The Reality of Socialized Medicine

[JackLuis]

Fox News reporter busts Trump for lying about UK’s health system

The fate of the United Kingdom’s National Health Service (NHS) has emerged as a top campaign issue in upcoming U.K. elections, as Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn has accused Conservative Prime Minister Boris Johnson of plotting to sell off parts of the NHS to American health care firms.

During a press conference on Tuesday, Trump denied that he wanted anything to do with the NHS, and said he didn’t know how rumors started that he wanted to put the NHS up for sale as part of a trade deal between the United States and the U.K.

“Trump said today he doesn’t know where the rumor came from that Britain’s National Health Service would be on the table in a new trade deal with the U.K.,” Roberts wrote on Twitter after the president’s London press conference. “It came from his press conference with Theresa May on June 4, 2019.”

Trumpski's problem is he doesn't think people have a memory longer than his!

 

[gunthernehmen]

It's got nothing to do with whether or not they pay taxes (many do) or whether they "expect all the benefits afforded citizens" (Dumpington's rantings aside, there is no evidence that most illegal aliens ever try to vote, for example).

Can one feel ill, go see the doctor, get an RX for amoxicillin, pick it up at the drugstore?

Can he stub a toe (painful but clearly not life threatening) and go to the er for bandaids? Or substitute whatever non life threatening but urgent issue you like.

In other words, can someone simply jump the border into Canada and live out their lives using your healthcare system, not a citizen, not there in any legal capacity?

It's a clear question. No need to evade with voting irrelevancies.

 

[oggbashan]

Can one feel ill, go see the doctor, get an RX for amoxicillin, pick it up at the drugstore?

Can he stub a toe (painful but clearly not life threatening) and go to the er for bandaids? Or substitute whatever non life threatening but urgent issue you like.

In other words, can someone simply jump the border into Canada and live out their lives using your healthcare system, not a citizen, not there in any legal capacity?

It's a clear question. No need to evade with voting irrelevancies.

In the UK they could BUT if they are not on a legal visa and have not paid as part of that visa for access to the NHS they should get a bill. Sume bills are not issued when they should be. Some, who are billed, do not pay but they are a very small proportion of the NHS's costs. Some of that small non-payment is NHS managers''s inefficency; others is inability to trace someone; others is caused by travel insurers' delays...

The NHS's priority is to treat the patient. They usually don't think about whether the patient should pay because the vast majority don't have to.

Edited for PS: Before Brexit, EU citizens can carry a card that entitles them to free treatment in every EU country with universal health care on a reciprocal basis. They get the terms and conditions as if they were a tax-paying citizen of whatever country they are in. It is still advisable to have health insurance as part of your travel insurance but that is cheap because the insurance only has to cover conditions and injuries above and beyond the free health care.

 

[BotanyBoy]

As you surely know, it's the liberal term for illegal aliens. People that enter the country illegally, without a passport, without claiming refuge without paying taxes on the money they Earth working illegally. Yet still expect all the benefits afforded citizens.

Leftist....not liberal.

The reality deniers on the left are NOT liberals, at all.

YOU are significantly more liberal than YDB95.

Liberal =/= left.

 

[JackLuis]

When we think of the "Cost Of HealthCare" we should not forget the cost of lost manhours, Unpaid bills to others and the emotional costs we pay as a society from the lack of care. No to mention the cost of outbreaks of the unvax'ed.

Just a thought.

 

[BotanyBoy]

When we think of the "Cost Of HealthCare" we should not forget the cost of lost manhours, Unpaid bills to others and the emotional costs we pay as a society from the lack of care. No to mention the cost of outbreaks of the unvax'ed.

Just a thought.

Quit trying to force that cost upon us collectively.

Then we all just have to worry about our own problems, liberty is a win like that!!!

 

[icanhelp1]

I have posted this several times but some people still don't accept it:

In the UK you can use the National Health Service; you can have medical insurance with varying levels of co-pay and use the extensive number of private medical hospitals and facilities; you can pay your own way for private treatment; or you can do all three depending on your choice at the time.

You are not FORCED to use the NHS but if you are in employment or being taxed you cannot avoid paying for it. But if you become seriously ill, the health costs of your treatment on the NHS cannot and will not bankrupt you because it is free at the point of use.

If you want to, you can go abroad for treatment. Several European countries offer specialist treatments much cheaper than private care in the UK. Even the NHS can send you abroad if it is appropriate and you are willing to go.

Ogg, that's the point, you have a choice, the progressives here want to take away our choice and throw us into a single payer system while trashing private care.

 

[oggbashan]

Ogg, that's the point, you have a choice, the progressives here want to take away our choice and throw us into a single payer system while trashing private care.

Because your politicians are paid to trash any reasonable system.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Because your politicians are paid to trash any reasonable system.

No, they are paid to exploit it.


The desire to take away our choices and nationalize our HC system is just good old fashioned authoritarian leftism.

Which our government is not set up to function as.

Our government was set up as a highly restricted liberal one.

If we are to be "reasonable" then we need to get 2/3 of congress and 38 states together and SHIT CAN the entire fucking Constitution and re-write it from the ground up to provide the more authoritarian state everyone else seems to think we should have because it's what they have.

Maybe like the UK we'll just hand over our sovereignty to the EU and let bureaucrats in Brussels micromanage our lives.

 

[oggbashan]

That's because unlike any other government on the planet our system was purposely designed to promote freedom for the individual....not "reasonable" control and authority......freedom.

Which massive overstepping has created the problems you speak of.


If we are to be "reasonable" then we need to get 2/3 of congress and 38 states together and SHIT CAN the entire fucking Constitution and re-write the bitch from the ground up to provide the more authoritarian state everyone else seems to think we should have.

Maybe like the UK we'll just hand over our sovereignty to the EU and let bureaucrats in Brussels micromanage our lives.

All that would be unnecessary if the US politicians could get together on healthcare to produce a system, or systems, that is/are insurance based and not featherbedded to provide massive profits. It doesn't have to be federal; it doesn't have to be government run. It needs to be affordable.

Other countries can do it. The UK set up the NHS long before the EU. If we were starting from now it would look very different because other countries have better systems than ours.

 

[BotanyBoy]

All that would be unnecessary if the US politicians could get together on healthcare to produce a system, or systems, that is/are insurance based and not featherbedded to provide massive profits.

They were not ever supposed to be creating a system to impose upon private citizens like that.

It doesn't have to be federal; it doesn't have to be government run. It needs to be affordable.

Affordability is relative.

Affordable for everyone is not possible without government intervention and authority taking from the rich and giving to the poor or public at large.

To do something like that with some chance of it not being a totally corrupt and clusterfuck would at a bare minimum require MASSIVE fundamental changes to both our Constitution and our overall structure as a nation.

States can do it.....they can do pretty much whatever they want so long as they don't violate it's citizens rights. Progressives can impliment that 97.5% tax rate, with wealth taxes to tax people annually on the value of all their shit they've already paid taxes on with money they already paid taxes on.

Question is why don't they?

California might be stepping up to the plate to provide free HC for anyone who shows up with their hands out at the expense of the top 5% and evil horrible corporations.

We're going to see how that works out for them.

I have a feeling the exodus of companies and tax payers to more free, more liberal states like Texas, is going to accelerate RAPIDLY.

Other countries can do it. The UK set up the NHS long before the EU.

And every one of you is on the economic struggle bus for it. And that is WITH the USA covering large chunks of your defense expenses to boot.

If we were to stop and you all had to suddenly take arming yourself a bit more serious? If you didn't do some deeeeeep cuts to your social spending for at least a few years the taxes would fucking crush your economy.

 

[oggbashan]

The US already spends a larger percentage of its GDP on health care than almost any other country (17.8%):

https://www.statista.com/statistics/184968/us-health-expenditure-as-percent-of-gdp-since-1960/

The US spends 3.2% of GDP on defense.

The UK spends much less (9.8%) on health and could spend more without affecting defence.

https://www.health.org.uk/chart/chart-nhs-spends-about-eu-average-as-percentage-of-gdp-on-health

 

[BotanyBoy]

The US already spends a larger percentage of its GDP on health care than almost any other country:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/184968/us-health-expenditure-as-percent-of-gdp-since-1960/

The UK spends much less (9,8%) and could spend more without affecting defence.

https://www.health.org.uk/chart/chart-nhs-spends-about-eu-average-as-percentage-of-gdp-on-health

Yea....you could give the US federal government 900 TRILLION dollars and they STILL wouldn't be able to get everyone basic HC. It would all just magically vanish into a black hole call government. There is no amount of money you can throw at that problem to make it go away. Not even imaginary.

And you keep posting that as if that's some kind of reason to give them MORE money and MORE authority over peoples lives....as if suddenly that will make them behave responsibly with the money/authority they already have.


So given their track record....

Would you trust the US government to manage your NHS??

Would you trust the US government to keep prices affordable for you????

 

[oggbashan]

Yea....wild corruption, because the government's doing shit it shouldn't be doing.

You keep posting that as if that's some kind of reason to give them MORE money and MORE authority over peoples lives.

Given their track record....

Would you trust the US government to manage your HC??

Would you trust the US government to keep prices affordable????

NO. I have never advocated spending more on US health. What I have consistently said is the current spend is madness and if the US politicians looked seriously at how other countries do it, they could spend much less to cover everyone. How? That is up to them and doesn't have to be a constitution-busting issue.

But US politicians have their hands in the pork barrel of big pharma.

 

[BotanyBoy]

NO. I have never advocated spending more on US health.

The ONLY way we won't spend more? Is to get them the fuck out of HC industry management. For 35 years they've done a total shit job.

They need to do public safety and let the corruption/mismanagement prices come down.

What I have consistently said is the current spend is madness and if the US politicians looked seriously at how other countries do it, they could spend much less to cover everyone. How? That is up to them and doesn't have to be a constitution-busting issue.

It is madness.

We aren't other countries, not even close, so no we can't do it like you do. The US federal government is more like the EU than the government of France, UK or Germany, which are all far more comparable to our state governments. The United States of America is a union of states.....not a unitary state.

A good reverse analogy would be me saying "Well some places have more equitable or "better" HC than the UK, if the EU were to look seriously at how they did it, they could just force the UK along with all other members into the same 1 size fits all system!! " , an absurd notion and a good way to start a war.

You can't run a federal government designed to manage a union of states like an individual unitary state. Especially a federal government that is explicitly and heavily restricted in it's authority as the USG. So yea to do what you're talking about, a national HC system trying to manage HC in all 50 states with a 1 size fits all rule?? Would absolutely be a Constitution busting issue. Their attempts to skirt the Constitution and pretend to be a unitary state anyhow? Is the reason for the total shit show in the first place.

But US politicians have their hands in the pork barrel of big pharma.

All the more reason to not have them running our HC systems.

 

[gunthernehmen]

Leftist....not liberal.

The reality deniers on the left are NOT liberals, at all.

YOU are significantly more liberal than YDB95.

Liberal =/= left.

Point taken, although I'm more about personal responsibility than any liberal view.

 

[oggbashan]

...

All the more reason to not have them running our HC systems.

Maybe you need a different set of politicians, neither Republican nor Democrat.

You need to elect people who don't want to be politicians but who want to help their fellow citizens.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Point taken, although I'm more about personal responsibility than any liberal view.

Liberalism is centered around personal responsibility.

So I don't see how you manage that.

What is it you think liberalism is???

Maybe you need a different set of politicians, neither Republican nor Democrat.

You need to elect people who don't want to be politicians but who want to help their fellow citizens.

That has NOTHING to do with it.

Fill the WH, HoR and Senate with saints....a 1 size fits all federal HC plan still isn't going to work for 50 states with their own legal rights, authorities, cultures and economies. .

It's our structure and law that prevents this.

The EU has a far greater chance of replacing various nations HC system (or any segment of their economy) and unifying them all under one centrally controlled EU system than the USG does doing the same in the US.

Something tells me if the EU tried, they would probably be told to get fucked by a number of their member states as well.

 

[gunthernehmen]

Maybe you need a different set of politicians, neither Republican nor Democrat.

You need to elect people who don't want to be politicians but who want to help their fellow citizens.

BINGO

To clarify that, we need to end the treatment of political service as a way of life. It should be an inconvenience that had to be tolerated, not a way to control people and money.

 

[magicalmoments]

Reading through the discussion above reminds me of Galileo's fight with the Pope over whether or not the earth moved around the sun or vice versa. Galileo had published a book asserting the sun was stationery and the earth moved, which was contrary to the bible and church doctrine. He was put on trial and was found guilty of heresy and was forced to recant and declare the earth was unmovable, but legend has it after he recanted he was heard to say, "yet it still moves".

Despite all the dire warnings and prediction of disaster if the USA adopts a socialist style health system the fact remains that many countries successfully operate such systems, most in tandem with a prosperous private enterprise system so citizens have a choice.

"Yet it still moves!".

 

[BotanyBoy]

Despite all the dire warnings and prediction of disaster if the USA adopts a socialist style health system the fact remains that many countries successfully operate such systems, most in tandem with a prosperous private enterprise system so citizens have a choice.

"Yet it still moves!".

So not a socialist style health system but a public healthcare service.

That's for nearly if not all of them, I bet you'd be pressed to find a single socialized HC system that isn't a totally failed shit show.

Much less a totally socialized economy.

I'm sorry I mean "progressive" economy.

 

[oggbashan]

So not a socialist style health system but a public healthcare service.

That's for nearly if not all of them, I bet you'd be pressed to find a single socialized HC system that isn't a totally failed shit show.

Much less a totally socialized economy.

I'm sorry I mean "progressive" economy.

Proof for your unjustified assertion?

 

[BotanyBoy]

Proof for your unjustified assertion?

What unjustified assertion???

That socialism is a failed system and ideology??

 

[oggbashan]

What unjustified assertion???

That socialism is a failed system and ideology??

No. For health care systems.

I discount your bias against socialism. That is your view and not borne out by many European countries who work quite well with a capitalism based government system with social elements.

Just because you think the US system is the best - and your massive spend on health care shows it isn't always - doesn't mean that differing systems are ALL socialist or even that democratic socialism leads to failed economies.

You are defending possibly the worst performing and most money-grabbing elected politicians in any part of the free democratic world.

 

[BotanyBoy]

No. For health care systems.

And what unjustified assertion are you talking about then??

I discount your bias against socialism. That is your view and not borne out by many European countries who work quite well with a capitalism based government system with social elements.

No, that's historical record.

That's because I've never considered a capitalism based government with social elements to be socialism, that's your ascription.

Just because you think the US system is the best - and your massive spend on health care shows it isn't always - doesn't mean that differing systems are ALL socialist or even that democratic socialism leads to failed economies.

I never even suggested much less said outright that any differing systems are all socialist.

Really? Can you show me a single democratic socialist state that isn't failed?

Just ONE....best of luck with that.

You are defending possibly the worst performing and most money-grabbing elected politicians in any part of the free democratic world.

No, I'm not, at all.

Not supporting the totalitarian takeover of our HC industry by the government everyone seems to think the USA needs to be part of the civilized world is NOT defending the system we have.

I've explicitly stated my support for public option HC systems at the state level, AND that the feds need to go and not be involved in 90~ish % of the shit they are involved in BECAUSE of that and the fact that they aren't supposed to have that kind of authority anyhow.

Are you confusing me with someone else???