[TheSlayer]

(03-05-2013 06:09 PM)ElBorrachoInfamoso Wrote:  

On a more fundamental level, UHC requires a violation of human rights in practice because it requires the government to either force providers and pharma companies to provide free services/products or it requires people to pay into a forced insurance scheme.

In Canada, the hospitals are owned by the government but operate their own budgets and the pharma companies are private. UHC doesn't mean that hospitals and pharma companies are forced to provide free services/products. They still get paid, but instead of you paying them it's the government.

By the way, prescriptions are not a part of UHC in Canada. This is where your employers' insurance kicks in if you have it or you pay for it yourself.

What do you think about the Dark Knight Rises shooting survivors having to pay thousands in medical bills because they did not have insurance? At least with UHC if some dumbass decides to shoot you and you are lucky to survive, you won't be going broke because you can't pay your hospital bill.

[Apollo]

So anyone who opposes nationalized health care is necessarily an advocate of the current clusterfuck that is the U.S. healthcare system? (that, in and of itself, is mired in federal regulations)

Come on...

[ElBorrachoInfamoso]

(03-05-2013 06:04 PM)BoiBoi Wrote:  

Yes, the world's best hospitals might just be the American ones, but that doesnt mean that the entire system is the best, as well. I'm German and neither do I get the whole fuss about it. Sure, UHC is not without flaws, but the complete commercialization of a nation's healthcare system is just bizarre. Just like water, transport and education, HC should be a mostly public good.

HC doesn't satisfy the criteria for a public good. A few aspects of HC, such as vaccinations and contraceptives qualify as public goods but most HC does not.

[EisenBarde]

Health costs are so high in the U.S BECAUSE of government intervention in the market. Healthcare is likely the most regulated industry in the country, and the lobbyists would love nothing more than more power in the hands of Big Pharma.

The real problem is the insurance stuff in the U.S, everybody owes everybody and all those "billions" in debt are mostly just attempts to graft anything out of anybody.

Nobody in this country is denied ER services because of inability to pay.

[TheSlayer]

(03-05-2013 06:21 PM)EisenBarde Wrote:  

Nobody in this country is denied ER services because of inability to pay.

I heard that too. From my understanding the way it works in the US is that if you call 911 for a medical emergency you still get the care even if you don't have insurance but after you are treated you are presented with the bill (which is usually thousands of dollars). Am I right or wrong?

[liberman]

I agree with Teedub on this issue. Im a New Zealander and we too have free universal healthcare as does every first world country except the US. I am completely baffled by the opposition to it of course i am not american and the US is not my country but why would you tolerate spending the most out of any country on health care yet not have it free for every citizen?.
   
Universal healthcare does not mean that you must go to a public hospital, if you have the money you can choose to go private but the point is you have the option of free healthcare.

[HeyPete]

(03-05-2013 06:01 PM)Teedub Wrote:  

(03-05-2013 05:59 PM)HeyPete Wrote:  

Teedub, Quick question.

Say I'm visiting the UK for a week and I step off a curb and break my ankle. Can a US citizen get free care at a UK hospital in that instance?

Yes.

Edit- The amount you paid in airport taxes, food taxes, booze etc...Paid for a quick trip to have your ankle to have a check up

That is amazing. Now, that's a wonderful working system.

[Teedub]

The way I see it, is, the U.S is dominated by the "fuck yeah" Hank character from Breaking Bad, and the rest are treated as filth by the aforementioned. It is truly an American problem, probably due to the ridiculous 'Hispanic' thing myself and speakeasy have discussed. Who knows? I have no reason to argue, it's just a discussion.

[Ensam]

(03-05-2013 06:21 PM)EisenBarde Wrote:  

Nobody in this country is denied ER services because of inability to pay.

^^This. We have universal health care in the US; it's just done in the most retarded way possible. If you have no money you can always go to the county clinic. It sucks, you'll spend all day doing it, and you'll probably catch something worse than what you have while you're in the waiting room.

[Lemmo]

(03-05-2013 04:57 PM)Teedub Wrote:  

I have posted this question under another thread, I just thought it deserves a thread as I am truly baffled as to the vitriolic opposition of it from many Americans.

What is so bad about it, considering you are the only 1st world nation without it.

I was watching Breaking Bad, and it occurred to me that the idea that someone should go into hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt due to cancer is just fucking cruel, straight up.

Even when people have insurance, it seems it is often deemed unacceptable by the health establishment/insurance companies.

Well, I suppose the same reasons to oppose the nationalization of any industry - lower quality service, lower supply, overutilization, higher costs. I've lived in a few countries with national healthcare and, by the standards of what a middle class American would expect, the quality of care was atrocious. I've always ended up just paying out of pocket to go to a private clinic in such countries.

That said, I wouldn't oppose some sort of national "disaster" insurance for the Breaking Bad scenario. The problem is that the left in the US always wants to go for a nationalization model instead of a safety net model. This is why they generally oppose means testing for gov benefits - the desire to nationalize trumps the desire to create a benefits program targeting the poor.

And considering the US spends so much more than other countries on healthcare, any politician who proposes to reform healthcare in a way that doesn't involve massive cuts in spending isn't proposing a solution at all.

[BIGINJAPAN]

I think a lot of people in support of UHC do not the facts about it. I can't speak specifically about England but I am sure their system is similar to ours.

First of all we pay huge amounts in taxes to support it. You just don't see it because it is hidden in a lot of different areas.

The 2 major expenses are doctors and drugs. In Canada the amount our government pays for drugs will surpass the amount we pay doctors for the first time next year. That should tell you all you need to know about UHC. We also have massive doctor shortages because none of our doctors want to work in the system. we have to bring 100's of doctors in from African countries to work in clinics. Although I suspect obamacare will actually help us out as a lot of Canadian doctors will be coming back instead of working under that system.

I think the main reason for not wanting UHC is the government chooses what drugs you will have access to as well as what procedures are accepted in the country. I am not a fan of any prescription drug use but in Canada we only have access to half the drugs on the market because the federal government decides what drugs they want to buy. Same with technology and medical procedures. We never have the cutting edge in medical science because our federal government decides what is welcome into the country.

Another reason against it is just set foot into any long term care facility. The living conditions of seniors is atrocious. Do you know in Alberta they charge you extra if you want to have a shower in a long term care facility ? If you want to shower more than once a week expect to pay $25 for each additional shower.

[Partizan]

(03-05-2013 05:22 PM)j r Wrote:  

Nationalized health care is not a bad thing as long as you have the tax base willing to fund it and your population isn't full of people looking to game the system. I am suspicious as to whether the United States fits the bill.

The Military Industrial Complex in the US needs its trillions to wage wars and cause death and misery across the globe so screw the people.

[Jack Of All Trades]

Universal healthcare isn't a bad thing per se, but having the US adopt free healthcare could balloon the costs of other OECD countries budgets to unsustainable levels. People often criticize the big pharma, but they produce most of the innovations along with medical companies who create innovative technologies to heal sicknesses. Americans bear the brunt of paying the capital costs of innovation in medicine, resulting from in huge personal medical costs. Because the marginal cost of products from health technology is 0 other OECD countries can get much lower prices and have more sustainable healthcare budgets. Essentially US citizens are subsidizing europe's healthcare systems, this is especially true in the prescription drug industry with big pharma; since drugs are used as a substitute to treatments.

[cibo]

I'm for a UHC system of some sort (Singapore has an interesting one) but UHC isn't going to solve the problem of US health care. That is fucked up from all sorts of things beyond access.

What most Americans, including myself, expect is that a UHC done by the government will be done based on special interests and will be incredibly fucking inefficient. The US is not like the Scandinavians which have pretty efficient government services that can often compete with private ones. US government services are just not that productive relative to the private sector.

As for the UK system, it's OK. The concept works but I feel there's a lot of inefficiency in how it's run. I'm not sure if that's because it's government run or just because it's British. I'm sorry but you guys have a terrible culture of operations management both public and private.

[BIGINJAPAN]

Also the americans don't have free market healthcare either. If they did, I promise you it would be the greatest system ever seen.

The government interferes in their system just as much as any other government. That is why they have such high costs. HMO's, medicare and medicaid are not free market inventions.

[ElBorrachoInfamoso]

(03-05-2013 06:13 PM)Teedub Wrote:  

No other system bankrupts people. Come on man, you must see how the U.S system is harsh, it's all about profit and not about helping people?

I agree that the American system is harsh. I wish we had a free market system.

[tenderman100]

(03-05-2013 06:36 PM)Partizan Wrote:  

The Military Industrial Complex in the US needs its trillions to wage wars and cause death and misery across the globe so screw the people.

I see you have an Italian flag.

Don't forget -- the United States spent considerable amounts of its blood and treasure (a) liberating you from the hobnail boots of the Nazis and (b) protecting you from the next great totalitarian state, The Soviet Union.

So tell you what...you can talk shit about the United States when you, in Italy, achieve the equivalent.

I am not holding my breath.

[Lemmo]

(03-05-2013 06:19 PM)Apollo Wrote:  

So anyone who opposes nationalized health care is necessarily an advocate of the current clusterfuck that is the U.S. healthcare system? (that, in and of itself, is mired in federal regulations)

Come on...

Yeah, as usual the debate always comes down to 2 extremes - pure free market or communism, neither of which is desirable and neither of which describes any current system. That is the problem with US politics. Every debate comes down to a ideological wank fest rather than a pragmatic approach to solving problems. It is like when people phrase the abortion debate as you are either for an unlimited right to abortion during 9 months of pregnancy or you are for a complete ban.

[Lemmo]

(03-05-2013 06:36 PM)cibo Wrote:  

What most Americans, including myself, expect is that a UHC done by the government will be done based on special interests and will be incredibly fucking inefficient. The US is not like the Scandinavians which have pretty efficient government services that can often compete with private ones. US government services are just not that productive relative to the private sector.

Exactly. Obama, Reid, Pelosi, etc. aren't exactly technocrats and have shown no interest in efficiency. If one of them came forward and said "here is a detailed plan and here is how it is going to cut the % of GDP we spend on health care by 50%" than I think people would listen. Instead, I and many Americans assume it will be the usual government approach of finding a way to spend as much money as possible while not addressing the problem (see e.g. education).

[Partizan]

(03-05-2013 06:41 PM)tenderman100 Wrote:  

(03-05-2013 06:36 PM)Partizan Wrote:  

The Military Industrial Complex in the US needs its trillions to wage wars and cause death and misery across the globe so screw the people.

I see you have an Italian flag.

Don't forget -- the United States spent considerable amounts of its blood and treasure (a) liberating you from the hobnail boots of the Nazis and (b) protecting you from the next great totalitarian state, The Soviet Union.

So tell you what...you can talk shit about the United States when you, in Italy, achieve the equivalent.

I am not holding my breath.

Another dumb Yank. Its Irish actually and dont give me 'we saved you from the Nazis/Commies crap' because you didnt mate.

Maybe if you diverted half of what you squander on wars into health and education, millions would not be denied access to proper healthcare and education.
Jesus wept.

[NYJ]

(03-05-2013 06:49 PM)Partizan Wrote:  

(03-05-2013 06:41 PM)tenderman100 Wrote:  

(03-05-2013 06:36 PM)Partizan Wrote:  

The Military Industrial Complex in the US needs its trillions to wage wars and cause death and misery across the globe so screw the people.

I see you have an Italian flag.

Don't forget -- the United States spent considerable amounts of its blood and treasure (a) liberating you from the hobnail boots of the Nazis and (b) protecting you from the next great totalitarian state, The Soviet Union.

So tell you what...you can talk shit about the United States when you, in Italy, achieve the equivalent.

I am not holding my breath.

Its Irish actually and dont give me 'we saved you from the Nazis/Commies crap'.

Jesus wept.

Eh, I was about to post saying that wasn't an Italian flag nor were the Italians liberated from the Nazis. Godwin's law violation for sure.

I think the big factor into why we don't have UHC is our sheer population size. We're a country of 300 million plus when right next door Canada only has a pop of roughly 34.5 million.

[Partizan]

(03-05-2013 06:53 PM)NYJ Wrote:  

(03-05-2013 06:49 PM)Partizan Wrote:  

(03-05-2013 06:41 PM)tenderman100 Wrote:  

(03-05-2013 06:36 PM)Partizan Wrote:  

The Military Industrial Complex in the US needs its trillions to wage wars and cause death and misery across the globe so screw the people.

I see you have an Italian flag.

Don't forget -- the United States spent considerable amounts of its blood and treasure (a) liberating you from the hobnail boots of the Nazis and (b) protecting you from the next great totalitarian state, The Soviet Union.

So tell you what...you can talk shit about the United States when you, in Italy, achieve the equivalent.

I am not holding my breath.

Its Irish actually and dont give me 'we saved you from the Nazis/Commies crap'.

Jesus wept.

Eh, I was about to post saying that wasn't an Italian flag nor were the Italians liberated from the Nazis. Godwin's law violation for sure.

I think the big factor into why we don't have UHC is our sheer population size. We're a country of 300 million plus when right next door Canada only has a pop of roughly 34.5 million.

Comes back to my original point that the US state should be spending more on education because if it had been, tenderman would have been a bit more informed.

[Lemmo]

(03-05-2013 06:58 PM)Partizan Wrote:  

(03-05-2013 06:53 PM)NYJ Wrote:  

(03-05-2013 06:49 PM)Partizan Wrote:  

(03-05-2013 06:41 PM)tenderman100 Wrote:  

(03-05-2013 06:36 PM)Partizan Wrote:  

The Military Industrial Complex in the US needs its trillions to wage wars and cause death and misery across the globe so screw the people.

I see you have an Italian flag.

Don't forget -- the United States spent considerable amounts of its blood and treasure (a) liberating you from the hobnail boots of the Nazis and (b) protecting you from the next great totalitarian state, The Soviet Union.

So tell you what...you can talk shit about the United States when you, in Italy, achieve the equivalent.

I am not holding my breath.

Its Irish actually and dont give me 'we saved you from the Nazis/Commies crap'.

Jesus wept.

Eh, I was about to post saying that wasn't an Italian flag nor were the Italians liberated from the Nazis. Godwin's law violation for sure.

I think the big factor into why we don't have UHC is our sheer population size. We're a country of 300 million plus when right next door Canada only has a pop of roughly 34.5 million.

Comes back to my original point that the US state should be spending more on education because if it had been, tenderman would have been a bit more informed.

Yes, every problem is solved by spending more money. That's why the Camden, NJ school system is the envy of the world and outperforms the Koreans and Japanese! As the US already spends far more on education and health care than other countries (per capita), I guess the USA must be #1 based on your philosophy.

[scorpion]

It's a very complicated issue, but essentially it boils down to the fact that for better or worse Americans value freedom (or at least the appearance of it) over good health. It's just a cultural thing.

You also see this same attitude in regards to guns in America, as well as efforts to regulate and tax junk food. People would rather suffer the consequences that sometimes accompany freedom than have the government make decisions for them.

The glaring exception to this is the country's attitude toward terrorism. The population will go along with almost any measure designed to keep them safe from terrorism. Why? Because they're scared shitless from 9/11 and a decade of ongoing propaganda.

Want to get universal healthcare in America? Find some way to scare the shit out of the population and convince them that they're going to die if everyone doesn't have healthcare.

[NYJ]

(03-05-2013 06:58 PM)Partizan Wrote:  

(03-05-2013 06:53 PM)NYJ Wrote:  

(03-05-2013 06:49 PM)Partizan Wrote:  

(03-05-2013 06:41 PM)tenderman100 Wrote:  

(03-05-2013 06:36 PM)Partizan Wrote:  

The Military Industrial Complex in the US needs its trillions to wage wars and cause death and misery across the globe so screw the people.

I see you have an Italian flag.

Don't forget -- the United States spent considerable amounts of its blood and treasure (a) liberating you from the hobnail boots of the Nazis and (b) protecting you from the next great totalitarian state, The Soviet Union.

So tell you what...you can talk shit about the United States when you, in Italy, achieve the equivalent.

I am not holding my breath.

Its Irish actually and dont give me 'we saved you from the Nazis/Commies crap'.

Jesus wept.

Eh, I was about to post saying that wasn't an Italian flag nor were the Italians liberated from the Nazis. Godwin's law violation for sure.

I think the big factor into why we don't have UHC is our sheer population size. We're a country of 300 million plus when right next door Canada only has a pop of roughly 34.5 million.

Comes back to my original point that the US state should be spending more on education because if it had been, tenderman would have been a bit more informed.

Sad part is we are spending more on education and we still can't get it right.