I’m not sure if “contempt” is the right word, but that’s the source of my opposition. If America did not have a large underclass, I wouldn’t have a serious objection to socialized medicine here.
I imagine that other people would object for other reasons.
It’s my justification. Probably other people would see things differently.
I’m not sure what your point is. As I noted above, we basically have a 2-tiered system in the United States.
And yes, I admit that I do not want to live near; share hospitals with; or send my children to school with poor people. Just like most educated people who spend extra money so that they can live in a “nice neighborhood” with “good schools,” which are basically code phrases for neighborhoods and schools which do not have a lot of people from the underclass.
If you feel differently, you are free to save money by living in a lousy neighborhood and sending your children to school there.
OK, I didn’t realize that you meant that somehow the young people would be able to avoid paying whatever tax is going to subsidize this plan.
I have no problem with (properly trained) midwives, but most -pathics are pure placebos. I am honestly not against placebos for short term pain. Some countries still have pharmacies stocked with varies colors and sizes of sugar pill. The only issue there is that to work the patient can’t know what he/she is getting, but most -pathic is overpriced water or, if it actually has active ingredients, poorly regulated and controlled drugs of unknown potency.
This brings up a good point. Right now, we are paying more than we need to for the uninsured. Lack of insurance means that they wait until an emergency and then go to the emergency room for treatment. That costs more than early intervention for worse results. And who pays for it? It is added to all our insurance premiums.
Jonathan
On preview:
Curlcoat, the whole age/wellness thing is a reason that to work, a single payer system cannot have an opt out feature, of if it does, you need to prevent people for opting back in just in time to receive benefits.
Not a tax per se. A lot of the proposals include the continued paying of health insurance premiums, perhaps capped at a certain percentage of salary like in Europe. Since it isn’t a tax, people can opt out unless there are rules to the contrary I think some plans (maybe Mass.?) require employers to offer health insurance benefits or else pay into a general fund to support insurance for those not covered by employers.
Only 10% couldn’t afford a cardiologist? I’d also be curious as to what the definition of “couldn’t afford” is - couldn’t pay cash up front? Had too much debt from Christmas overspending? Didn’t feel like putting off a vacation? Had six kids?
You think? And what about the other 40% - tough noogies?
This isn’t true - none of my doctors have a separate person in their office that just does insurance. Plus, even if we did have a socialized plan, how would billing be different?
Why do you think this?
It depends on your definition of preventative care.
They don’t now, once they meet their federal quota, which many seem to do by Jan or Feb. Unless that has changed too - I haven’t need to go to an ER for many years.
Under this system, we would all get the same “plan” too, right? So I would end up paying premiums for even more things that I will never use in order to make sure the government can finance these things. Unless they have multiple levels of premiums, which the private insurance companies don’t have, I am going to be stuck paying for extremely expensive things like infertility treatments.
Also, socialized medicine in other countries seems to make a point at blocking access to treatment unless it is really necessary, or the government doesn’t believe in it. Such as sterilization or any surgery that might render a woman sterile. I am past that point, age wise, but I sure don’t want to be paying taxes into a system that would essentially force women to have kids.
Sort of. I’d say the rich get more use out of our highway system than the poor do.
Do they? Do they pay the same percentage of taxes that the middle class folks do? Taxes are killing us here - my husband makes almost six figures, our only real debt is our mortgage and we cannot live on that due to the income tax, sales tax, gas tax, whathaveyou tax. And now you want us to pay more to subsidize socialized medicine?
I don’t think you can compare Medicaid to the highway system or the post office. (Or maybe you can, since the highway system isn’t exactly in great shape.) Look at not only Medicaid but also Medicare, Champus and the state run programs like MediCal. Also, if the plan you want includes the ability to opt out, eventually it is just going to be like Medicaid - those that can afford to will go private and the rich will not be paying into socialized medicine.
That is more the fault of the union than anything else.
They may be paying less for UHC over there, but their other taxes are much higher than ours, right? It evens out - those with any money at all are expected to give it to people who have not earned it.
Without government subsidies, the U.S. health care system would collapse. It is unsustainable as an inefficient, expensive corporate structure that pays out billions in executive compensation to maximize profits by denying care. The U.S. health care business needs a nanny state to maintain its existence.
The question is who should benefit from public funds, the American people or corporate executives and investors. Is the government using public funds for public service or at the expense of the public ?
I’m sorry, he’s a cancer specialist. I was thinking of my cardiologist. My bad. The 10% are clearly uninsured and unrich. Remember, some of these people still couldn’t pay for their treatment and tests after he waived his fees. No one in my family has had cancer, but my wife had a detached retina, and the operations to fix it (no overnight hospital stays) cost more than all the vacations I’ve taken in my life - and I’m 57.
That’s a pretty big majority for such a big change. If some of them would rather have the working poor die so they won’t live under “socialized medicine” tough noogies indeed. Remember that the well known socialist Mitt Romney was governor when this was passed.
Are you sure? All my dentists do, as does the retina group my wife goes to. For other stuff I go to a big group, and they have a large insurance department, which deals with the insurance company screwing up. I have it good since my employer self insures, and just uses the insurance company for the paperwork, so there is less incentive for them to refuse coverage. In a single payer plan, there would be a single form or a single interface. I think our Canadian friends have testified about how simple this is up there. My daughter is in college in Germany this year and has bought the German plan (cheap enough so that trying to figure out how to get my insurance to cover her wasn’t worth it) but she hasn’t used it yet.
I’ve seen the overhead numbers - in fact I’ve cited them, but I don’t remember them right now. My son-in-law had a job as part of this overhead, working for an insurance company reviewing claims.
[/quote]
How do you define it? My insurance, even while raising co-pays and cutting benefits, pays 100% for preventative care. Clearly they get that it saves money to do this. I gave the example of how early detection of my heart problem probably saved a ton of money. Do you doubt that finding health issues early saves money?
I personally believe it is unethical to use force to solve the medical insurance and or price problem.
Any government system will use force.
How about the speeding problem? The red light running problem? The forged check problem? The nonviolent scam problem? The dumping pollution into streams problem?
How else are we going to get adherence to rules agreed upon by the majority? And if you can’t stand this, you have an excellent alternative - find someplace better. Being a child of the '60s, I enjoy saying “Love it or Leave it” to right wingers. 
What kind of force? :dubious: Guns and militia? Or is making any changes at all, via legislation or what have you, too much ‘force’?
The “no initiation of force” paradigm is pure Objectivism (& of course, always subjectively applied–how can one build without forcing his will on the environment?).
Personally, I think I’d rather have some initiation of force if it could improve things, libertarian ethics be damned.
If you manage to live to the age of 120 and never require any healthcare, then you’ll still have friends, family, co-workers, employees, neighbours, and so on who’ll need healthcare - including the people who collect your trash or serve you your ultra-healthy food.
If your sister goes bankrupt due to healthcare costs, you might end up with neices and nephews living in poverty.
If your parents have the same happen to them, you might end up with them needing to live with you because they had to sell their house.
Even if that doesn’t bother you, remember that, if your trash collector dies from a condition that could have been easily treated, your rubbish might not get collected - and multiply that for all such services, which you use dozens of every day, often without noticing that you’re doing so. Then their families might end up social security, paid for out of your taxes.
These are all quite realistic possibilities.
Unless you’re a hermit, you benefit from those around you having better healthcare. The healthiest person in the country uses the free-at-point-of-service healthcare system too, just indirectly.
And unless you can guarantee that you’re going to live to 120 without any healthcare problems, you’re going to benefit from it directly too.
@Brazil: then you pay a small amount on top for private healthcare, same as you pay extra for your homes and schools away from poor people.
So the only difference from what we have now is the government would be running another insurance plan? No thanks!
Personally, I see a difference between forcing people to not do “bad” things, and forcing people to do “good” things. Driving recklessly and thereby risking other people’s lives is “bad” in a way that failing to subsidise people’s healthcare isn’t.
And I’m 51. I’m not sure I get your point. Yes, health care beyond the basics is expensive. Do you think it would be (and should be) less expensive if the government ran it?
60% is only 10% over the majority, and it probably represents close to the number of people that were uninsured or were paying for private insurance prior to UHC. After the shiny newness has worn off, it will be interesting to see how many still like it.
As for the working poor, sorry but far far too many of them put themselves into that situation. Why is it that responsible people are required to pay for the irresponsible?
Positive - medical and dental insurance is what I did before I couldn’t work any more.
Do you really believe that the US government, author of the income tax rules, could possibly have something that simple? If you are talking about a single form for the patient, I don’t fill out forms for my visits with the insurance I have now (and haven’t for years). If you mean for the doctors and their staffs, I really have to believe that the government would generate at least as much paper.
Again, just calling it preventative care doesn’t tell me anything. It could be something as simple as one well visit a year all the way to paying for all of the new vacicnations they are coming out with for adults, full body scans, annual mammos, etc.
Also, simply because an insurance company pays for something doesn’t mean they it because they think it will save them money. Insurance companies are in the business of selling policies and particularly in the case of group policies, they offer things that they find will influence people to sign up.
I highly doubt it would be a small amount, even assuming that it would be legal and practical.
It is all those things in the UK.
Canadian Medicare is much more efficient than US private health care. Don’t believe me. Read this linked article. I’m not going to quote from it, because you should read the whole thing.
(That & many other links fromthis thread.)