Obamas stake to get socialistic NHS system in the US!

[neorichieb1971]

This has been in the news a lot today over here in the UK. Namely because the USA opposition seems its a great idea to attack the way the British treat our sick and needy through the National Health System.

I for one believe that a country is healthier if it does not have to deal with the ins and outs of insurance when it comes to health. Thats before you even get sick or need treatment.

Can I just give a visualization of why the NHS is so fucking cool?

Imagine Obama goes up on stage and has this woman with him that needs $180,000 worth of treatment. Without it she would die in 60 days. She can't afford it. Obama explains that with the new social system she will be saved. He then asks those who do not want a socialistic system to raise their hands if they want her to die! Would you raise your hand? Would you raise your hand if it was your sister? Or your mother?

Another thing that gets me so mad about Americas way of thinking. Its ok so save a sick car industry but not ok to save a sick person?


And whats that flag all about? When I lived there it was all about being UNITED after 911!!!!!! How can you be united if your willing to let your weak and sick die just because they are not as fortunate as you?

I believe the USA is number 35-37 in the health stakes worldwide. Britain is in the top 10. The stats speak for themselves.


All this Obama hate is really getting on my tits. Maybe Americas rich don't want to be treated the same as everyone else. Maybe they should just cough up even more money for private treatment. I don't know.. What a weird world we live in.


Sorry, had to rant... Its not everyday America tramples on our reputation. I think the British should make a commercial for those Americans opposed to this idea. Rule Brittania.

[antron]

The sick lady can walk into an emergency room and get the best care in the world (if it's not too late). She will owe the hospital a lot of money and will work out a payment plan that will last her entire life. That's how it works now, and all the morons over here like it that way for some reason. It would have been beter if she had been paying into a pool of money her whole life in case she gets sick. People here want to gamble, but everyone else still gets stuck with the bill when they loose anyway. And we have no preventive care because people won't pay out of pocket for checkups.

Hey, wingnuts, get in here so we can rip you a new one.

[neorichieb1971]

Would you want to be saved if you owed $180,000 afterwards? Would your family stick by you knowing that you needed $180,000 to become a normal person again.

I'd get the treatment and then just for measure, go hang myself.

[jpj]

before anyone jumps the gun, richie has lived in the states for many years, and can see the pros and cons of both systems.

i'm too lazy to search, but i remember you arguing about this with that kid who got banned some time back (who didn't want a social health care system), and as always ... it comes back to the almighty dollar

i haven't needed to go the hospital for about 10 years, but like yourself ( ), even if i'm not personally using that service, i'm happy that there are needy and sick people out there that are getting the treatment they need.

post 3993..!?

[antron]

Would you want to be saved if you owed $180,000 afterwards? Would your family stick by you knowing that you needed $180,000 to become a normal person again.

I'd get the treatment and then just for measure, go hang myself.

you might never own a house, that's about it. a friend of mine is in this situation.

My problem is different. I cannot purchase insurance for my family becuse of pre-existing medical conditions. They don't even let us play unless I work for an employer that offers "group" insurance. Why? I have no idea. I just pray that I never loose my job.

[undamned]

i haven't needed to go the hospital for about 10 years

Haha, medical insurance co's love people like us
-ud

[neorichieb1971]

JPJ,

Yes I lived in the USA for 6 years. 2 years of that was fine, as I worked for Bristol Myers Squibb and had the best treatment/insurance available. But after that, it was almost impossible to get out of contracting. Contract exploitation is a kind of "20 year probational" period where the company never takes you on full time. Choosing instead to opt to pay you slightly more for the privelege of NOT paying your health insurance.


My main beef today is slightly different. I'm just upset that on radio 1 they had some commercials from the States saying our health care system is inferior or unjustified.

Then one English woman said "If we ran an American system in the UK, i'd be dead now, or at least living a life of hell".

[nikkos010]

I'd rather not see a flame-war start here over this. I can only urge people to study the bill themselves.

I have not read the whole bill myself. Only excerpts. And I'll note that I do not currently have health insurance, so I do have some stake in the matter. However there are a number of things that concern me, specifically care for illegal immigrants, restrictions on creation of _new_ health insurance policies by insurance companies (which means that if this bill is in effect when I decide to spend money on insurance, I cannot buy from the insurance company, as that would be a new policy) access to my bank accounts by the government, and adding taxes to employers who keep private health insurance plans. These things _are_ in the bill.

What's not in the bill are some very interesting ideas that could reduce health-care costs. Some of these ideas include allowing insurance companies to sell across state lines. This is important because an insurance company could mitigate risk over the entire country rather than in one particular state. This also creates competition where there is very little (for example, I live in Minnesota, but a North Dakota policy with the same deductible is cheaper, but I can't buy it)

Another thing that is not on the table, but requires examination is "Tort" reform. IE the reduction of malpractice suits. Currently in the US are sued for malpractice. Many of these suits have merit, however because how our legal system works, many suits that don't have merit are still settled because it's cheaper than the costs of fighting a suit to trial. By reducing the situations in which a patient is allowed to sue, or by allowing a judge or a panel of judges to decide on a case's merit early in proceeding, quite alot of money could be saved.

There is also the issue of illegal immigration. It's another debate, but I think that money is being spent there that shouldn't be.

As for the comparisons and fear-mongering about the NHS. The concern is that the government will decide what care I should get and not a doctor. This does have some basis in fact http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healt ... tions.html

That does not mean the NHS is bad. But there are more issues going on besides simply health-care. If you see Obama's election as a check on the behaviours and ideals of the Republican party. Please understand that the people are enforcing a check on the Ideals of the Democratic party. The people have had a very low opinion of both parties in Congress for a very long time now. There have been instances before of massive public opinion against the plans of congress (gun control in the 90s, Immigration reform last year) this is really no different.

[neorichieb1971]

A flame war won't start on my behalf. As long as your argument has merit i'm willing to take it.

It sounds to me like America is in a state where there is a growing number of people thinking against the grain, against the rulebook (you call it your constitutional rights). Yet those few who remain in power, or those few who believe in the constitution and its current day significance try to keep it the way it always has been.

Ultimately, these changes won't change the way Americans live their daily lives. It will just move evil from one place into another. Someone will always moan. Its just the way it is.

[nikkos010]

A flame war won't start on my behalf. As long as your argument has merit i'm willing to take it.

It sounds to me like America is in a state where there is a growing number of people thinking against the grain, against the rulebook (you call it your constitutional rights). Yet those few who remain in power, or those few who believe in the constitution and its current day significance try to keep it the way it always has been.

Ultimately, these changes won't change the way Americans live their daily lives. It will just move evil from one place into another. Someone will always moan. Its just the way it is.

I'm not sure you worded that the way you meant to. The people are trying to maintain the rulebook, it's Congress that they believe is trying to go around it and/or distort it.

But "evil" was always incorporated into the Constitution. It's why we have 3 branches of Government and countless checks and balances.

To use an example, I'd liken this to the uproar about MP expenses currently going on in your country. The people are rightly pissed. This is similar, as politicians (many/most who've never read the proposed law in the first place) tried to force this bill through before the public had a chance to speak. This type of behavior was unacceptable during the Bush years (Patriot Act) and has occurred under the new (and supposedly different) administration once already (stimulus bill) and now again it was attempted and the people are rightly pissed.

Don't get me wrong. I am for health-care reform, and so are most Americans. However being for health-care reform does not equate to supporting the current proposal. You must remember that a US hospital cannot turn away an emergency patient. If I, even without health insurance, am injured in a car accident, they will do everything they can to save me. Will I have a bill to pay? Yep. And since I've chosen not to have insurance, it'll be a nasty bill. But just like credit cards I'll likely be able to settle into payments and even negotiate a substantial amount off the total cost.

There are 3 main things that make America's health-care so expense.
1. Administration Costs - estimated to be as high as 35% of the total costs. Medicare, varying insurance plans, malpractice, and billing/collections.
2. Non-Pay and abuse. There are a huge amount of people who do not have insurance, get treatment, and do not pay. There are also a number of documented cases where some people will use emergency-room services to treat colds/flu/minor cuts and bruises. There are also a number of people who are nuisance patients who visit medical facilities on a daily basis because of mental issues.
3. Medical research. Most medical research and drug testing has been done in the US. This has resulted in the US paying higher costs for treatment and medicine. While other countries have either forced the drug companies to reduce prices through law or negotiation, this has not happened in the US.

So.. what can fix this? Well, beyond some of the things I mentioned in my previous post, I would like to see something done about medical research and drug costs. I don't believe the US should pay so much more while the rest of the world pays less.

[Acid King]

What's not in the bill are some very interesting ideas that could reduce health-care costs.

This is my problem with this healthcare reform nonsense. It doesn't seem like any of the proposals going forward actually address why insurance and healthcare services are as expensive as they are. Insurance shouldn't cover everything, it should only be for accidents and catastrophic health problems. Going to a doctor should not cost $130. MRI's should not cost $3,000. Creating a publicy funded insurance option doesn't address those core costs. All that does is suck government further into the black hole of rising costs. The goal should be to bring costs down to the point where someone who doesn't have insurance can afford to pay a doctor out of pocket for a consultation when they get sick and potentially buy cheap, higher deductible insurance for when something goes horribly wrong. Without doing that, all that's going to happen is costs shifting from one entity to the other and the cost continues to climb.

[antron]

@nikkos
are you saying the bill forces everyone to give the government access there bank accounts? if so do you have have a reference?

also, you have claimed that you are the #2 reason for high costs.

[ZacharyB]

The goal should be to bring costs down

As far as I understand it, the reason costs are high is because the technology is expensive, doctors have to pay for Med school, laboratory testing (expensive technology again), equipment... health is just expensive. Doctors and hospitals have to pass the cost of operation down to the customer, like any other business, otherwise they go out of business.

I don't know what to suggest to solve the problem. Should doctors and hospitals never profit? I remember reading a NY Times science section essay where a doctor described how health has become much more business-like than what doctors expect while in medical school.

It makes me wonder... seeing a black Mercedes with a doctor's license plate. How much of that car does he or she really own? How much of a hit will doctors be willing to take?

[neorichieb1971]

You could get rid of shareholders for a start.

[Ex-Cyber]

To me, the most egregious thing about the opposition is that there is nothing close to a serious proposal for an NHS-style system, yet we have people who act like it's on the verge of being implemented. In the US, about the limit of mainstream thought is a Canadian-style single-payer system (i.e. doctors still have private practices, but everyone has tax-funded insurance by default), and that has no chance of passing right now. Democrats are struggling just to have a "public option" in the bill, where you can buy insurance from a government agency if you want. Even then, the last proposal I heard involved income restrictions so that only poorer people would be allowed to buy into the government insurance plan.

My greatest fear is that we will get "reform" and nothing will really change, i.e. it won't do anything to stop insurance company abuses. The Democrats get to go home happy because they passed a bill, the Republicans get to go home happy because they defended America from OMGSOCIALISM, the insurance companies go home happy because nobody really challenged their control of the industry, and people with no or shitty insurance (have any of you ever shopped for individual policies? It's depressing, even if you could be guaranteed that you wouldn't have to fight the insurance company to actually get claims paid, and that they wouldn't try to retroactively cancel your policy the minute you're diagnosed with an expensive chronic illness) get to go on gambling their entire financial future.

[TriggerHeartExelica]

Oh so you guys are ok with crappy coverage for all?
Do you even begin to fathom how extremely hard it would be to implement this? Sure every other developed nation has this but their populations pales in comparison to the US of A.
I cannot get on board with a plan that allows medical care funded by my taxes for people who are illegally here. I cannot get on board with a plan that will say grandma's going to bite it because some bureaucrat decides shes too old (google jane sturm). I cannot get on board with a plan that while providing coverage for all, provides less then adequate at best coverage. Its put the doctor's in charge of your medical needs. I for one like the fact that if I do not agree with my primary doctor's course of treatment I am able to seek a second opinion. Within this plan there is no allowance for that.

[nikkos010]

@nikkos
are you saying the bill forces everyone to give the government access there bank accounts? if so do you have have a reference?

also, you have claimed that you are the #2 reason for high costs.

SEC. 163. under administrative simplification.

And regarding the second part, yes and no. No, in the sense that I don't consider myself getting into a car accident and needing critical care abuse of the system. And while I see your point about me possibly negotiating costs down, if that is part of the problem, then Medicaid, (which is Government-funded healthcare for pensioners for those across the pond) which forces doctors to take payments for as low as 20% of cost, is a problem as well, isn't it?

But yes, you do make a point. #2 was directed towards illegal immigrants primarily. They do not work legally and therefore do not get employer-sponsored plans, and because of their status they do not get private plans. If you take them out of the equation, then the number of people in America without health insurance drops to under 10% of the population, which seems a much more reasonable group of people to offer a plan too, IF they chose.

There were a couple comments posted while I wrote this, so I'll address them quickly too.

The public option sounds great, but only if it's in tandem with private insurance. On page 16 there is this part:

"Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day" of the year the legislation becomes law.

Which again means that if you don't have private insurance on or before the action date of the bill, you have no choice but to take the public option. This is how the bill becomes the base for a single-payer system.

[szycag]

I'm gonna chill in ON-TOPIC for a bit. Later dudes

[neorichieb1971]

I hear a lot about plans. It sounds to me like there is some kind political brick wall here.

If the dems and republicans were given 20 billion $ each to pass this through, it would be done before midnight.

As for the people themselves like yourself who claim your freedoms are jeaprodised by a certain "bill". Well, people like me just go on about my daily life. I have never felt (NEVER EVER) that I won't be treated exactly how I want to be.

In the UK you can choose your doctor. It would be the same doctor that treats privately. You want medicine its prescribed, probably costs about $12 on average no matter what it is. Why do you care if illegal immigrants are getting covered by your cash? Shouldn't you just be worried that someone is covered and getting better? Wouldn't you be happier knowing that your neighbors down the street have the exact same treatment as you. Isn't "equality" a big part of being "united"? If United to you means "I'm the king of the castle and your just a low down pimp" then of course nothing is united.

The problem with democracy is that it makes everyone thats apart of it cry. Why can't we just be PEOPLE? If someone got run down in the street you would help them wouldn't you? Why does the behaviour have to change just because of a financial reason?

[Domino]

Why do you care if illegal immigrants are getting covered by your cash?

Because they are not US citizens and shouldn't be in the US in the first place?

[nikkos010]

I hear a lot about plans. It sounds to me like there is some kind political brick wall here.

If the dems and republicans were given 20 billion $ each to pass this through, it would be done before midnight.

Unfortunately true, and part of the current problem.

In the UK you can choose your doctor. It would be the same doctor that treats privately. You want medicine its prescribed, probably costs about $12 on average no matter what it is. Why do you care if illegal immigrants are getting covered by your cash? Shouldn't you just be worried that someone is covered and getting better? Wouldn't you be happier knowing that your neighbors down the street have the exact same treatment as you. Isn't "equality" a big part of being "united"? If United to you means "I'm the king of the castle and your just a low down pimp" then of course nothing is united.

The problem with democracy is that it makes everyone thats apart of it cry. Why can't we just be PEOPLE? If someone got run down in the street you would help them wouldn't you? Why does the behaviour have to change just because of a financial reason?

You just touched on something very important. Freedom in America has nothing to do with equality. We are born equal and have the same right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That does not mean I automatically get half of Bill Gate's fortune, because we should be equal. Instead I'm free to work hard and make my own pile of cash. I don't deserve to get a scholarship, just because someone else got one. I'm free to work hard in school and earn my own. While many people think it's unfair, a Free Society has a certain amount of inherent Darwinism. There are very few people in this country in which circumstances and bad luck are 100% to blame for their poverty or failure. There are also very few people in this country in which circumstances and good luck are 100% the result of their success. Dedication, hard work, and the levels of effort are responsible for the rest, good or bad.

[TriggerHeartExelica]

Last time I looked America is a capitalistic society not socialist.
And FTR I am neither Dem nor Rep so...

[antron]

Oh so you guys are ok with crappy coverage for all?
Do you even begin to fathom how extremely hard it would be to implement this? Sure every other developed nation has this but their populations pales in comparison to the US of A.
I cannot get on board with a plan that allows medical care funded by my taxes for people who are illegally here. I cannot get on board with a plan that will say grandma's going to bite it because some bureaucrat decides shes too old (google jane sturm). I cannot get on board with a plan that while providing coverage for all, provides less then adequate at best coverage. Its put the doctor's in charge of your medical needs. I for one like the fact that if I do not agree with my primary doctor's course of treatment I am able to seek a second opinion. Within this plan there is no allowance for that.

size has nothing to do with it b/c it's not a single payer system. none of the rest is true. you already pay for immigrant's care.

[antron]

Last time I looked America is a capitalistic society not socialist.
And FTR I am neither Dem nor Rep so...

libraries. fire, police departments. social security. military drafts. highways. etc...

[antron]

And regarding the second part, yes and no. No, in the sense that I don't consider myself getting into a car accident and needing critical care abuse of the system.

why not? with out insurance should I just trust you'll pay up? if so I'm sorry, I don't.

[TriggerHeartExelica]

Oh so you guys are ok with crappy coverage for all?
Do you even begin to fathom how extremely hard it would be to implement this? Sure every other developed nation has this but their populations pales in comparison to the US of A.
I cannot get on board with a plan that allows medical care funded by my taxes for people who are illegally here. I cannot get on board with a plan that will say grandma's going to bite it because some bureaucrat decides shes too old (google jane sturm). I cannot get on board with a plan that while providing coverage for all, provides less then adequate at best coverage. Its put the doctor's in charge of your medical needs. I for one like the fact that if I do not agree with my primary doctor's course of treatment I am able to seek a second opinion. Within this plan there is no allowance for that.

size has nothing to do with it b/c it's not a single payer system. none of the rest is true. you already pay for immigrant's care.

This isn't the first time I've been involved in a thread regarding Obamacare ya know. I did my research much like everyone else does and have not found a single website that is nonpartisan that disputes my research.
And I know we pay for immigrants health care which needs to stop. They want to come here and live the American "dream", they should have to suffer as the rest of us do with taxes and whatnot.

[TriggerHeartExelica]

I also should say that even though they claim its not single payer, it is looking to be the way its heading what with the taxes on employer sponsored insurance. To me it appears to essentially phase out the private sector of the industry by bullying them.
And I must say this it is not just the insurance companies that hold the blame in all of this. Try fighting for your rights as a patient only to have your doctor tell you there is nothing wrong although he can't even take 5 minutes to examine you.

[neorichieb1971]

Last time I looked America is a capitalistic society not socialist.
And FTR I am neither Dem nor Rep so...

libraries. fire, police departments. social security. military drafts. highways. etc...

Postal Service... hehe.



Well, it seems one of the biggest issues is illegal immigrants. This is Americas own catch 22 problem, since they use the cheap labor it delivers. Knowing full well what your paying these people doesn't get them health cover in the first place.

I don't know exactly if anyone on here is a hypocrit by actually using such services, but even if your not and you still have the mindset of it being a consideration, your still a hypocrit. What we have here is a maze of political rights and wrongs. Your society should not tollerate exploitism as much as it does. Its a self fueled problem.

For the life of me, I can't fathom why your political system is so complicated? Lets say for arguments sake a swine flu outbreak happened in NYC and the only reason it happened is because immunisations were not made because it was deemed "Too expensive". Its a self fueled problem. The guys in the street paying a hefty insurance premium are just as likely to get hit with it. Basically, your system is dividing the line between those who beat the system to stay alive, and those that fell beneath graduation level and can wither and suffer, if not die.

I understand that equality isn't measured for everything. But the right to live out of harms way is mindset people should have even if they don't agree with the methods that could make it work.

[nikkos010]

And regarding the second part, yes and no. No, in the sense that I don't consider myself getting into a car accident and needing critical care abuse of the system.

why not? with out insurance should I just trust you'll pay up? if so I'm sorry, I don't.

Lol, funny that you refuse to trust me, but you'll trust the government which has already given away the opportunity to negotiate drug costs for $80mil in advertising support for health care. Here's a hint, your odds are better with me.

Not sure where you're going with the police and fire engine argument. We don't have a draft (though the Dems keep suggesting we reinstate it) and I don't think building highways are sign of socialism. You trolling?

[Domino]

Not sure where you're going with the police and fire engine argument. We don't have a draft (though the Dems keep suggesting we reinstate it) and I don't think building highways are sign of socialism. You trolling?

Because government runs those programs (and how well they run it is a different story).

In other news the Post Office should had deliver me those PCBs from Japan today, now I have to wait another day.