Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by KenH, Jan 27, 2006.
It pains every ounce of my right wing heart to say it, but we are going to have universal health care, and we will have it soon.
I hate it, I can't see that it will be good for most folks, but it is coming, and I can't see how we will get around it.
The link between health care and employment must be severed, Major B. I would prefer it to be through HSAs, but it may well be through national health care and a single payer plan.
As a counselor in active bi-vocational ministry, and as a middle school teacher, I see more and more every year the growing disparity between those who have good health insurance and those who have bad insurance or none. Working people are forced into making stupid decisions based on health insurance alone. Individuals find it nearly impossible to cope--the irony is that my doctor HAS to give me a discount, because the Tricare system imposes that on him, but an individual without health insurance usually has to pay full price for everything.
Mercy: should we not try to put our selves in the shoes of the have nots...that imho is the biblical definition of mercy ..I have blue cross
blue shield really comprehensive but still I would want everyone to have what I have so as not to go without or be broken and file for bankruptcy...I say "Get r done" as long as mercy is part of the equation I am for it.
I think the numbers are rising for those who do
not have an ounce of health insurance in the country and that is a disgrace.A catastrophic
health crisis and you are filing in a very draconian bankruptcy system..thanks to the bush culture and its fake compassion.
Oh some might say the church will step in ...well
what has prevented them from stepping in ..in a
major way ..and yes I know there are some good things going on with some churches but as a major
movement it is not there to provide health care for the have nots.
So is that a major failure??? time will tell.
First, the people need to decide the extent of govt's obligation to keep people alive. 90% of Medicare funds are spent on the last year of people's lives. Is the govt obligated to keep people alive as long as it is technically possible?
Second, until WW2 there was no medical "insurance." People paid cash. The origional medical "insurance was "major medical" which paid a set amount for hospital overnights and emergancies. The present "medical insurance" is not insurance becauase it doesn't conform to any insurance principles. It is a pre paid medical service. Would the cost of eating decrease if we had "food insurance?"
Third, preexisting conditions should not be covered by private "insurance."
National health care will not mean the end of quality medical care... that will always be available to the rich who can pay for it.
National health care will mean that quality heathcare will be less available to many working-class families.
Already here in Philadelphia there are ads for special privilege hospital units where food is better, nurse/patient ratio is lower, physician care is better, and most importantly, TV's, phones, furniture etc. are upgraded ...for those who can pay.
Of course these ads are fueled by the expansion in services of suburban hospials that now out-perform the big urban University hospitals of years past.
The big-city hospitals are left serving the poor urban community; they have lost their paying customers and are trying to lure them back.
Universal health care will mean a generally limited availability of services and eventually may mean that at some point a decision will be made by the government as to when service ends.
This reminds me of the joke about lost keys.
"Why is it that when I loose my keys I always find them in the last place that I look?"
Over 30 years of non-stop efforts have been spent on installing universal health care as an integral part of a socialist country in a socialist world.
When I first entered the job world, health insurance was cheap and covered everything, but huge steps have been made in incredibly tiny segments to get us here, to the point that even my wife wants it.
Seventy years ago, when almost no one had health insurance, a heart problem meant, "there is nothing we can do, sit in your chair until you die." Heart bypass operations are relatively recent as well. Seventy years ago, virtually all cancer was a death sentence.
Most serious child illnesses resulted in death.
Pneumonia was a death sentence.
We had special hospitals for TB patients.
The high cost of "miracle" cures, the high cost of star wars medical equipment, and the burgeoning crop of lawsuits over medical malpractice all served to make costs higher. I have several very large kidney stones. Even 20 years ago, the only therapy would have been a dangerous operation that would sideline me for a month. In 10 days, I will step into a very expensive apparatus which will pulverize the kidney stones, and I will miss only two days at work. My insurance will pay for almost all of it--I could not pay for any of it.
We cannot put the genie back in the bottle. I know very few people who can afford medical care on their own.
Half of me says "take the profit out of it"; the other half says that would lead to no more advances.
I don't want the government to nationalize the system, but I don't see any viable alternatives, without depriving somebody of medical care. When medical care is rising faster than income, it's only a matter of time.
I confess, I don't have an answer on this one. All I know is that the current system is breaking me...
I saw a list a while back about the top money-makers in health care.
1. malpractice lawyers
3. health insurance executives
4. hospital administrators
5. plastic surgeons (no healthcare crisis there)
Nobody's fighting to get into a profession that after a decade of education requires long hours of work, weekends, and nights.
In a sense we already have it. The poor get taken care of because they cannot pay and Medicare takes care of them. The rich can afford good health care. It is the working person in the middle who needs health insurance.
When I quit pastoring my health insurance cost went to less than 1/2 of what it was when I was pastoring.
Several years ago when I lived in Ft. Worth I needed surgery and the best hospital in the area was a county hospital. The private hospitals did not compare.
Unfortunately, the breaking of peoples banks was part of a calculated plan to insure that socialism would succeed, and who were the major players? The lawyers demanded exhaustive testing for every eventuality of a given disease, under threat of a lawsuit. Drs. and hospital's malpractice insurance is out of this world.
Lawyers have the natural ability to be able to tap the resources of every segment of society, and they do so with gusto.