Universal Health Care Reform in the United States

having health innsurance is of cource a very smart choice, but people shouldn't be forced to have

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steve_spackman

So if no one has read the bill, then where are they getting all this nonsense from??

As for killing off the old.

My grandmother is in her 80s. She was diagnosed with lung cancer last year. She saw her doctor..then was sent to a specialist..(didnt have to wait by the way) and got all her treatment and medication all at no cost to her....

---

Similar situation with my mother. She had immediate and regular access to a team of doctors and oncologists, inlcuding medication, treatment, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steve_spackman

So if no one has read the bill, then where are they getting all this nonsense from??

As for killing off the old.

My grandmother is in her 80s. She was diagnosed with lung cancer last year. She saw her doctor..then was sent to a specialist..(didnt have to wait by the way) and got all her treatment and medication all at no cost to her....

So much for the NHS killing off the elderly...

---

Free government-provided health care for all can work, at least in small countries. We here in Finland have it and we have, for example, one of the lowest infant mortality rates in the world. I couldn't imagine people here accepting a situation where somebody would not get treated because he/she didn't have an insurance. But the US is so huge, can they afford free health care for everybody?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DexDexter

Free government-provided health care for all can work, at least in small countries. We here in Finland have it and we have, for example, one of the lowest infant mortality rates in the world. I couldn't imagine people here accepting a situation where somebody would not get treated because he/she didn't have an insurance. But the US is so huge, can they afford free health care for everybody?

---

The question is rather "can we afford not to?"

The cost of insuring just the choicest, those generally young who need generally less, and the elderly and premature babies is already twice as expensive as most of the civilized world.

The opponents repeat their cliches "I don't trust the gubbymint.....' but that implies they have faith that the for-profit corporations who hire low wage minions in some warehouse reviewing and approving or disapproving procedures, or worse, a computer program, will do a better job.

It is folly here.

Via motorsport, I have had a chance to be treated for identical injuries in Sweden, France, UK, California and Washington State.
I have just had----after 12 years of fighting---2 spine operations related to the stresses from racing from 40-30 years ago.
12 years of dead ends, can't do it, "take it easy" , "try asprin" "try physical therapy.
None of that helps crushed discs and smashed nerves.
12 years of "the Best health care in the World" according to the armchair/keyboard experts.

What was the cost of lost production for 12 years?
Near disability for 12 years?

The difference between systems is one thing, the randomness of treatment is another.

ALL the systems depend on somebody listening.

When was the last time a Corporation listened to a complaint and did something that costs them money?

It's incredible to think that judged by how much is spent by the federal government each year doesn't give everybody in the USA universal health care.

Well said janvanverpa couldnt of said it better myself

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8198084.stm

http://twitter.com/#search?q=nhs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DexDexter

But the US is so huge, can they afford free health care for everybody?

---

Dont see why the countrys size should matter, there is much bigger population who would pay it aswell.

I know it's a simplistic argument but I can't help but think that if the U.S. would divert only 1% of their annual ~$1 trillion in military spending to national healthcare, that would provide $10B :mark:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

You're obviously baiting the question. Few have had the opportunity to read the entire bill (1200 plus pages, when was the last time you read 'War and Peace' and then had to give a detailed report on the contents?). Though as more time goes by, more will have that opportunity and more truth will be available for people to consider. This bill was attempted to be pushed through the Congress before the summer break when few if any of the legislators had any opportunity to read it --- much less time to consider and debate the ramifications of each part of that 1200 pages. That is NOT good governance no matter what system you're working under.

---

Maybe not, but neither is making spectacularly ignorant comments about the nature of state healthcare in those countries that have it, and I feel that more vitriol deserves to be directed at them. Some of the remarks I have read and heard are simply unbelievable in their crass stupidity.