other, and that's all very fine, but I think we must just stop casting slurs at each other about who is more or less American than who. So far, Sen. McCarthy has not posted to this thread (assuming he's still alive!) and I'd rather he didn't.

I'll do my best to behave too (at least no-one has accused me of being un-American - lol).

We seem to have established that the primary reason for eschewing a state-sponsored heathcare system is that it is wrong to reward people who try to cheat the system, by giving them the benefits of a public health service at the expense of others. I agree. It is wrong. But as has already been pointed out, it is even more wrong to deny people who are not cheats, but who genuinely cannot afford treatment.

So this brings out an admission of something I haven't owned up to before: sometimes "free" healthcare services do provide treatment to people who have not paid into the system. In the UK, readers of the Daily Mail (I must be careful about the aspersions I cast ... see above) rail and rant and have apoplectic fits about the hoardes of Afghans and Pakistanis who enter the country illegally, sign on for unemployment benefits, march their four wives into hospital so they can be delivered of their babies for free, and then try to blow up our buses and underground stations. Yes, I admit, these systems are open to abuse. Yet the NHS survives, and so do we. That's because the true level of abuse is low. It isn't easy to cheat the system, especially if you can't read or speak English, and I would venture to suggest that most successful cheats owe their success to a lazy or inefficient clerk rather than to their own skillful manipulations.

And a lazy or inefficient clerk in a private healthcare system will forget to bill some people.

It has also been said that a private system will allow people to (a) prioritise their spending on health - some will want cover for everything, others only for accident and emergncy care, and (b) to exercise their freedom of choice. OK - that's fair. I don't have much to say about that, except that I don't think those are important freedoms in this context. Freedom of expression is one thing, freedom to decide who will cure you is another.

But I would point out that, here in the UK, I can choose who will be my GP, and if I am to be hospitalised, I can persuade him to send me to a London teaching hospital rather than the local city hospital, if I think it would be better for me.

Furthermore, you won't be excluded from the treatment of some disease you are prone to, or which already exists at the time you take out your policy. If the health service can treat you, it will.

Finally, I think that the chemical companies of the world have demonstrated perfectly that competition under capitalism does not force prices down. The prices of medicines are maintained at artificially high levels for far too long, supposedly to recoup R&D costs. Frankly, I don't believe it. I think competition under capitalism exists only for as long as it takes for a tacit cartel to come about, where the chemical companies do not sell their drugs below a certain price level to cushion their profits, although they might compete with each other above those prices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wmrs2

Yes, we can do better and I side with you in trying to do better. As to being your fault for being sick, of course it is not your fault. God has seen fit to rain on all men equally. Bad is going to happen to us all and it is none of our fault. We also receive good and that is not our fault either.

Maybe I should amend my statement to say that this is the best country in the world for me in which to be sick. Many Americans feel this way and that does not make us mean spirited. You have my sympathy and prayers. I certainly hope you well.

---

So God did it it me? Wow. So God must love the social democracies more because they have better health care?

You use Medicare, that medical safety net system that is paid for with taxes to cover your own needs. Therefore I'm guessing that you have that Social Security deposit made every month. That comes from taxes too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr_BuzzCzar

So God did it it me? Wow. So God must love the social democracies more because they have better health care?

You use Medicare, that medical safety net system that is paid for with taxes to cover your own needs. Therefore I'm guessing that you have that Social Security deposit made every month. That comes from taxes too.

---

You really have been damaged if you interpret what I said to be anything but sympathetic to your situation. I don't blame God for anything. A favorite statement of an atheist friend of mine is "that shit happens."

For the record, I do not make SS payments or withdraws. I would like to participate but I can not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MMI

OK - this debate is meant to be measuring capitalism against socialism, by comparing various countries' healthcare systems with each other, and that's all very fine, but I think we must just stop casting slurs at each other about who is more or less American than who. So far, Sen. McCarthy has not posted to this thread (assuming he's still alive!) and I'd rather he didn't.

I'll do my best to behave too (at least no-one has accused me of being un-American - lol)..

---

I do not like McCarthyism either but a sensible analysis of the political condition of the USA should not be compared to McCarthyism. Neither should a person be condemned for giving praise to his country. As far a slurs go, it is best to not hand out any slurs. Slurs,on the other hand, do not bother me because it is so easy to point out that the person handing out the slurs is usually the person guilty of this type of bigotry. Usually the one calling others fanatics are that themselves. The reason you feel that you have not been called un-American is that you are respectful to the ideas of others. You appear to like new ideas and challenges. That is the way you should be.

I would like to be more that way, but every time I make a positive comment, I have to take time to defend the comment because I am challenged by people who can not tolerate differences of opinions. It is not a good thing that people who differ from the opinions of others is a fanatic. That is simply a false assumption.

If your political philosophy is to the far left, it is only reasonable to know that those on the far right will differ with you. If a person can not tolerate this fact, political debate should not be a forum for their discourse. If I make a statement that is to the right of politics, I would be stupid to think a person on the left would not challenge me. I would even be more stupid if I retaliated by calling names. By pointing out that another person holds certain beliefs that puts them on the right or left is not name calling and having a different opinion is not narrow mindedness. I call it fun.

ANYONE who uses Medicare, is using a 100% Government Financed Medical Servie. it is pure Socialism, the Goverment controls EVERY aspect of Medicare, Premiums, drug costs, doctorss fees (beter know as assignment, some Doctors accept assignment other do not, i you accept it it means you het what the GOVERNMENT feels the service is worth rather the whatit may actualy be worth) ect I have been on it for 9 years out of inabilibty to afford Private insurace so i recieive it through my disability, check
But it is still 100% Socialised Medical Insurance it is run by The Social Security Adm, which is 100% governeent owned and operated
So much for Sicialism and bein a Socialst, if you use Medicare you are using a Socialist form of health insurance, plain and simple

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mkemse

ANYONE who uses Medicare, is using a 100% Government Financed Medical Servie. it is pure Socialism, the Goverment controls EVERY aspect of Medicare, Premiums, drug costs, doctorss fees (beter know as assignment, some Doctors accept assignment other do not, i you accept it it means you het what the GOVERNMENT feels the service is worth rather the whatit may actualy be worth) ect I have been on it for 9 years out of inabilibty to afford Private insurace so i recieive it through my disability, check
But it is still 100% Socialised Medical Insurance it is run by The Social Security Adm, which is 100% governeent owned and operated
So much for Sicialism and bein a Socialst, if you use Medicare you are using a Socialist form of health insurance, plain and simple

---

I pay a monthly premium for medicare coverage and what medicare does not pay my supplementary insurance does pay. My medicine is paid by supplemental insurance too. i am not against socialized medicine. There are many social programs that are good and necessary. I was really impressed yesterday of how Oboma handled the public health forum. I will be interested to see how things work out as a result of the collaboration that is taking place.

People should take yesterday's forum as an example of how to behave on this forum. Nobody acted like they had a chip on their shoulders and dared each other to knock it off. Everybody knew what they were whether liberal or conservative. Had some smart ass made critical remark about Bill Clinton or G Bush there would have been a fight right there in the forum. Everybody needs to know when it is time to shut there mouths so the people's business can be done, don't you agree?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MMI

The prices of medicines are maintained at artificially high levels for far too long, supposedly to recoup R&D costs. Frankly, I don't believe it. I think competition under capitalism exists only for as long as it takes for a tacit cartel to come about, where the chemical companies do not sell their drugs below a certain price level to cushion their profits, although they might compete with each other above those prices.

---

I worked for a pharmaceutical company at one time, a small one, and I can assure you that the R&D costs are astronomical! Even minor medicines went through many months, if not years, of development and testing, and not all of them were successful. So when you are paying those high prices for the drugs that let you lead a comfortable life, you are also having to pay for the research for other drugs which never made it to market.

Add to that the high cost of manufacture for those drugs, too. From the top of my head, every raw material which was purchased for production had to be rigorously tested to meet FDA standards. Every step in the production process had to be tested, repeatedly. Repeated sterilizing of equipment, relatively high cost of training production personel, as compared to average factory workers, added to the cost. Testing continued through the packaging process and even sampling from the warehouse.

That's not to say that the drug companies don't pad their prices, but after seeing the process in action, I can't fault them too much.