What I Hate the most about EMS

[PapaBear434]

Harsh? You bet ya! But true.

When you can answer this question, you will have changed my mind:

Why punish those who can help, and reward those who choose not to better themselves?

Ok, true. But what about the kids that were stupid enough to be born to folks in the lower classes of society? What if they get sick? What if, even after all their hard work in getting scholarships, they need to quit college to work so they can help their poor cancer ridden mother with no insurance?

What about the folks that HAVE health insurance, but have a chronic illness like diabetes or COPD? Their insurance usually goes up every year, often to the point where they have to choose between food and house and the medication that keeps them alive. They can't shop around for insurance, because the insurance companies won't cover preexisting conditions without demanding a blood sacrifice.

This "screw them, they didn't work hard enough" attitude is driving me nuts. Yes, some lazy jerks will get covered. But there are lots folks out there that don't make enough to get insurance, but too much to qualify for government programs. There are a lot of folks that THINK they're covered, until a major illness comes along in their family that convinces their insurance that they are too costly and they try to price them out of their service.

Our health should not be up for sale by mega-corporations. Yeah, there will be government bureaucrats involved. At least that bureaucrat isn't worried about making a profit, as opposed to the thousands of privately employed bureaucrats that currently infest insurance companies and HMO's, who's only job is to try to find a way NOT to pay out.

We're America. We are supposed to help out the tired, poor, and huddled masses. How does that NOT include helping them when they are most vulnerable, when they are sick and hurt? How do we pride ourselves on being so compassionate, caring, and plentiful when we can't even provide basic health care for 50 million of our own citizens? Especially considering that every other industrialized nation in the world has figured out how to make it work and has overwhelmingly positive ratings from it's people?

We aren't nearly as compassionate as we think we are. We are much more concerned with our selfish endeavors. People don't vote for what's good for the country, or other people. They vote for what's best for #1. We are advocating a perverse form of non-religious Calvinism. A social Darwinism of sorts. The people with money will survive, the rest should die because they're dead weight.

 

[Shishkabob]

Ok, true. But what about the kids that were stupid enough to be born to folks in the lower classes of society? What if they get sick? What if, even after all their hard work in getting scholarships, they need to quit college to work so they can help their poor cancer ridden mother with no insurance?

They are working, so they are contributing to society, are they not? They are attempting to better themselves, no? You missed the mark completely in my argument.

What about the folks that HAVE health insurance, but have a chronic illness like diabetes or COPD? Their insurance usually goes up every year,

One of those tricky areas. They cost more to treat, which means the insurance company will have to spend more on them. Someone has to get screwed with cost... the person with the illness, or the rest of us healthy ones that have to pay higher premiums. Someone, somewhere, has to make up for the money that is spent.

But there are lots folks out there that don't make enough to get insurance, but too much to qualify for government programs.

My sister and her husband are going through this right now. Both middle twenties, he with a Bach degree, she close to having one. Both white, raised in middle class families, her upper, he lower. Both have jobs. Both work 40 minimum at said job.

They just had a baby, not eligible for gov't assistance, but can't afford insurance.

The baby was jaundice, and my sister and the baby had to spend extra time in the hospital because of such.



STILL doesn't change my view on the matter, nor theirs. We are all in agreement that it's not the governments job, right, or responsibility to give everyone health care.

Our health should not be up for sale by mega-corporations. Yeah, there will be government bureaucrats involved.

Companies find ways to save money to make a profit, while still offering a service that people will pay for, and keep paying for.

The government is losing money in the Postal Service.

I choose the former.

Plus, what happens when you force said insurance companies out of business? To think no one will lose their jobs from this is foolish. Thanks for adding to the recession.

How do we pride ourselves on being so compassionate, caring, and plentiful when we can't even provide basic health care for 50 million of our own citizens?

I'm tired of this statisic. It has no factual basis and is false. It's just a statistic.

How many of that "50 million" CHOOSE not to be covered? He's a hint, it's a helluva lot more then you would believe, or the pro-NHC group is willing to admit.





I ask you again, why the push for free healthcare? Why not the push for free food, water and/or shelter? Those are the necessities for life.

 

[Melclin]

Good article Maya, interesting and good example of how problems that could be fixed or managed with good social support and universal health care, end up actually costing more in long run. Diabetes, Hypertension, Cancer, heart failure - the problems that are swamping ERs, could easily be managed with good primary care, if it was easily available, cheap enough to regularly visit and the medications for all those conditions were affordable enough (through government subsidy). In the long run its cheaper that your current system and has the added benefit of providing everyone with good health care. On a side note, a lot of those problems like drug abuse, homelessness and violence that put pressure on the health system can be tempered with good social support systems. It also mentioned someone wasting their social security cheque - welfare doesn't have to be and shouldn't be free money.

I've been a googling and I have this to show for it.

As it turns out in 2005, on average American's actually paid slightly more income tax that Australians - this is what I mean, its about the redirection of money already being spent, you really don't actually have to tax much more, if at all, than you do now.

In the same year, the US government was responsible for 45.1% of health spending, while the Australia government covered 67.5% - its not that different yet we haven't got EDs being completely swamped by people

15% percent of US GDP was spent on health, while Australia spends 8.7%. It has been predicted that with the current US system, that will grow to 20% in ten years.

 

[Shishkabob]

welfare doesn't have to be and shouldn't be free money.

But that's what it has turned out to be for many people.

This needs to be corrected, and until it is, I will forever be against any form of social welfare. It's there to help the needy, not promote the lazy.

 

[Melclin]

I ask you again, why the push for free healthcare? Why not the push for free food, water and/or shelter? Those are the necessities for life.

Subsidising healthy food is probably not a bad idea. This would fall under the banner of public health.

Rights, responsibilities and entitlements aside, if your sister lived in Canada or Australia, she would live exactly the same life with the exception of fact that her child's health woes would not be an issue. This would be same for millions of Americans. How would it be punishing those that contribute to take some of the tax money they already pay and put it towards helping people like your sister?

 

[Melclin]

This needs to be corrected, and until it is, I will forever be against any form of social welfare. It's there to help the needy, not promote the lazy.

Couldn't agree more. So what you should really be doing is speaking out against the way welfare is administered, trying to fix a system that could (and does in other countries) work, not speaking out against the basic idea of social support.

EDIT: "thats the way it has turned out for many people" - that's the fault of the way it is applied, not the basic idea of welfare. Germany elected Hitler democratically...doesn't make democracy a bad thing.

 

[Shishkabob]

Hold on here, we're not talking about subsidizing. We're talking about making it free for all. No qualifiers. Free food, house, and water for everyone, for life.


Let's say you were a bullied as a kid. If a teacher caught the bully in the act and told the kid to say sorry, would that forced sorry make you feel any better? Or would a sorry from him that was true and sincere feel better?


Charity should be a choice, not a legal and forced requirement.



PS-- You obviously don't know enough about Canada to think they are equal

 

[Shishkabob]

Couldn't agree more. So what you should really be doing is speaking out against the way welfare is administered, trying to fix a system that could (and does in other countries) work, not speaking out against the basic idea of social support.

And here's where we keep dropping off with eachother. I'm not against helping people.

I'm against stupid ideas of helping people.





Fining and employer for not offering insurance, even if that move would put the business out of, well-- business, is stupid.

Fining people for choosing not to have insurance is stupid.

The way the government manages that vast majority of things it does, is stupid.

 

[Melclin]

Hold on here, we're not talking about subsidizing. We're talking about making it free for all. No qualifiers. Free food, house, and water for everyone, for life.


Let's say you were a bullied as a kid. If a teacher caught the bully in the act and told the kid to say sorry, would that forced sorry make you feel any better? Or would a sorry from him that was true and sincere feel better?

Charity should be a choice, not a legal and forced requirement.

Well in a sense all of those things are free, if you need them (food stamps, government housing, rent assist programs). But providing people with any house they want for free, is not equivalent to basic universal health care. Basic universal health care is equivalent to the food stamps and the housing commission flats. It looks after your basic health needs that you require to get through life. No bells and whistles, just the basics. If you want more, you pay, just like the house and the food.

Health funding is not the same as an apology, I take your point about the questionable ethics of forced charity, but its not the same. Money is money. If my taxes go towards a road, they build the same road whether or not I was sincere about wanting it built.

And I might add that you already pay for health in your taxes, its just that the money isn't spent well. If it was you could easily have a system like ours, while paying the same taxes you do now.

Fining and employer for not offering insurance, even if that move would put the business out of, well-- business, is stupid.

Fining people for choosing not to have insurance is stupid.

The way the government manages that vast majority of things it does, is stupid.

Yes my point exactly, those things you mentioned are one of the many ridiculous aspects of your system. Your system is buggered.

 

[Shishkabob]

Yes, I know taxes are taxes, but difference is the increase that will have to be done to fund such a thing. There will be an increase in taxes, no doubt about it.



The reason I brought up food/house/water is becuase people claim that medicine is a right (which it's not), but keep forgetting the actual necessities.


Again, not talking about subsidizing. Subsidizing is to make people like me feel like we're kind of getting it our way. I'm talking about straight up free. Free as in the Canadian healthcare where they pay for their citizens, non citizens, and illegals without a penny coming out of pockets.



Why can healthcare be free, but not food? Why is healthcare more important?

 

[Melclin]

Yes, I know taxes are taxes, but difference is the increase that will have to be done to fund such a thing. There will be an increase in taxes, no doubt about it.



The reason I brought up food/house/water is becuase people claim that medicine is a right (which it's not), but keep forgetting the actual necessities.


Again, not talking about subsidizing. Subsidizing is to make people like me feel like we're kind of getting it our way. I'm talking about straight up free. Free as in the Canadian healthcare where they pay for their citizens, non citizens, and illegals without a penny coming out of pockets.



Why can healthcare be free, but not food? Why is healthcare more important?

Well we pay about the same taxes as you and manage alright.

I wasn't talking about subsidizing either. Housing commision, food stamps, and rent assist, are effectively free food, water and housing. Healthcare here is not strictly free. It is subsidized, we pay for doctors visits, and medication and scans and so on. But the government subsidises it a very great deal more affordable. I'm not sure exactly how it works in Canada, but the point is universal health care comes in many shapes and sizes, not all of them prohibitively expensive.

Which brings me to the reason why health care needs to be socialised: it costs more (that's why you have insurance for health but not for food or water). It costs more than housing and food and water. You can get by week to week, pay you rent, pay the utilities bill, work hard, but when all of a sudden you end up in an ED and Dr tells you that you need a 150,000 dollar operation or else you will never be able work again, or talk, or die or whatever. That you can't afford. Or maybe its the $750 a month for your diabetes medications, so maybe you don't take it much and end up getting carted to ED three times a month for all kinds of preventable problems. The point is the health is ridiculously expensive and still relatively essential. That's why it should be socialised.

EDIT: Yes I don't think medicine is a right either, but many of the things our governments provide us with are not rights. They are privileges. Privileges of living in wealthy countries. I don't believe I have a right to medication, but seeing as though it would be better if I had it, and a good system has been worked out where we all contribute a little, so no one pays alot has been worked out, I'll argue for that.

 

[Maya]

Even the CEOs of Insurance Companies have admitted that they don't think that the current system is sustainable. I watched a documentary. The CEO of the company said that she, herself, was not considered insurable by that company's standards, were she not already working there! Basically, she can't leave that job.

I was denied private health insurance because of a cervical fusion in my spine. I currently don't have health insurance. I wish I did!

The thing about extending health insurance to ALL citizens, is that the cost would be much lower, so WHY would anyone NOT get insurance?! Also, why would parents ever choose NOT to get insurance for their children? It's just criminal -- unless they simply can't afford it. Currently they can't afford it. If healthcare were to be universalized, they just might be able to. And if they CAN afford it -- all of a sudden -- it should be mandatory, for the children's sake.

By the way, if Health Insurance were universalized, it would be cheaper for EVERYONE than it is now. So why is that a problem? I WANT to be covered by health insurance. It's not even a CHOICE for me! Shouldn't that be illegal?! Where are my rights?

 

[Shishkabob]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7d85T4OfqA[/youtube]

 

[Maya]

Also, for those who say that implementing mandatory health insurance for all employees would put small businesses out of business -- I think you may be judging by TODAY'S very high cost of health insurance.

If insurance were made mandatory for everyone, costs would suddenly drop precipitously. In the documentary that I watched, the CEO of the insurance company said that they would actually prefer to have it that way. They still make money, because they have a much larger consumer group, even though they are dropping prices. It works out for the employer, because costs are less and employees are healthier and happier. It works out for the employees. Everybody's happy.

 

[Maya]

bwahahahahaha! I don't know if I want to buy ANYTHING from an infomercial!

If I buy now, do I get a free Slap Chop? ..oh wait, that was the ShamWow guy.

 

[Sasha]

By the way, if Health Insurance were universalized, it would be cheaper for EVERYONE than it is now. So why is that a problem? I WANT to be covered by health insurance. It's not even a CHOICE for me! Shouldn't that be illegal?! Where are my rights?

I don't think universal health care is the answer, but neither is the current health care system.

I don't have an answer for how it should be, (There are people much smarter than I to figure out that answer) but I do know the system desperately needs reform.

 

[reaper]

I am all for it. Free health care for everyone.

First, we need to pull US troops back to our country and protect our borders only. No more helping other countries. They are on their own now. All that money saved right there, could fund insurance for every American for their lifetime.

Then wait 5 years for the rest of the world to tear itself apart, all the while wondering why America is not saving them!

We could take care of every American, if we stopped worrying about the rest of the world!

 

[Sasha]

I am all for it. Free health care for everyone.

First, we need to pull US troops back to our country and protect our borders only. No more helping other countries. They are on their own now. All that money saved right there, could fund insurance for every American for their lifetime.

Then wait 5 years for the rest of the world to tear itself apart, all the while wondering why America is not saving them!

We could take care of every American, if we stopped worrying about the rest of the world!

You, reaper, are a political genius. Except for the fact when WE get attacked, we wont have any allys when it becomes self centered, and I do not believe America is the superpower it builds itself up to be.

 

[reaper]

We do not have many Allies now! I am not worried about the rest, America can hold it's own against anyone.

Some just do not realize how much of our taxes are spent, defending the rest of the world!

 

[Shishkabob]

We do not have many Allies now! I am not worried about the rest, America can hold it's own against anyone.

I'll have to correct this.

As long as we're allied with the UK, we can hold our own against anyone. We share much too much military tech. with England ^_^