Free Health care

gunthernehmen said:

That's EASY.

Submit FOIA requests to Massachusetts CMS asking for data pertaining to type and severity of treated illnesses along with outcomes. They HAVE this data because the data is required by the state in order for payment to the providers to happen.

You'll possibly have to work at getting the similar data for private insurance, but it's out there.

Mass was the prototype for Obama Care (which is the socialized medicine you guys are promoting). I've not the slightest doubt the same data is available in all other states, but you really just need a sampling.

Click to expand...

I'll wait then. How long do you think it'll take you to come back with some proof? It sounds like quite a lengthy process.

KimGordon67 said:

I'll wait then. How long do you think it'll take you to come back with some proof? It sounds like quite a lengthy process.

Click to expand...

I'm solid. I was informing you how you can find your proof. My own information is anecdotal (so useless as a cite) but quite sufficient for my interest in the matter.

What I don't understand is the outside world's fascination with the internal matters of the United States.

Half or more of the haters here are from other countries. What do YOU care if we have socialized medicine or not? Are YOU all on the KGB payroll?

KimGordon67 said:

Evidence needed.

Click to expand...

Pointless request. They have none, it's just non-stop rhetoric that can't stand the light of a close examination.

gunthernehmen said:

I'm solid. I was informing you how you can find your proof. My own information is anecdotal (so useless as a cite) but quite sufficient for my interest in the matter.

What I don't understand is the outside world's fascination with the internal matters of the United States.

Half or more of the haters here are from other countries. What do YOU care if we have socialized medicine or not? Are YOU all on the KGB payroll?

Click to expand...

Ah ... 'anecdotal' evidence. Always a good means of informing policy.

The responses have been to the concept of 'free health care'. This isn't a notion that's not peculiar to the US. Those of us living in taxpayer funded health systems were simply suggesting that this model does work, and could be argued to work better than the American model (depending on what your measure of 'success' is, of course). The GB isn't an American-only thing. If you don't want non-Americans to have an opinion about a thread topic, that should be made obvious from the get-go ... and even then, it's an open forum.

Also, it's possible to care about the wellbeing of those outside one's own country, and it's also possible to be interested in what's happening in other countries.

KimGordon67 said:

Ah ... 'anecdotal' evidence. Always a good means of informing policy.

The responses have been to the concept of 'free health care'. This isn't a notion that's not peculiar to the US. Those of us living in taxpayer funded health systems were simply suggesting that this model does work, and could be argued to work better than the American model (depending on what your measure of 'success' is, of course). The GB isn't an American-only thing. If you don't want non-Americans to have an opinion about a thread topic, that should be made obvious from the get-go ... and even then, it's an open forum.

Also, it's possible to care about the wellbeing of those outside one's own country, and it's also possible to be interested in what's happening in other countries.

Click to expand...

We involuntarily took a run at it with Obama Care, which was a resounding failure.

I'm not interested in fixing something that isn't broken. Private, voluntary insurance works.

Nobody here (except Democrat Party leadership) wants this crap.

gunthernehmen said:

...

What I don't understand is the outside world's fascination with the internal matters of the United States.

Half or more of the haters here are from other countries. What do YOU care if we have socialized medicine or not? Are YOU all on the KGB payroll?

Click to expand...

Because what happens in the US affects most of us. Health Care is a significant issue in US elections. The decisions of the FDA have an impact in the UK, so much so that there are various Brexit petitions seeking to prevent food being imported from the US that is acceptable to the FDA but not in Europe. People are worried that Brexit means US standards will be accepted in the UK.

They believe, rightly or wrongly, that the FDA is weak and quote the deaths of UK people from contaminated blood products derived in part from the US:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contaminated_blood_scandal_in_the_United_Kingdom

'Socialised Medicine' is a term of abuse. Most universal health care systems are based on insurance backed by the country's government. The impetus in the UK for a National Health Service was largely driven by the military who were horrified by the poor health of the conscripted soldiers in WW1 and 2 - suffering from health conditions that could have been prevented or easily treated in earlier stages.

We also worry about anti-vax movements in the US. Some parents refuse to take their children to US-based Disney resorts that are hot spots for measles infections. Disney Paris doesn't have the same problem.

gunthernehmen said:

We involuntarily took a run at it with Obama Care, which was a resounding failure.

I'm not interested in fixing something that isn't broken. Private, voluntary insurance works.

Nobody here (except Democrat Party leadership) wants this crap.

Click to expand...

You obviously don't speak for people who cannot afford "private, voluntary insurance".

oggbashan said:

Because what happens in the US affects most of us. Health Care is a significant issue in US elections. The decisions of the FDA have an impact in the UK, so much so that there are various Brexit petitions seeking to prevent food being imported from the US that is acceptable to the FDA but not in Europe. People are worried that Brexit means US standards will be accepted in the UK.

They believe, rightly or wrongly, that the FDA is weak and quote the deaths of UK people from contaminated blood products derived in part from the US:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contaminated_blood_scandal_in_the_United_Kingdom

'Socialised Medicine' is a term of abuse. Most universal health care systems are based on insurance backed by the country's government. The impetus in the UK for a National Health Service was largely driven by the military who were horrified by the poor health of the conscripted soldiers in WW1 and 2 - suffering from health conditions that could have been prevented or easily treated in earlier stages.

We also worry about anti-vax movements in the US. Some parents refuse to take their children to US-based Disney resorts that are hot spots for measles infections. Disney Paris doesn't have the same problem.

Click to expand...

You're right that our healthcare system affects you.

You benefit every time some breakthrough in treatments for X is made.

coati said:

You obviously don't speak for people who cannot afford "private, voluntary insurance".

Click to expand...

And you do?

gunthernehmen said:

And you do?

Click to expand...

They do, wise ass. Living in a rural area where boom and bust schemes have left many in poverty, I hear their stories all the time.

They have convinced me to vote for leaders who will work toward universal health care of some sort. Now that Obamacare has been deconstructed by wise ass Repugnicans, it might be time to look toward Medicare being extended to those who can't afford private insurance.

KimGordon67 said:

Ah ... 'anecdotal' evidence. Always a good means of informing policy.

Click to expand...

coati said:

They do, wise ass. Living in a rural area where boom and bust schemes have left many in poverty, I hear their stories all the time.

They have convinced me to vote for leaders who will work toward universal health care of some sort. Now that Obamacare has been deconstructed by wise ass Repugnicans, it might be time to look toward Medicare being extended to those who can't afford private insurance.

Click to expand...

So, anecdotally then

Yes, I'm prone to being a wise ass, but in this case, I'm not being that.

Before you go voting for something you don't understand, find some people that ARE covered by this socialist medicine in the US. Ask them how they like the care they receive. I HAVE done this. I can tell you without any question that the results you get will not be the results you wanted.

Hopefully we can all live with the aftermath, but I seriously doubt it.

Has anybody brought up death panels yet?

gunthernehmen said:

So, anecdotally then

Yes, I'm prone to being a wise ass, but in this case, I'm not being that.

Before you go voting for something you don't understand, find some people that ARE covered by this socialist medicine in the US. Ask them how they like the care they receive. I HAVE done this. I can tell you without any question that the results you get will not be the results you wanted.

Hopefully we can all live with the aftermath, but I seriously doubt it.

Click to expand...

The "socialist" insurance that I mentioned is called Medicare. You may have heard about it. At my age, I happen to be a subscriber, so I have some first hand experience.

Believe it or not, many people have been living with the "aftermath" of Medicare for decades now. Medicare actually tends to cover a much wider range of conditions and preconditions than the private industry does.

I don't buy your typical red-scare arguments. The private insurance industry had its chance to be involved with covering the poor. Their lobbyists and the Repugnicans blew that chance. So now it is time to cut out the middle man and let Medicare cover the poor.

coati said:

The "socialist" insurance that I mentioned is called Medicare. You may have heard about it. At my age, I happen to be a subscriber, so I have some first hand experience.

Believe it or not, many people have been living with the "aftermath" of Medicare for decades now. Medicare actually tends to cover a much wider range of conditions and preconditions than the private industry does.

I don't buy your typical red-scare arguments. The private insurance industry had its chance to be involved with covering the poor. Their lobbyists and the Repugnicans blew that chance. So now it is time to cut out the middle man and let Medicare cover the poor.

Click to expand...

Medicare has nothing whatsoever to do with this. Medicare would disappear right along with private insurance if you have your way. You knew that, didn't you?

No, you'll be downgraded to Medicaid. If you sometimes have trouble finding a doctor that accepts Medicare, just wait!

Your cost if you have no income would be nothing, of course.

But lets say you have a job. Somebody earlier said you'd only have to pay $200 a month for your healthcare. Of course that's fantasy to think that would cover the tab even for yourself, but whoopsies. Only about 150m Americans are in the work force. Sure there are more than that working, but when you work under the table you don't pay taxes. So you're going to be paying not only for yourself but for somewhere between one and one and a half OTHER people as well.

So let's just put aside the foolishness that this makes any sort of fiscal sense.

The core of the problem is, do you have a DUTY to take care of that 1.5 other people? If you do then duh. Socialist medicine makes sense. If you don't then it's nothing more or less than theft.

Obviously you're ok with mugging half the people in the country so their property can be redistributed by the government. I'm not.

Oh, Phro, your death panels. They exist in EVERY healthcare system public or private. At least in essence. At some point it becomes pointless to keep trying to keep someone alive. Or impossible. Or the quality of life becomes unbearable. The question THERE is who makes the decision? An uncaring government paper pusher or an uncaring insurance company paper pusher?

coati said:

The "socialist" insurance that I mentioned is called Medicare. You may have heard about it. At my age, I happen to be a subscriber, so I have some first hand experience.

Believe it or not, many people have been living with the "aftermath" of Medicare for decades now. Medicare actually tends to cover a much wider range of conditions and preconditions than the private industry does.

I don't buy your typical red-scare arguments. The private insurance industry had its chance to be involved with covering the poor. Their lobbyists and the Repugnicans blew that chance. So now it is time to cut out the middle man and let Medicare cover the poor.

Click to expand...

I'm like you, also on Medicare, Free A coverage, pay for B & D. I like it, but still have a supplemental insurance to cover the rest. I'm concerned it will change once our Government tries to cover 350 Million people. How much more will it possibly cost ? Will I still be able to see my own Doctor? Will we pay more in Taxes as well? That's if they even do it.

cuck72 said:

I like you am also on Medicare, Free A coverage, pay for B & D. I like it, but still have a supplemental insurance to cover the rest. I'm concerned it will change once our Government tries to cover 350 Million people. How much more will it possibly cost ? Will I still be able to see my own Doctor? Will we pay more in Taxes as well? That's if they even do it.

Click to expand...

They're NOT going to answer you clearly (neither will the politicians if you try talking with them) because they KNOW it will cost you more.

It isn't a question of of IF it will cost more (and provide less!) but how MUCH more it will cost.

gunthernehmen said:

You're right that our healthcare system affects you.

You benefit every time some breakthrough in treatments for X is made.

Click to expand...

So do you, when research in Europe provides new knowledge. That knowledge is shared across borders. Many researchers build on a wide base, yes, much of it US-based, but also in other countries too.

Viagra was developed and initially manufactured in the UK - the water running off the Pfizer site caused interesting activity in the local sealife until an expensive water treatment plant was installed.

oggbashan said:

So do you, when research in Europe provides new knowledge. That knowledge is shared across borders. Many researchers build on a wide base, yes, much of it US-based, but also in other countries too.

Viagra was developed and initially manufactured in the UK - the water running off the Pfizer site caused interesting activity in the local sealife until an expensive water treatment plant was installed.

Click to expand...

And the Israelis think they might have a cure for cancer. What's your point? Research takes money. Facilities take money. There is a reason that the facilities and docs in the US are the best in the world...

cuck72 said:

I'm like you, also on Medicare, Free A coverage, pay for B & D. I like it, but still have a supplemental insurance to cover the rest. I'm concerned it will change once our Government tries to cover 350 Million people. How much more will it possibly cost ? Will I still be able to see my own Doctor? Will we pay more in Taxes as well? That's if they even do it.

Click to expand...

Of course it costs money to provide health insurance to the poor, just like of course it costs money to take measures to protect the environment for future generations.

But that all has to do with how we prioritize the use of tax revenues. Repugnicans want to reduce tax revenues so they can keep a white knuckle grip on their money for their own brief lifetimes. So they have you worried that your Medicare premiums are going to go sky high if we provide Medicare to the poor. That's just part of the Repugnican scare tactic related to their motto of "I've got mine, so fuck the rest of you."

Look, when it comes to discretionary possessions, I am all for laissez faire economics, but when it comes to the essentials, like health care and food, everyone must be covered.

coati said:

Of course it costs money to provide health insurance to the poor, just like of course it costs money to take measures to protect the environment for future generations.

But that all has to do with how we prioritize the use of tax revenues. Repugnicans want to reduce tax revenues so they can keep a white knuckle grip on their money for their own brief lifetimes. So they have you worried that your Medicare premiums are going to go sky high if we provide Medicare to the poor. That's just part of the Repugnican scare tactic related to their motto of "I've got mine, so fuck the rest of you."

Look, when it comes to discretionary possessions, I am all for laissez faire economics, but when it comes to the essentials, like health care and food, everyone must be covered.

Click to expand...

You do know this is the Democrats plan, right? I don't care about all the peoples dumb ass hate. I was just saying if these Democrats have such a great idea here this "Medicare for all". I would just like them to EXPLAIN HOW IT WORKS? I'm so tired of ignorant news people and Politicians just talking shit. EXPLAIN, they have no idea, or just don't want to tell people about what it will cost, or what it will cover. But fuck it. I hope Trump wins again.

I can see America's future, and it includes UHC. It will spur the collapse of the health insurance and pharmaceutical advertising industries.

Then Republicans and the sorts of folks who steal milk from babies will get elected again, cancel all UHC funding, and cause every other healthcare industry to collapse as well.

Then we'll all get cholera.

cuck72 said:

You do know this is the Democrats plan, right? I don't care about all the peoples dumb ass hate. I was just saying if these Democrats have such a great idea here this "Medicare for all". I would just like them to EXPLAIN HOW IT WORKS? I'm so tired of ignorant news people and Politicians just talking shit. EXPLAIN, they have no idea, or just don't want to tell people about what it will cost, or what it will cover. But fuck it. I hope Trump wins again.

Click to expand...

I am not talking about "Medicare for all". People of means would still be able to insure themselves through private companies. I am talking about extending Medicare coverage at an affordable rate to people who currently do not have the means to be covered entirely on private insurance.

The private health insurance industry had its opportunity to be subsidized by the government to cover the poor and the working poor, and it did not work out due to their belief that they could make even more money through Repugnican policies. So, screw them. Cut out them as a middle man and use the subsidies they would have received to simply extend Medicare to the poor at an affordable rate.

No one needs to EXPLAIN how Medicare works. Read its history. It ain't perfect, but it will be cheaper than subsidizing a private insurance middle man and more ethical than doing nothing at all about the uninsured portion of the population.

And yes, rich people would still be able to get Cadillac coverage.

But I am not saying all this for your benefit, because you have already resolved to vote for greed again. However, because of the gross income disparity in the country that results in wealth being concentrated in a minority of the population, the greedy will ultimately be overwhelmed at the voting polls on this health care issue.

gunthernehmen said:

And the Israelis think they might have a cure for cancer. What's your point? Research takes money. Facilities take money. There is a reason that the facilities and docs in the US are the best in the world...

Click to expand...

And yet abandons some of its citizens if they get sick?

oggbashan said:

And yet abandons some of its citizens if they get sick?

Click to expand...

Indeed, that is the insurance issue in America. Republicans have focused on the myth that if we provide affordable insurance to people in the lower incomes, somehow that will stop all innovation in medicine.

Bull crap. They just don't want tax dollars subsidizing people who don't make as much money as they do to obtain basic health care, and yet they are the same people who fight against minimum wage increases so they can get all their goodies at the cheapest rate possible.

Greed gone wild.

coati said:

Of course it costs money to provide health insurance to the poor, just like of course it costs money to take measures to protect the environment for future generations.

But that all has to do with how we prioritize the use of tax revenues. Repugnicans want to reduce tax revenues so they can keep a white knuckle grip on their money for their own brief lifetimes. So they have you worried that your Medicare premiums are going to go sky high if we provide Medicare to the poor. That's just part of the Repugnican scare tactic related to their motto of "I've got mine, so fuck the rest of you."

Look, when it comes to discretionary possessions, I am all for laissez faire economics, but when it comes to the essentials, like health care and food, everyone must be covered.

Click to expand...

Now you want FREE GROCERIES as well as free healthcare?

Jesus...

Just thank your lucky stars you're living today. Couple hundred years ago, the combo of lazy + stupid was a death sentence. Even 50 years ago it would have earned you a well deserved beat down.