AssemblyBoard

As a healthcare worker for the last 27 years I didn't learn anything new about our healthcare system by watching Michael Moore's new movie, "Sicko". Yet after watching the footage shot in Cuba a twinge of pain shot through my heart. After watching the "Socialist" healthcare workers in action I remembered why it was I went into the profession. As a young idealistic Christian I wanted to serve the Lord. For me this meant helping people, helping my society, finding my place in the community of Fullerton. After getting my license in Occupational Therapy I applied for a Job at St. Jude hospital in Fullerton. After contacting a number of Christians that worked there I started a ch summary Bible Study. As time went by I made many friendships with patients and coworkers. Yet there was a group that I didn't make friends with, Administration! This began soon after I hired on. It was the need for "Increased Productivity". At staff meetings employees were constantly being  reminded that "Hospitals are closing!"  "We need you to account for every minute of your day!" "You should be billing for every hour you are here!" One by one I noticed every coworker leave.  There were 18 people in my department when I arrived in 86. By 91 there were only 2 left. This was due to the fact that the company put money above everything else. They wanted their therapists to work for low pay and high production. For example a 1/2 hour of my treatments brought in 75$ for the hospital. (They paid me 9$ an hour) So while I averaged 11 hours of billing (sometimes I billed 16 hours in a day!) The hospital? Business!  was getting a pretty good deal. How good?  During the 90's St. Judes added billions of dollars worth of "Imaging centers" to the existing facility and the community of Fullerton is saturated with "Off Site Centers". Again the whole time I worked there I was lectured on "More Productivity" at every staff meeting. Patient care changed also, HMO's limited time and services. "In order for us to make money we need to be efficient!" Patients were admitted then discharged regardless of their needs! I began to loathe my job! I began to get sick and tired of giving myself, lifting patients out of bed even though my back was aching, changing patients diapers because the nurses just don't have time to do it and then being told, "You aren't working hard enough!" It was during 1990 I decided to change my career. (I still work as a therapist during the summers) Today I am very happy that I am a teacher. (My kids just had their art work accepted into the Orange County fair!) I know that when I grow older and retire I will feel good about my choice to give to others. Yet after watching Sicko I am convinced it didn't have to be this way! People in other countries, even Cuba get better healthcare than U.S. citizens!  Why? Because we turned a humanitarian occupation into a multi billion dollar business.

The medical field is one area where capitalism certainly isn't giving the answer.  More and more there are stories of certain medication or procedures given not because it is best but it is what insurance will pay.  My doctor has to run folks through like a mill limiting visits to fifteen minutes so he can get enough folks through his office to actually make a living.  At our local hospital, a VP is frustrated because he cannot fire or review someone on his staff who literally (and I mean literally) reads magazines and sleeps in his office all day.  Meanwhile, nurses work for lower pay because we are in a "desired resort" community and part-time nurses are no longer given the option of saying "no" when they are called in at a moments notice.

I don't know that socialized medicine holds the solution though it is often taunted as the bright alternative.  Stories from Canada include folks who can't get needed procedures for months and severe limitations on what they can have done.  In short, you have to deal with one expression of human greed and sin or another.  Whether it be dealing with money-making mentality of administrators and insurance or the "user" mentality of those who take undo advantage of a system that is free.

Mr. Moore is certainly shooting fish in a barrel in pointing out that our medical system has serious problems.  According to my VP friend, there is predictions in single-digit years on how long it will be for the local hospital to go under if some serious changes are not done.  Nevertheless, unless there is some serious changes in the heart that will restore medicine to compassion and mercy as well as restoring a sense of personal responsibility for one's medical care (and no I don't have the right to sue his ass if the doctor makes an honest mistake), I suspect that moving from one medical model to another will only provide a new venue for the same problem.

Hi David M.,

 Cuba is used by Michael Moore in his film as an example of great medical care?  ??? Why did Castro get treatment from a doctor who flew in from another country (I think it was Spain?).

  The care in Cuba is free, but it is extremely backward and lacks even the most basic services that we take for granted in the free World.

  As bad as private care may be I'd rather have that then something the govt. runs.  Can you imagine waiting for your medical care the way that Katrina victims waited for help from the Feds!?  Taking responsibility for your self is always a better answer than waiting for the benevolence from some civil servant.

                                                                              God Bless,  Mark C.

  "The care in Cuba is free, but it is extremely backward and lacks even the most basic services that we take for granted in the free World." Quote from Mark

   As long as I can remember I have heard these kind of remarks about "Socialized Medicine" Yet in the movie Mr. Moore moves through Canada, France, England, Cuba demonstrating that is is simply not true. Why do you say, "..backward and lacks even the most basic services..." did you hear this from someone who lived in Cuba?  "I went to the hospital in Havana and they shook a rattle over my abdomen!"  The truth as Moore clearly shows in the film is that they use the most up to date treatments and equipment. Plus prescriptions that cost U.S. citizens 100's of dollars are pennies over there. Moore also points out that a child born in Cuba has a much better chance for survival than if it was born in the U.S. Mark can you back up what you are saying with some evidence?

  Moore points out that we in America have been trained to FEAR the word "Socialized" We equate it with communism. However there are many institutions in America that are socialized and work perfectly fine. schools, fire departments, post offices, libraries are all run by the government (Federal and State) paid for by our taxes. Why do they work?

 Cuba is used by Michael Moore in his film as an example of great medical care?   Why did Castro get treatment from a doctor who flew in from another country (I think it was Spain?).


   I am not sure that this contradicts Moore's example. However, Castro probably has powers that were never granted to him by the citizens of Cuba. Castro has probably abused his powers in innumerable other ways. The founding fathers of our country identified this as "Absolute power corrupts absolutely." Isn't it great that we have a constitution that is designed to keep this from happening to us? ;D

How do I know David?

  I must admit that when I first posted I had the general impression from what I heard and read in the news that Cuba medical services were as I described them.  I'm glad you challenged me as a easy news search was very helpful in validating what I had guessed.

  A Dr. Leonel Cordova who once was a doctor in Cuba, but is now working in a hospital in Miami had this to say about Michael Moore's movie "Sicko," and especially what Moore says about Cuba:

 "Moore was either misled or is deliberately not telling the truth.  There is a two tiered health system in Cuba--- one for the poor and another for the privledged.  95% of the Cuban population is served by a health system that is free, but has almost no medicines, or options.  The vast majority of the population is suffering from malnutrion and poor health as a result.  The medical facilty that Moore visited is one for the 5% priviledged class.  The USA certaintly needs improvement in it's health care system, but Cuba is not the answer."

  Moore has a leftist driven agenda with his movie making (which supports him in a lavish capitalistic lifestyle btw ::)) that leaves him with no credibility in my mind.

   As to Govt. running things:  Even Europe has being moving away from socialism as they have discovered that it does lead to huge problems.  The heavy tax burdens levied on the productive part of the populace to support craddle to grave services for the indolent kills the motive of the producers in the country who are getting tired of supporting everybody else.

  There are things that only the govt. can do (police, military) but when govt. attempts to redistribute wealth via confiscatory taxes to fund those not willing to take responsibility for their own lives I am against it (it's a wholly different matter when considering those not able to help themselves--- the truly needy--- and charity services not only are an worthy effort in this situation they do a far better job at providing help).

                                                                    God Bless,  Mark C.

Folks,

From the web:
...............................
"Complaints have arisen that foreign "health tourists" paying with dollars and senior Communist party officials receive a higher quality of care than Cuban citizens. Former leading Cuban neurosurgeon and dissident Dr Hilda Molina asserts that the central revolutionary objective of free, quality medical care for all has been eroded by Cuba's need for foreign currency. Molina says that following the economic collapse known in Cuba as the Special Period, the Cuban Government established mechanisms designed to turn the medical system into a profit-making enterprise. This creates an enormous disparity in the quality of healthcare services between foreigners and Cubans leading to a form of tourist apartheid. In 1998 she said that foreign patients were routinely inadequately or falsely informed about their medical conditions to increase their medical bills or to hide the fact that Cuba often advertises medical services it is unable to provide.[56] Others makes similar claims, also stating that senior Communist party and military officials can access this higher quality system free of charge.[7][8] In 2005, an account written by Cuban exile and critic of Fidel Castro, Carlos Wotzkow, appeared showing apparent unsanitary and unsafe conditions in the "Clínico Quirúrgico" of Havana;the article claims that health care for Cubans occurs in worse conditions in the rest of the country.[57]

An article in Canadian newspaper National Post, based interviews of Cubans, finds that in reality even the most common pharmaceutical items, such as Aspirin and antibiotics are conspicuously absent or only available on the black market. Surgeons lack basic supplies and must re-use latex gloves. Patients must buy their own sutures on the black market and provide bedsheets and food for extended hospital stays.[9] The Cuban government blames the shortages on the embargo and states that those with more severe chronic diseases receive medicines.[10] However, other sources suggest that also those with such diseases lack medicines. It is also suggested that in some cases the local non-dollar stocks have been shipped abroad. [11][12]

An article in The Boston Globe, partially based on interviews with Cubans, argues that the massive export of doctors and other medical personal to Venezuela in exchange for oil has caused shortages in Cuba. Regarding Operación Milagro, "It's all the Venezuelans who need cataracts surgery first, and then the Cubans if there's any time left", said Georgina, 60, a retired Havana clerk."
.................................

Our medical system is the most technologically advanced in the world.  It is, however, hideously expensive.  A large part of this expense has nothing to do with medicine but rather is caused by self-defensive costs against lawsuits.  Doctors regularly have to prescribe "defensive tests" when they don't suspect a problem, but fear that they will be exposed to lawsuits accusing them of negligence if they don't test for every possibility.  At each level of healthcare one must carry expensive malpractice insurance to protect oneself against the constantly vigilant packs of lawyers sniffing around for clients.

Another huge problem is the illegal alien influx.  The Democrat politicians favored by Mr. Moore favor virtually unlimited immigration in the hopes that this will produce more Democrat voters in a few years.  Let's also not forget that the Trial Lawyer's Association, which opposes lawsuit reform, is one of the top contributors to Democrats.

Modern European countries do deliver excellent healthcare.  What they don't usually mention is that since it is paid for by government appropriations, when the annual budget is used up these services are not available until the following year.  The only way to prevent this is to ration healthcare services.  So where we just go to the doctor or hospital an get what we need, Europeans are in constant danger of being put on waiting lists.

If you are in danger of dying immediately they take care of you.  Folks with ulcers, needing hip or knee surgery, arthritic surgery, hearing problems, eye surgery...you are likely to have to wait a year or two before you get what you need.  I read of a case in Canada where a person had waited over a year for knee surgery.  She had paid the extra premium they allow for a private room.  When they finally called her to the hospital she found that she was in a three bed room with two men.  When she complained she was told to shut up or she would be kicked out and put back on the waiting list.

I once lived with "free" government healthcare when I was in the service.  They had full healthcare services but it was rationed.  At my base in Michigan the wait for a dental appointment was nine months.  However, you could get in a week or so if you slipped the clerk that made the appointments $20 under the table.  This was in 1961 and a low ranking enlisted man like me made about $80 a month.  He got caught, so after that it was a nine month wait for everyone, except high ranking officers and their families.

"Socialized" medicine is not for me.

Thomas Maddux

Tom, Mark, It seems like this has deviated into a bash Castro's Cuba thread. Instead of focussing on Cuba hows about we ask real people who live in Canada, England, France how they feel about their healthcare?
Moore points out that we (U.S.A.) rank 37th in the world when it comes to healthcare. Why?  What about the arguments about "waiting lists" etc..?  It just so happen to know a couple who have duel citizenship in Canada and the U.S. I will try to contact thema nd get it from the horses mouth. (This should be interesting as the husband had a severe stroke about 5 years ago.)  I also have quite a lot of contacts in Europe through another B.B. Isn't the internet great!  I am sure you know lots of people in Canada?  Cassets?  Let's hear what they have to say!  Will be back soon!

Tom, I can't help but comment on the "Lawsuit excuse" While working at St Jude I ran into Dr. Boston. I remembered him from my childhood. He had a practice on Beach and Malvern. Dr. Boston had a habit of parking his top model Corvette Illegally in front of the hospital. But he was better known for his antique car collection. He, like so many others need these luxeries to cover themselves if they were ever sued??? Another time I remember going to visit a Dr. Soderquist. I was having problems with a rash on my hands. (Turns out from the billing papers I was filling out everyday at St. Jude.) My insurance at St. Judes had a $200 deductable. So I had to pay $60 for the Dr, to look at me for 5 seconds and say, "I think you are allergic to chemically treated paper."  "Here try this cream." Now after making $9 an hour I should have been able to sue him for robbery!

  While working at "Thrifty Drug Store"  I was a member of the Retail Clerks Union. All of my dental and healthcare (with prescriptions) were covered free!  I remember going to a dentist (Dr. Macnamara on Commonwealth), and having thousands of dollars of work done. (I was in real bad shape.) For my prescriptions I walked to the back of the store where I worked, Mr. Tanita, the pharmacist would hand them to me, Free! Why our country treats its servicemen the way you describe doesn't have anything to do with socialized medicine. (If I am correct Republicans have recently voted and passed legislation to cut servicemen's benefits.) If what you say is true our servicemen should be very angry and demand better!  But of course the notion that we as Americans should stand up for ourselves is foreign to us. 

Benjamin Franklin started the first public library, fire department, hospital for the poor, and post offices and yet he was a capitalist!  He was a capitalists capitalist!  He was the quintessential American! The self made man! He believed in hard work!  His sayings constantly chided the lazy man and affirmed the diligent man!  Why then did he see the need for free public services? 

Exactly. Many doctors have left off delivering babies because of the expense of malpractice insurance.
Very interesting information. Thanks.I heard that the lines for medical care in Canada are very long. So much for moving to a place of safety from Hilary, (from whom no one is safe), if she becomes our next president. Long lines are characteristic of those on public aid here. Me neither.
[/quote]

Dave,

Here is a news article about a Canadian who sued his government after waiting an entire year for a hip replacement.  Notice the solution...not elimination of the waiting lists, but rules about maximum time on the lists.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/healthcare/

Regarding the "lawsuit excuse".  It is a very real problem.  A few years back production of small aircraft in the USA stopped completely.  Beech, Piper, Cessna, Mooney all of them had to stop making light planes due to the humongous costs of liability insurance.  They had to charge so much for the planes because of it that no one would buy them!

In one lawsuit a guy had flown a plane that was over 40 years old into a mountainside.  The seat tore loose from the floor in the crash.  The pilot's family won a large settlement on the basis of faulty workmanship!  I don't think that any plane in the world would not be completely trashed if you ran it into a mountain.

When the Bush administration came into power, they were able to get a weak reform bill through congress.  You can no longer sue for faulty workmanship on planes over 20 years old.  So, Cessna at least is making light planes again.

BTW, what did folks buy when the US companies stopped building them?  Foreign planes.  Their countries protect them from ridiculous lawsuits.

Tom Maddux

Here is someone from Germany,

As for Germany...

...those on "socialized care" (I'll assume this is roughly what we call "Krankenkasse" over here, in contrast to private health insurance) have to pay more than was the case some years ago, that's true, and it annoys us patients to no end... but I dare say that the increased cost is tolerable (amounts to 40 € per year max). What do we get for it? From my personal experience, you'll have to wait for an average of one our or one-and-a-half before it's your turn, but the care you receive is okay. And aside from your monthly fee for the federal health insurance (which isn't back-breaking) you rarely have to pay extra bucks unless it's for some rather... exotic... treatments that are not officially endorsed by the insurance companies.

On the other side are the private health insurance customers who indeed get the very best care (as far as I can tell), but for a whopping price (unless they signed their contracts when they were damn young - the fees rise sharply with every passing year).

So, our health system could be much much better, but we don't normally have to worry whether we'll ever get over our diseases. Of course I don't exactly have much experience with how it works in other places...

Woops this is American, (this is a tragic story)

I only managed to watch half of Sicko before I got so angry I had to turn it OFF. I live in the USA. I have health insurance. I have spent, out of pocket, over $100,000 to stay alive during the past ten years. Two words that can, and will, bankrupt an average American family: co-pay and deductible.

It works like this. I pay 25 dollars every time I see a doctor. Which is GREAT, unless you see four doctors in one week. OK, that’s 100 bucks. Doctors prescribe four new medications. One is 15 dollars, the other is 15 dollars, the next two are 30 dollars each. Now I have spent 190 dollars on medical care in a single week. WITH health insurance.

Groceries or medical care? Which do we buy this week? I have fed my daughter POPCORN for dinner because we could not afford food after paying for my medical care. Our house has been in foreclosure so many times because we paid the doctor instead of our mortgage.

I had two surgeries THIS year. I had one surgery last year. I had chemotherapy for almost two years. I had cancer surgery that cost $200,000 in 1998. Our insurance paid 80% of the bill. It took us five years to pay off that medical bill. We spent my daughter’s college fund. We spent our entire retirement savings. And I still have medical bills that are not paid for. And as long as I am alive, I will have MORE medical bills. What insurance doesn’t cover is shocking. It really is.

As far as waiting for medical care, what the hell do you think goes on in America? I’ve waited two months to see a neurologist. I’ve waited six weeks to see a neuro-ophthalmologist. I got a prescription for a new wheelchair in January 2007. It’s now July 2007. Do I have my wheelchair? NO! Because my insurance company is tying things up in red tape. I’m still waiting for them to pre-qualify me so I can order the goddamn chair. When will I get my wheelchair? I don’t know. I’m so angry I could go to my insurance company and beat someone with a cane. Break someone’s legs. OK, now YOU can’t walk. Now, you wait seven months on HOUSE ARREST while some pinhead decides to pre-qualify you for the wheelchair you need! See how much YOU like it!

Sad thing is, if I DID beat someone, I’d get the damn chair in prison! America has socialized medicine… in prison. A criminal needs an MRI? They get one and don’t have to pay the deductible, either. Oh, you need a powerchair, here you go! It has crossed my mind that committing a crime might save my family financially. I pay my taxes. I follow the rules. I’ve never even gotten a speeding ticket. If I was a murdering bastard, I’d have my powerchair right now. Instead, I follow the rules and the rules... SUCK!

Catastrophic illness is a nightmare. It really is. I’m living most people’s nightmare scenario. I can handle chest cracking, rib spreading surgery. I can handle high dose chemo. I can handle pain so bad that all I can do is scream at the top of my lungs. I’ve done it all! I can deal with degenerative, incurable, neuromuscular illness. I cannot deal with the medical bills. It’s the BILLS that make me suicidal, not the illness. Because I love my family and I hate to see them hurt. And the medical bills hurt us. If I died, they would be financially better off, and that’s not fair to them, or me.

My husband makes too much money for me to qualify for Illinois Medicaid. I was a stay at home mom when I got sick, so I don’t have enough work credits to qualify for Federal disability income. I cannot collect disability on my husband’s job until my husband turns 63. He was 36 when I got sick. I’ll most likely be dead by the time he’s 63, but I’m gonna fight like hell to live, anyway. Because I have a life that matters!!!!!

We need healthcare reform in America. No child should be fed popcorn for dinner because mom had to choose between medicine and food. Housing and medicine. The car payment or medicine. The electric bill or medicine. I’m sick of choosing between medical care and my family’s needs. I’m sick of feeling guilty for being sick AND broke.

Isn’t being sick tough enough??????

Copy this, print it and hand it to your friend who says, socialized medicine would be worse. NOTHING is worse than losing every last penny to a medical nightmare. Nothing is worse than seeing your child cry because she’s hungry and you can’t afford food because you paid doctors. And you don’t meet the low income requirements for the food pantry, so no help there. Good thing you have popcorn this week. We’ll buy food next week, sweetie. Don't cry.

We make too much money to qualify for assistance, and not enough money to actually pull this off. And it never stops. Ever. Until I’m dead, or America reforms healthcare, which will happen just after hell freezes over. I’m starting to think I’ll get my new powerchair when hell freezes over!

Take it from someone who has been in the trenches for ten years. America's health care system sucks. Damn, I’m mad! I’m gonna go play my cello and calm down.

Russian, (This person says he/she is in Russia yet talks as if they aren't involved directly with the healthcare system)

In Russia there is a long waiting list for free care and the quality, I've heard, is not good. Brutal in fact. Most Russians now splurge and pay for private clinics if they can afford to (more and more can). Private clinics are still cheaper than the US, by quite a large margin I believe. We also have western clinics, which charge the same as the US. Care in the Russian private clinics and western clinics is roughly the same, but the western clinics have prettier offices.

Tom, for years I have heard the lawsuit excuse as an "end-of-argument" to the issue of high cost. The truth is that it isn't!  What Doctors pay in insurance is a small fraction of what they make. Yes they would have you believe els-wise. Where is the evidence? Show me a doctor who is going  into another profession because they just can't make ends meet! Go to the parking lot at St. Judes, go to the "Doctors Only" section. How many cars do you see under 60 grand?  Listen to their conversation in the "Doctors Only" section of the cafeteria. How many are vacationing in state, in country this summer? What you hear are things like, "Monte Carlo, Tuscany," etc... But when they condescend to the lowly people like us they say things like, "Boy can you believe the price of gas these days!"  Tom why do you always side with the people who do not represent your best interest!?

(Joe, I'm trying to avoid having this thread go off into a different direction, as you can see the topic here is healthcare in other countries. As you can read I am getting contributions from another B.B. that are pretty fair/objective. Please start another thread if you want to discuss Mr. Moore)

Here's Canada,

I live in Canada. The system is not nearly as perfect as described in "Sicko", but yet it's not bad either. We do have waiting list problems, but it depends on which area you live in. A few years ago one of my friends was diagnosed breast cancer and had surgery the following week and chemotherapy and radiation treatment immediately after; it was a hard time but now she's fine. She has not had any problem with the health system. When my grandfather, in his last 4 years, was frequently very ill, he never had to wait to get treatment and he had free home services (a nurse coming twice a week, another person once a week who helped him take his bath), the pharmacy preparing his medicines and delivering them, and when he was not able anymore to stay at home, he got a place in a government nursing home, where he was very well taken care of, until his death. Right now my father's parents (the other grandpa I was talking about was my mom's dad), aged 85 and 90, have the same home services. But some other people do have problems, are waiting, and even seeking health care in foreing countries (US or others) to wait less. Working at the customer service for the health care department, I do know about that.

So it's true we do have some problems, but I still think that a universal public health care system is the best, but it has to be well managed and this is hard to do for governements. Here in Canada it is an important, and widely agreed, social value, yet it is being questioned, especially those years. Here in particular, about 10 years ago, the governement made a big mistake and offered early retirement to millions of doctors and nurses; they did not think they would all take the opportunity but they did. Consequently now we've been lacking doctors and qualified nurses for years, and this will not stop for years to come. It is also true that there is a parallel private system for people who have a lot of money. Recently some law suits made the Supreme Court decide that private insurance companies should be allowed to give basic health coverage (so fare they were just authorized to give complementary coverage - they could cover what the governement dit not pay), but the laws to arrange how it's going to work are yet to be passed.

My personal opinion is, while it's the best system, it has to be looked at and rearranged regularly, to avoid situations like the one we have now. It can work very well, but it has to be handled carefully. A few countries, whose name are not coming to mind right now, have a mix of public and private systems, and it seems to work well. But I definitely think that private health insurance companies should not have the whole field and rule everything.

Sweden!

I'm not quite qualified to give you a complete or accurate description of the Swedish health care anymore, but I can say that when I grew up, it was great. Unfortunately there are some problems with it today - based on hearsay from my folks back there - that older people get less quality care. It has become a bit of "best service to best person", so if you're young and productive it seems you can get a faster care. My grandma (about 5 years ago) had to go to the ER and was pretty bad (this is according to my mom who took her there) but had to wait for 24 hours to see a doctor. Maybe the incident was just a fluke, but I've heard other stories from other people, to realize that no system is perfect. The other problem with a socialized system like this is that the rich people who supposedly pay the largest part of the tax burden, knows how to avoid the taxes or move to another country.

I know that during the 80's and 90's in Sweden they talked about implementing more private clinics, so people had a choice or maybe it was because the care was too expensive and it wasn't enough tax revenue to cover the costs, but I don't know what happened to that.

In the end I think it's important to see that both systems have good and bad sides, and if we go all out to one or the other, we're setting us up for failure. The only way to do it somewhat fair is to find a system that is in the middle. Moderation is better than extremism. We do need a system in US that can catch people like CelloChick and help them, but without creating a system that eventually will crash financially.


--------------------
Thanks Joe! We started out talking about Moore's message, then it started veering off towards Castro. So I suggested we get people who were from other countries to share their experiences. Pretty much it seems that all systems have their problems however, I have yet to read that the claims about, "long waiting lists" and "substandard care" are really true!

Massachusetts!

As of yesterday, July 1st, all citizens of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts have medical insurance to cover medical expenses. Or so the government of the state would want you to believe.

As of yesterday, anyone NOT covered by some sort of medical insurance will be FINED and PENALIZED by the state, having tax returns garnished and other economic attacks on the working poor and the self-employed.

The state's solution to get people insured is to attack the individual and FORCE everyone to buy insurance, whether there is a plan that fits a person's (or family's) real budget.

If this plan had been in effect when I was laid off, it would have cost me hndreds of dollars a month, money I spent more wisely making sure my credit rating was good and not defaulting on any bills. If I had had to have health insurance for those couple of months, and then the months BEFORE my work's insurance kicked in, I would have missed several due dates for bills, wrecking my credit and my future. JUST SO THE POLITICIANS IN THE STATE CAN BRAG THEY HAVE UNIVERSAL HEALTH COVERAGE....makes me sick.

Quebec! (Don't tell them they are Canada!)

Some years ago, in Quebec, when my mother had her first hip replacement, she was a subject in a study which compared outcomes of hip and knee replacements in a few hospitals, some Canadian, some American. Yes, she had to wait a few months from being referred to surgery to getting the surgery (would have been a bit longer, but she got a cancellation slot). She got a copy of the study when it was published. There was in interesting conclusion in that study: The patients in the American centres did not have time on a waiting list, but their arthritis was more advanced, on average, when they got their surgery. This was, apparently, because the American patients did not get insurance approval for the surgery until their condition was more severe, or delayed the surgery due to expense. No, I can't find the study online, I think it was published in 1994. But it's coloured how I think about waiting lists, that they don't tell the whole story about delays in treatment. Yes, there are sometimes delays that there shouldn't be, but they really try to triage. Sometimes there just aren't enough resources, and some of the administrative decisions that have been made have been wrongheaded, but there seems to be a general sentiment that everyone should have access to health care.

Sometimes there's money questions in what's covered, but that happens with any kind of insurance, and at least the questions are debated publicly. It's complicated, especially since the underlying science changes all the time.

My experience is relatively good. If I have anything bothering me, I can go to either my GP or an after-hours clinic, and they'll usually be quite nice to me, and sort out my problem. I've had to wait for referrals occasionally, but not for an emergency. When I've been broke, I haven't had to worry about the wasted expense if it's nothing, and the doctors usually ask about drug insurance before prescribing anything expensive (and offer something cheaper and/or see if they have samples if cost is a problem). I've had some crappy doctors, and some that are amazing (one drew me pictures of the structures of the lungs on the examining table paper, and would always give a few fun facts about whatever problem I brought to him...I liked him) I can switch doctors at any time. When friends and family have been seriously ill, the hospitals have sometimes been grim, and the doctors, not always perfect, but they didn't need to really worry about money. When my husband had a nasty infection in his leg last year, he went off to the doctor every couple days for a few weeks, so they could keep track and make sure it was resolving, we didn't even have to think about the cost, and didn't consider skipping appointments to save money. My father had a pile of diagnostic tests all within a week of a crisis last year. Really, most of us just assume that if we really need it, we'll get care, and that that's the way it should be.

Folks,

Here is a link to a slideshow from a Canadian source.  It discusses both the strengths and weaknesses of the Canadian system.  It also compares the Canadian system to other European systems.  The recent Supreme court ruling forcing the Canadian government to allow private health insurance is also discussed.

Use your arrow buttons to go from slide to slide.

http://www.boardoftrade.com/policy/CanadianHealthcareSystem10jun05.ppt#22

Tom Maddux

The UK,

I've never been seriously ill myself, but generally I find the NHS (National Health Service) to be OK. I was a bit surprised that when I tried to re-book an appointment the next one wa a few months later, but it wasn't for anything serious so I think it's fair enough.

There are of course problems with our hospitals, and those need to be sorted out. But abolishing a system that is free at the point of care is not the answer.

I do realise private healthcare can be much better...my cousin went to a wonderful private hospital a while back and was seen and treated immeidately. However, if she'd had an ongoing problem there's no way she could've afforded to pay the money regulalry. Few people I know could, if anyone.

I realise it's my culture that has brought about this belief, but I see free healthcare as a basic human right. I, and many others, would be rioting on the street if the NHS was abolished. Life is not a business...the capitalists can go too far. Life is a right.

  O.K. a pattern seems to be developing, people in countries with socialized medicine have some complaints but for the most part are happy with their care. The complaints are nowhere near the horror stories we are reading from people in the U.S.A. (A lot more people from the U.S. posted on the other board but I couldn't edit out all the language.) 


   I have yet to read about people in other countries losing their homes, going without food, waiting for months and months to qualify because of medical cost. Waking up in the hospital to find out your insurance company is denying your ambulance cost because you forgot to authorize it while you were unconscious! (See Sicko) So the arguments I have heard over and over about "Lawsuits" and "Waiting Lists" simply don't justify the the fact that "The Richest Country in the World" is 37th when it comes to healthcare.

   

Dave,

A few quotes from one of your posts:


You asked me, "Why are you always against your own best interests?"

There are two answers to your question:

1. First, I am not at all sure that government provided healthcare is in my best interest.  I have experienced that level of healthcare...adequate but spartan.  In the USAF I experienced the "take these papers and follow the green line to window 6" type of treatment you get in such places. 

I spent three weeks in the hospital at Norton AFB back in 1962 or 63.  I was in a 12 bed ward with guys with all sorts of ailments.  The guy in the next bed walked in with his feet spread three feet apart...he had the mumps.  I have never had the mumps.  They put this guy in the next bed to mine!!! 

2. The other reason is that I believe that dependence on the government is not good for people personally or as a society.  Look at the quotes above.  I sympathize with this woman's problem...but it is obviously partially self inflicted.

She complains that: a. She has had to feed her kid popcorn for dinner. b. Her house has been in foreclosure.  She also says they make too much money to qualify for Medicaid.

So, sell your house, move into an apartment that does not cost as much and use the money for health care.  Then perhaps her child will not have to eat popcorn!  In other words, take care of yourself until you can't do it any more, then we will help you.

This woman's sense of entitlement disturbs me.  I am supposed to pay for her medical care so she can continue to buy a house!  Why do I owe her this?  Why do you?

In the past, the USA we had a two-level healthcare system that worked quite well.  Those who could afford it got top level healthcare, those who could not got county provided healthcare.  It was slightly better than military level healthcare.  Spartan but adequate.  People we know from these boards have used that healthcare when they were poor students.  I can name three of them.

American leftists admire Europe and wish us to emulate its societies.  Dave, these are sick and dying societies.  They live by borrowing more and more money, mortgaging their grandkids lives so they can have it easy.

Abortion, hedonism,and loss of a sense of purpose for life as a result of their secular beliefs have led to sub-replacement level birthrates.  So they have to let foreigners, who they hate, into their countries so someone can do the work.  (Many of them are Muslims which they are finally realizing is a BIG problem.)  This problem is getting worse, not better. It has been calculated that in 200 years there will be no Italy, or at least no Italians!  Japan has the same problems.

These dying societies are our models for the future??

Here, we have a mild welfare state.  I have no problem with that.  Those that can take care of themselves.  Those that can't we can help. Those that simply won't take care of themselves...they need to experience the logical consequences of their choices.  Before being overwhelmed by illegal immigration our county healthcare systems worked quite well.  They are still in place but heavily strained.

Many complain that this is not "fair".  Life is not fair, never has been, never will be. Not for me, not for you.  I have no argument with the idea that we need to improve our healthcare system.  Lawsuit reform, a better drug approval system, improvements in our insurance programs and more.  But not at the cost of the basic American values of self-reliance, hard work, individualism and freedom.  We did not follow Europe to our present position in the world, and I see no reason to begin now.

Tom Maddux

1. First, I am not at all sure that government provided healthcare is in my best interest.  I have experienced that level of healthcare...adequate but spartan.  In the USAF I experienced the "take these papers and follow the green line to window 6" type of treatment you get in such places. 

I spent three weeks in the hospital at Norton AFB back in 1962 or 63.  I was in a 12 bed ward with guys with all sorts of ailments.  The guy in the next bed walked in with his feet spread three feet apart...he had the mumps.  I have never had the mumps.  They put this guy in the next bed to mine!!! 

  Yes, as I mentioned before, I don't understand why our military seems to treat its' own in such a demoralizing way, It makes you wonder, Do they want to keep you in a subservient position? Like in the Assembly, we were treated like dirt and then we blamed ourselves, "I guess I just deserve to be treated like this." As "Sicko" and the people who have contributed  to this thread from all over the world have shown their system works much more efficiently.


This woman's sense of entitlement disturbs me.  I am supposed to pay for her medical care so she can continue to buy a house!  Why do I owe her this?  Why do you?

  You bring up a good point!


  Why?  Why should our medical cost eat up our life savings?  While working in the medical field I've seen it all. If a patient request 2 Tylenol they get charged $ 6.50 Other countries arn't doing this to their own citizens! 

   Dave, these are sick and dying societies. It has been calculated that in 200 years there will be no Italy, or at least no Italians!


  You really have to qualify these kinds of statements.


  My question concerning "your best interest"  is directed to the fact that our healthcare system works for the poor and the rich. But as we have read and many people have pointed out over the past thirty years it hurts the middle class. People who make too much to qualify for coverage. These people end up losing everything they have worked for. I can't help but wonder if one day you might find yourself in this position. How will you feel about it then?
 

Dave,

You have brought up some excellent points.


The reason I have brought up my experience in the military is that it is analogous to government provided healthcare in general.  The main similarity is that military healthcare is a percentage of the overall military budget, just like any national healthcare system is a percentage of the overall national government of any country.

Healthcare in these systems must compete with all the other departments for their share.  So, political clout is what determines what you get.  In the military the sick folks can't vote, so they get leftovers...UNTIL there is a public scandal that focuses the public's sentiments on the bad situations that exist.

The same thing happened in England a few years ago.  You have to be over about 70 to have any real memory of a free market healthcare system.  So the people have never experienced a higher level of care, so they don't miss it.  Anyhow, things declined for years, until it became a big scandal, then the politicians fell all over themselves promising to allocate more money to healthcare.

The problem is that when you allocate more healthcare you have to either cut some other department's budget.  Roads?  Harbors?  Defense? Health Department?  Police?  Fire?  Water systems? Or....Education?  (Ever hear teachers complain that the gov't doesn't spend enough on education?)

Or, you must raise taxes.  However, when you are already confiscating 50% of what people make, (as they do in Europe), that isn't easy either.  So, they borrow, and borrow, and borrow more.  Our national debt, which is immense, is a far lower percent of our GNP than any major European country.  What this means is that our kids and grandkids will have to pay for all the "free" healthcare.  Imagine what it will mean for theirs.

Folks who never had any kids, or who killed the ones they started before they were born don't seem to care.  I think this attitude is deplorable.


First of all, you are attempting to answer a legitimate question by asking another question.  But, I will answer you.  I should spend my savings for what benifits me and my family rather than making you pay for it. 

Now, I have answered your question.  Can you answer mine by building a positive case why you or I should have to pay for another person's lack of foresight?  I am not talking about poverty people, I am talking about folks who "make too much to qualify for medicaid" as the lady you quoted did.  They have money, but they have spent it on things they would rather have.

I will answer the last question on another post.

Tom Maddux

Dave,


Every major European country has this problem.  In Russia it is worse than in Italy.  In the 1980's Germany had to make the military service term for draftees longer.  There weren't enough young men reaching draft age to replace the ones that were finishing their terms.


In 1984 my daughter Glory was being treated for cancer.  I had an old copy of my policy description and it seemed to exclude paying for chemotherapeutic agents.  (Actually they were excluding insulin but the description was not clear.)  They came to me and told me I need to pay about $20,000 over the 18 month course of treatment.  I didn't have 20,000 cents!  I stood there and looked at that doctor and thought, "I'll sell the house." 

What had happened was I was having to choose between two things I valued.  My daughter's welfare and the house.  Glory's life was obviously more important than a house!  It took me under 15 seconds to make up my mind on that.

 Life if full of choices, Dave.  Not that big, but we can never have all we wish we could.  First things must be first.  Why should other people be charged so I can have all the stuff I want?

It turned out that my policy did cover the agents she needed.  But as long as I thought I was going to have to find the money myself, I was determined that she would have what she needed, no matter what it cost.   If we had had nothing, Medicaid would have paid for it.  But I had, at the time, a net worth of probably $300,000. Mainly the house. I was cash poor, but I had one big financial resource. Should I have sent the bill to other folks when I had hundreds of thousands of dollars available? 

So, I know exactly how it feels to face this.   But I still don't think you should have to pay my medical bills.

Tom Maddux

In 1984 my daughter Glory was being treated for cancer.  I had an old copy of my policy description and it seemed to exclude paying for chemotherapeutic agents.  (Actually they were excluding insulin but the description was not clear.)  They came to me and told me I need to pay about $20,000 over the 18 month course of treatment.  I didn't have 20,000 cents!  I stood there and looked at that doctor and thought, "I'll sell the house." 

What had happened was I was having to choose between two things I valued.  My daughter's welfare and the house.  Glory's life was obviously more important than a house!  It took me under 15 seconds to make up my mind on that.

 Life if full of choices, Dave.  Not that big, but we can never have all we wish we could.  First things must be first.  Why should other people be charged so I can have all the stuff I want?

It turned out that my policy did cover the agents she needed.  But as long as I thought I was going to have to find the money myself, I was determined that she would have what she needed, no matter what it cost.   If we had had nothing, Medicaid would have paid for it.  But I had, at the time, a net worth of probably $300,000. Mainly the house. I was cash poor, but I had one big financial resource. Should I have sent the bill to other folks when I had hundreds of thousands of dollars available? 

So, I know exactly how it feels to face this.   But I still don't think you should have to pay my medical bills.


   That's very commendable!

    Let's say for a moment you had to make that sacrifice. Today you are living in an apartment and while you read the paper you come across an article about the healthcare system in Canada. You find out that a person in your same situation had everything covered in their healthcare plan. They were able to keep their house. The thought wouldn't cross your mind, "Hey, maybe they are on to something up there?"


(This probably should be the subject of another thread.)


  Personally if I lost my house it would take a big chunk out of my self-esteem. Why?

          I am an American! (Will explain later) I know (suspect) when I meet people and the conversation gets around to, 'Where do you live?" I know (suspect) they are sizing me up. If I say, "We rent an apartment in Santa Ana." It is probable they will think, "Oh, boy you sure haven't done much with your 45 years on this earth!"

    Being an American means that "I live in the land of Freedom and Opportunity!"  Being an American means  that I hold to the belief that any penniless immigrant who escapes the prison of his former government and comes to America has "every opportunity" to realize the "American Dream."  This maxim (myth?) is part of our heritage it is woven into the fabric of our nationality! I AM AN AMERICAN!  I CAN EASILY BECOME ANYTHING I WANT TO BE!  LOOK! SEE EVERYWHERE YOU CAN FIND PEOPLE IN AMERICA WHO CAME FROM NOTHING! FROM WARREN BUFFET TO  BRITNEY SPEARS! SUCCESS STORIES ARE EVERYWHERE! NOW IF FOR SOME REASON I DON"T ACHIEVE THIS FOREORDAINED GLORY? IF FOR SOME UNEXPLAINABLE ANOMALY I DON"T MAKE IT! WHOSE FAULT IS IT BUT MY OWN? I AM A LOSER!!!!!!!!  I AM A BUM!!!!  O.K. I'll stop. But I think you can see my point. While we have this belief that America is the land of opportunity the truth is very few people ever achieve the "American Dream"  So my point is, if you have worked hard your whole life and your insurance doesn't cover the cost of your illness, I don't think people should have the right to look down on you. You should be treated better than that! The government should say, "Hey this guy has worked hard his whole life. We should in turn help him!" Other countries do it!  Why not the richest country in the world?


     

Folks,

Here is some info on the European population problem.

 .................................................................  

 
Published: September 3, 2006
 
 
"...The result is birthrates that are the lowest in the world - and the lowest sustained rates in history: 1.2 per woman in the Czech Republic, Slovenia, Latvia and Poland, far below the rate of 2.1 needed to maintain population.
 
West European countries are also suffering: Greece, Italy and Spain have had rates of 1.3 and under for a decade.
 
But Eastern Europe is faced with a desperate double whammy: plummeting birthrates combined with emigration to Western Europe for work, made easier by membership in the EU.
 
As countries begin to feel the demographic crunch, Europe's "birth dearth" is becoming a political issue. Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany pushed through a package of family-boosting incentives for working women in June, and President Vladimir Putin warned in May that Russia's population decline was critical. Almost all governments are increasing baby bonuses.
 
"If you have a fertility [rate] of 1.2 or 1.3, you need to do something about it - it's really quite a problem," said Tomas Sobotka of the Vienna Institute of Demography.
 
In an attempt to turn the tide, the Czech Parliament voted unanimously this year to double the payment given to women on maternity leave to encourage new births. To maintain the country's work force, the Czech Labor Ministry several years ago set up a program to encourage emigration from Bulgaria, Croatia, Kazakhstan and Ukraine, although so far with limited results.
 
With the population of the Czech Republic projected to drop by 20 percent over the next 40 years, to 8 million from 10 million, "in this year's election every political party had a platform on family issues," said Professor Jitka Rychtarikova, a demographer at Charles University who has been advising the government.
 
"Europe is at a turning point," said Hans-Peter Kohler, a sociologist at the University of Pennsylvania who has warned that some countries could see their populations decline by nearly half in the next 50 years.
 
In Brussels, Vladimir Spidla, the EU's commissioner for employment and social affairs, who coincidentally is Czech, has asked that all new EU policies be evaluated for their effect on demography.
 
"We take this very seriously and are trying to understand more about it in order to reverse the process," said Spidla's spokeswoman, von Schnurbein.
 
In 1990, no European country had a fertility rate less than 1.3; by 2002, there were 15, with six more below 1.4. No European country is maintaining its population through births, and only France - with a rate of 1.8 - has the potential to do so, according to a recent report from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
who has warned that some countries could see their populations decline by nearly half in the next 50 years.
 
In Brussels, Vladimir Spidla, the EU's commissioner for employment and social affairs, who coincidentally is Czech, has asked that all new EU policies be evaluated for their effect on demography.
 
"We take this very seriously and are trying to understand more about it in order to reverse the process," said Spidla's spokeswoman, von Schnurbein.
 
In 1990, no European country had a fertility rate less than 1.3; by 2002, there were 15, with six more below 1.4. No European country is maintaining its population through births, and only France - with a rate of 1.8 - has the potential to do so, according to a recent report from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development."

................................................

All of the burgeoning population growth is happening in third world countries, with China and India in the lead.  In the future when overcrowded Asians look at depopulated Europe, what do you think they are likely to do?  

Ever hear of Ghengis Kahn?

Tom Maddux

I don't understand your point? The decrease in population won't support the system?

So let's not save people from starvation today because they will just starve tomorrow?

Oh well I guess we've just about ezhausted this topic anyway.


 

Dave,

1. In the USA the only way one can starve is through ignorance or indolence.  Right here in Orange County there are a number of places where folks with no money can go and load up with free food.  My church, EV Free, is one of them.  We have a ministry called the Pantry where poor folks can come and pick up dry and canned goods.  We have a clothing ministry as well.  Those who claim that they must choose between medicine and food are either ignorant of the available resources, too lazy to help themselves,  or exagerating.

2. My point in giving the population statistics was that Europe, the great utopian dream in the minds of many "liberals", is a dying society.  Seems to me that a society that is in its death throes is not a very good model to copy. 

We need a tune up in our medical system, not a transplant.

Tom Maddux

  There is a recent event in the news that might be worth considering for those who are advocates of Socialized medicine.

   This event regards the bombing attempts in England and Scotland that seem to have been the work of Medical workers in Great Britain who were in the country with foreign work visas.  You see, under socialized medicine the pay for doctors is not very attractive to the natives and so the country has to import foreign workers who are willing to accept a low level of pay.

   (We don't have that problem here because the higher pay in the USA attracts the brightest and the best who are paid on the basis of their achievement.)

   In accepting these immigrants from radicalized Isalmic countries Europe has opened the door to the kind of dangerous beliefs that have no thought of assimilation. 

   The private sector is often attacked as being based on human greed vs. a spirit of philanthropy that puts human suffering above making a profit.  I guess in a perfect world, where humanity can be reformed to fit into some kind of social system that is not-for-profit medical care in nature, we would be able to find all kinds of volunteers to work for low pay.

  I'd rather pay up to get the very best doctor that I can afford, vs. the cheapest one we can locate from the 3rd World (who might want to blow me up)---- even if that greedy doctor's only motive is to make a good living.

                                                               God bless,  Mark C.       

   Marc, I can't believe that you connected terrorists to low pay!  Have you actually looked up their pay scale? (Not terrorists, doctors!)a joke! The argument that U.K. doctors make really low pay in England is taken on by Moore in the movie. He doesn't just quote numbers he takes you into the home of a very young doctor and shows you his standard of living. I believe he was somewhere around 150 k? I could be low on this.


  Tom, I am well aware that the poor get free food. Moore's argument time and time again is "Working Class Americans"  People who have healthcare coverage in America are finding out time and time again that their coverage doesn't cover their cost! 


 Moore's argument:

            Healthcare in the U.S. is ranked 37th in the world! Is supported by the facts! Also the contributions of people from all over the world to this thread. 

Your counter argument:

             "Other countries have long lines, poor services, attract terrorists and will destroy Italy" have yet to show any real substance.  Where are your facts?

           Tom, I accept your conviction that others shouldn't be expected to pay for your daughter's cancer. It is a real blessing that your insurance did cover it! However other countries have adopted a policy to cover their citizens regardless their ability to pay. I would think this is in the best interest of all. )possibly in line with the example of Christ?)


  I think a truthful argument would focus on money! This is the obvious bottom line!  Why can't you accept this?


           

             

Dave,


1. I have read web articles about doctor shortages in Canada and England by simply googling "criticism of government provided healthcare".

2. The facts on the "destruction" of Italy, and the rest of Europe for that matter were contained in the article I linked.  BTW, what I said was Europe is dying, not that someone was going to destroy it.  The faithless, hopeless, hedonistic Europeans are doing quite a fine job all by themselves.

The article stated that 15 European countries have birthrates below 1.3 children per couple.  It takes a birthrate of a minimum of 2.1 children per couple just to maintain a country's population at its current level.  1.3 is a disastrous rate of decline.  The article also said that only one European country even has a chance of turning the decline around.

Our own birthrate, btw, is about 1.9 children per couple.  Not quite high enough to stay even, but because of immigration our population grows steadily.  I wonder if the influx of Mexicans and other hispanics will raise the birthrate in the future.

This is not new information, Dave.  I first learned of the decline when I read "The Birth Dearth" by Ben Wattenberg of the Heritage Foundation back around 1990.

Tom Maddux

1. I have read web articles about doctor shortages in Canada and England by simply googling "criticism of government provided healthcare".


Again, I have agreed that there are problems in other countries but are they comparable with the fact that someone in the U.S. loses their home?  is charged 60 grand to have a finger reattached? is denied services despite the fact they responded to the 911 disaster? The answer is no!



This is not new information, Dave.  I first learned of the decline when I read "The Birth Dearth" by Ben Wattenberg of the Heritage Foundation back around 1990.



I would like to read this book. Its premise, "Europe will die in 200 years because Europeans are not having enough children." seems incredibly far reaching, not considering a multitude of factors. The Heritage Foundation?  Who are they?

Dave,

The "lose your home" argument seems quite flawed to me.  Let's say that a couple is sitting on, say, $300,000 in equity in their house.  They suffer some catastrophic illness, and that is their only large financial resource they have to pay for medical expenses.

Another couple rents their house, but have $300,000 in various investments.  So the amount of financial resources is the same.

Would you say the folks who have their money invested in a house should not have to pay, but the one's with the money in stocks, bonds, and such should have to pay?

Or is your argument that no one should have to pay their bills?

Regarding the statement you made about the Birth Dearth:  I learned about the problem in general from the book.  I learned about the problem in Italy from PBS!  This is not some weird idea only believed by right wing nuts.

Do the math.  Let's say a country had 200 million people of childbearing age. and a birthrate of 2.0 children per couple.  The birthrate is an overall figure.  Some folks have 4 kids, some have none, but it averages out to 2.0.

In this country this group of 100 million couples would produce 200 million kids. They would have replaced themselves. The population, over time, would remain pretty stable.

In another country with an equal group of childbearing-age people and a birthrate of 1.3 per couple, they would produce 130 million kids...a drop of 70 million in that demographic group. 

In the following generation with the same birthrate, the 65 million couples would produce only 84.5 million kids.  That is a drop of 58% in only two generations...say 60 years or so.

Keep this up or 5 generations or so., and its bye bye to your country!!  Its all in the math.

Remember, right now there are 15 countries in Europe with birthrates BELOW 1.3 per couple.

Hmmmm.  I wonder how one says "lebensraum" in Chinese?   ;)


Tom Maddux



Tom Maddux

My argument:


         The U.S.A. is by far the richest country in the world, therefore it should be at the forefront of services to its citizenry. Yet we are 37th!  What?  Why? Because human beings in the U.S.A. are a commodity, they are something to be used for profit! It is more important to have medical institutions, companies, shareholders, doctors make lots of money in our country while in other countries such as Canada, France, England etc the value of their citizenry is given a priority above money.  (correct me if I am wrong but wouldn't Jesus be closer to this side of the issue?)

Dave,

Here is an interesting link.  The author, who says he is an economic adviser to Barak Obama, agrees with you about problems in our health care system.  (btw, so do I)

However, he disagrees with the idea that we should scrap our whole system and replace it with a national healthcare system.

He agrees with me: Reform over replacement.

http://slate.com/id/2169454/

Tom Maddux

Dave,

37th?  Says who?  Oh, so WHO said it.  (World Health Organization).

I will refrain from going off on a tangent by describing the corruption and incompetence of the UN, and simply post a link which details the manner at which the WHO arrived at this statistic.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1272/is_2665_129/ai_66011865

Tom Maddux

I just have discovered the gospel of Thomas!


Thomas 3:42-45


        And in those days the sick with all manner of diseases came unto him saying 'Heal us master." And as the multitude pressed amongst them, Thomas, one of the twelve cried out, "All right, all right, whose got cash?" "Do you expect to be healed for free?" 

45-46
  Then commeth forth another amongst them who rebuked Thomas by saying, "See that these have not to pay with?" "Search the scriptures!"  "When did the prophets charge for that which God hath given freely?" Wherin Thomas did regret and was therewith silent!

   Hezekiah 9:11------ It came to pass, that one day a lazy sluggard tripped and broke his leg as he came from much strong drink with his comrades.  Next door was his hard working neighbor who came over to help and carried him to a place where his wounds could be ministered unto.  The lazy drunkard was not thankful, nor was he repentant regarding his evil ways.  He just expected that others would take care of him and that he would never have to take responsibility for his own life.  The wise neighbor then realized that the most loving thing he could do for the foolish one is to next time let him face the facts of his mistakes and thus develop character that places value on preparing for ones own future.  After the wise man read the Proverbs, "go to the ant thou sluggard-----" he went away very happy in the knowledge that his society is better served by good individual character in it's members vs. craddle to grave entitlement programs for all!

                                                                   God bless,  Mark C.

        Yes, Marc you bring up a very good point. (Maybe this should be on a different thread?) As a school teacher I am constantly riding those students who are lazy, irresponsible, slobs, those who expect others just to carry them through every assignment. It would be so much easier for me to teach in a school were individuals had to pay out of their own pockets.

I think we've beat this dead horse enough.

47-48.

"But then Thomas remembered the words of the Lord Jesus when he said, "beware and be on your guard against every form of greed; for not even when one has an abundance does his life consist of his possessions."

Then Thomas said to the sick, "If thou art truly poor we shall help thee.  But if you are merely wealthy, indulgent American Liberals who wish to preserve their luxurious lifestyle by shifting legitimate responsibilities onto others by using taxation to confiscate the money produced by thier labor....then hit the road Jack."

TM

Wip that dead animal! Yeeeea! smack!

Dave,

 I propose universal health care for all animals as well.  Your call to "whip horses" is clearly an abusive attitude and one with which I strongly disagree!! :rofl:

                                                              God Bless,  Mark C.

Yes! Then my cat can qualify for dialysis when she gets kidney failure at the end of her life.
In fact, I'm going to sue because one of my cats had to die because I couldn't afford medical care for her kidney failure. Does anyone here have a contact in the government, ie, are there any democrats aboard?  ;)

I'm going to sue because one of my cats had to die because I couldn't afford medical care for her kidney failure.


   Moon, sorry about your cat!   :'(

Summary of discussion:

          Assertion: "Although the U.S.A. is the richest country in the world its healthcare system ranks 37th and leaves many individuals in heartbreaking financial losses and even death."


         Argument: "Other countries have a quality of healthcare that is substandard to the U.S.A."


          Counter:  I provided testimonies from people all over the world and the U.S.A. They have supported the assertion that although other countries have their problems they in no way compare to the U.S.A.


          Counter: Italy will be gone in 200 years! Counter:Swiftboat the W.H.O. Counter: Free grace is abused by human nature!



  This doesn't really address the fact that the richest country in the world is 37th!  Tom, Marc, would it destroy your pride to just accept this fact?  I am tired of beating this dead hor...er hippogriff (Sorry Marc)
and am bowing out!  Good-by!

Folks,

Dave and I had some discussion about falling birthrates.

Here is a link to an London Daily News article about a huge youth campaign where the young folks are encouraged to "do it for the Motherland". 

The reason for this is that Russia's population is dropping at a rate of a million per year!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=471324&in_page_id=1770

Oh, by the way, for anyone who cannot or will not do the math, state provided health care requires either: 1. A stable or growing population  2. Constant borrowing to keep the system running.

To have an aging population due to low birthrates means that a system with a growing number of health care consumers, (the old folks), must be supported by a rapidly declining number of tax-paying producers, (the young folks).  Hence, the need to borrow, and borrow, and borrow some more.

One might call it the "send the bills to your grandkids" system.

btw, the main point of the article is Russia's current political slide toward more and more state control.  I linked it to point out that the population problem is real and growing.

Tom Maddux

Answer (from a Canandian doctor):

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=270338135202343 (http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=270338135202343)

"One often-heard argument, voiced by the New York Times' Paul Krugman and others, is that America lags behind other countries in crude health outcomes. But such outcomes reflect a mosaic of factors, such as diet, lifestyle, drug use and cultural values. It pains me as a doctor to say this, but health care is just one factor in health.

Americans live 75.3 years on average, fewer than Canadians (77.3) or the French (76.6) or the citizens of any Western European nation save Portugal. Health care influences life expectancy, of course. But a life can end because of a murder, a fall or a car accident. Such factors aren't academic — homicide rates in the U.S. are much higher than in other countries.

In The Business of Health, Robert Ohsfeldt and John Schneider factor out intentional and unintentional injuries from life-expectancy statistics and find that Americans who don't die in car crashes or homicides outlive people in any other Western country.

And if we measure a health care system by how well it serves its sick citizens, American medicine excels. Five-year cancer survival rates bear this out. For leukemia, the American survival rate is almost 50%; the European rate is just 35%. Esophageal carcinoma: 12% in the U.S., 6% in Europe. The survival rate for prostate cancer is 81.2% here, yet 61.7% in France and down to 44.3% in England — a striking variation.

Like many critics of American health care, though, Krugman argues that the costs are just too high: health care spending in Canada and Britain, he notes, is a small fraction of what Americans pay. Again, the picture isn't quite as clear as he suggests. Because the U.S. is so much wealthier than other countries, it isn't unreasonable for it to spend more on health care. Take America's high spending on research and development. M.D. Anderson in Texas, a prominent cancer center, spends more on research than Canada does."

The article goes on further to explain that Canada's health care is becoming more privatized, even though it is illegal in some cases.  The government just turns a blind eye because their socialized health care system sucks so bad they need relief and are willing to take it, sanctioned by the current laws or not.
Privatization is the way to go baby!  More socialization is a death sentence to good health care.  Period.  End of story.

Folks,

Read the article linked on Gu3st's post below, and you will be GLAD that we are 37th in health care!!!!

(Whatever 37th actually means)

Tom Maddux