The system isn't be distributed at this point, it's in a free market for anyone who wants it to acquire it. Blue cross blue shield even has a website, you can go from uninsured to insured in less than 24 hours.
Nor have I but again we have different solutions.

It's not excuses, it's reality. Do you have enough free time to solve all the worlds problems? If you care so much why aren't you here demonstrating instead of being abroad working?

There is no way that can be said with any certainty.
Now we're talking about price ceilings and subsidies, both of which I have political objections and economical objections to.

A person should be paid exactly what they can convince someone else to pay them, that's what your worth in a free market economy.

Blue cross blue shield is nation wide and affordable.

Firstly if your going to preach down to me from a high horse I better be seeing you at every single rally that advocates nationalized health care or you being a hypocrite. I have a life to live, I have a family to take care of and I DO NOT trust the people around me to take as good of care of me and my family as I will. I will walk through hell to make sure they have everything they need and not everyone can say that, so no thanks on the lumping me into a group with people who lack the motivation I do.

Like smokers and drunks and junkies and mothers having children they can't afford and illegal aliens and failed attempted suicides... all these examples and not a single one do I ever believe I should be accountable for or have to pay for. We've already hashed this aspect out though and again we're starting to talk ourselves in circles.

Well... that's why you buy insurance, you buy car insurance to cover accidents, you buy health insurance to cover unexpected medical events.

Or if you've got insurance and even then there will be deductibles. Practicing medicine is expensive, the equipment is expensive, the facilities are expensive, the employees are expensive, we can just pretend like these costs don't exist for the sake of 'fairness'.
Got that in writing anywhere? I believe it to be untrue unless you have something to prove me otherwise because I know people that are currently on Medicare and they aren't living on the street, I realize this is anecdotal again, but hey that's the things we form our opinions around, but I'm open minded, show me where I'm wrong.
Nonsense. Unemployment is at around 4.5% which many economists would call full employment, there are jobs out there.

Well if it comes down to moving or letting my family do without the things they need then I'm packing my bags and going somewhere there is a job and I'll work it. There's plenty of excuses for not working, but only one person to blame.
There is state and federal assistance available to people who've fallen on these types of hard times and most mortgage companies will work out a plan, because it isn't in their interest to see it go into foreclosure, but again all this stuff requires effort.

Any job where there is a risk of injury is required by law to carry both workmans comp and disability. Workman comp lasts as long as the injury prevents you from being able to work and if you become disabled, disability is for life.

Where is her husband?

A market isn't free if it's being manipulated, your framing the discussion to fit your ideal.

I disagree, 100%. Competition is the single best deterrent to market manipulation.

The WTO is run by the UN, which is run by third world despots that refuse to acknowledge the medical information that comes out of Cuba and Venezuela isn't biased based on the fact the communist government controls the dissemination of information.
If my taxes get raised to pay for the health care of everyone then me and the people I love most are going to suffer. They mean more to me than any stranger and I'm not willing to sacrifice my hard earned money to go to some crack head.

In the military it's free for everyone and it get abused. People come in for things they could take care of themselves, but they use it to the point of abuse because it's free, just like what we see in Canada with the giant waiting lists.

In systems where it's 100% subsidized the system gets abused, hence the waiting list and what they never mention is that after a period of time care has to be rationed and then people are going without again...

We are $9 trillion dollars in debt... no we don't have the money.

LOL, so who's going to cover the cost when a doctor screws up? How is the family going to be compensated? This is why you have malpractice...
You can call it that if you want, but the reality is the cost of medical procedures is high and they're inflated by people who are unable to pay. MRI machines, KAT scans, X-ray machines all carry million dollar price tags and those costs don't change just because Uncle Sam is taking over.

So tell me again how an injured worker is supposed to pay his mortgage?

__________________

You can scapegoat all you want to and you can try to cherry pick to support that but if you actually go through the links you will realize that its not something that can be blamed on illegal immigration nor are states who have the lower rates of illegal immigration doing any better.

I also dont think pretending one corporate owned party is at fault vs the other corporate owned party.

I agree that ONLY U.S. citizens should be eligible for a universal healthcare plan. At the point of implementation, proof positive of U.S. citizenship will be required to receive your plan I.D. card. Period.

Private medical technology companies will/should be encouraged to develop breakthrough equipment. We will simply spread the cost-of-use of that equipment among all plan participants - all 300,000,000 million of us. Unfair? I don't know about you, but I'd be willing to put my share of taxes toward a piece of equipment I'll likely not need just in case a loved one does need it.

I think - as doctors and hospitals will remain private entities - that "reasonable" (I know, how do we define that?) damages awards based on gross negligence should be allowed. All suits shouldn't be banned; there just needs to be a demonstrable higher level of harm to win.

To me, the bottom line is that healthcare is too important to be left in the control of "middle-men" insurance companies and pharmaceutical giants. We need to demand of our government - the one that we hired - a single-payer universal healthcare plan, and it needs to be the way we want it!

__________________
"Just because you can, doesn't mean you should."
-- Author Unknown

Who's going to make those determinations? Who's going to oversee it? Who's going to pay the people that enforce and over see it? Who's going to pay out those damages? These are costs I'm willing to push onto the tax payer as they should bare no responsibility for negligence.
Right on! The people that should be running the show ought to be the doctors and the patients, not some third party group like umm.... THE IMPERIAL FEDERAL GOVERNMENT who already owes $9 TRILLION dollars and over $500 TRILLION in unpaid promises to the tax payers.

__________________

Not everyone has the means to participate...which is the problem.


Sure it can. We were making discoveries long before it made anyone filthy rich! People are curious by nature, we have a drive to learn and discover and its in our best interest to do so. We want to cure diseases that kill us and make us suffer.

We already give govt money to research projects and we already utilize subsidies. The free market can go through wild flucuations few would be able to survive very well so we put our own controls in to help alleviate that problem.


Affordable has wide variances and what you consider affordable may be out of reach for others.


You already are! Its not socialized medicine that changes this. Much of the conditions you mentioned would most likely mean a person is already below the poverty line and they do qualify for the more expensive govt funded health care programs now...programs that could be eliminated by streamlining into one plan for everyone.

You pay to jail them, to process them through the court system, the police to track them down and deal with any criminal issues that stem from illegal drug use or addiction.

Not everyone can afford health insurance.

Thats why its good to get rid of profit driven insurance companies and create one plan that everyone is in via our own tax dollars. We can get the most for our money and cover everyone.


Medicaid is a welfare program and you must be below poverty line to qualify. Assets like owning a home (and even a car) can place you above that line and disqualify you. Its possible to retain ownership BUT they would have to be assessed at very low value but its not very likely.

They will calculate that asset and add it to your monthly income which makes it too easy to be above their limit. The limits are pretty low.

http://www.health.state.ny.us/health...dicaid/#income

LOL, and do you believe that there is ANY PLACE on this earth that actually calculates their TRUE unemployment rates? A person working part time and not making it isnt even counted. How do you actually COUNT everyone? Many who are looking are not on unemployment..how do they get themselves counted?

What about all those who simply dont make enough to pay for rent power food AND medical coverage?


They dont require jobs to provide disability. They only require workmans comp and thats limited. Permanant disablity means you will have to go to the govt, the employer is not on the hook AND to accept workmans comp means you cant sue the employer for the injury or disablity you recieved at the job or due to the job.

You are also not protected from being terminated while on on disability from that job and on workmans comp. They can fire you once you have used the 12 weeks that FMLA gives you.




I think you meant to say the WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION (not the world trade organization).

Its still funny to try and say that Venezuela or Cuba have more influence in the UN than the US does!

They did a solid study and you can look up their methodology yourself, they dont have some secret agenda to create universal health care in the US...they are just trying to see whats working and what isnt.

Your taxes wouldnt need to be raised to cover universal health care. The US currently SPENDS MORE than the rest of the developed world on health care yet doesnt deliver to all. Its the bureaucracy and lack of price controls and the money thats allocated to profit thats at fault...remove those problems and you can provide more service for less money than is spent now.

LOL, its not free its part of their PAYCHECK and used to entice them to join in the first place. Its just another example of bureaurocracy because there are too many DIFFERENT health care programs that all operate seperately from each other...it creates massive and expensive inefficiency. This is another health care program (along with medicaid, medicare and workmans comp) that could be eliminated and that money diverted into one single system.

It would also be true that they have MORE INJURIES that the normal population due to current war and previous wars.

Not true. Areas that have quick and heavy growth are the ones who suffer shortages but that isnt the case for the entire nation. Canada is a good example of this..they do have some high growth areas this happened in but its not the same for all of Canada. The high growth areas will catch up. This would occur even in a private setting.

Then we have to stop funding such a massive military and wars, stop govt corruption and corporate welfare and take our tax money back to use it on ourselves, our own nation and our own people...that is the solution I am in favor of anyway.


Well the normal universal care system would take care of the medical costs. The doctor would then lose their license and STOP doing harm...currently most actually get to keep practicing.

We all PAY for this NOW...do you think you DONT? You pay for malpractice in higher doctor fees and higher fees for services.

Sure they do because the problem of not getting paid ceases to exist and you have reasonable price controls. Currently insurance companies negotiate set prices for procedures...the govt can do the same thing.

You can do the same thing for equipment.

Well his health cost would be covered in the universal care system. That doesnt address financial issues OUTSIDE the health services arena and I you could either cover it via the federal govt or require employers to provide straight disability rather than workmans comp. It wouldnt have to trouble itself at all with the health care side...just payments to cover the lost pay only.

* I snipped some stuff and tried to stick with health care issues only in an effort to tame the monster posts

The only reason that health care costs are so high is that the health care companies are run for-profit. They have a responsibility to provide their shareholders with money at the expense of the consumer. The more money they make, the more money they use to pay off the people at the top that don't actually provide the service they are in the business of providing. It's just one of many examples of the people getting screwed by having to pay for something that should be provided by the government charged with ensuring the welfare of it's people.

one thing that should be considered in all of this.....most countries that have decent socilized health care,are countries with populations under 80-90 million.....the US has 300 mil....China and India have problems....Russia is having problems,Brazil the same.....

Jellah Sweden has what 9 million people....lot easier to take care of....the state i live in has more people than Sweden or Australia or Canada....geez more than most European countries......many different people from different cultures,religions,geez you name it,many different ideas about this.....NO ONE is on the same page......


its a lot easier for 9 million Swedes,or Aussies,or Canadians,French etc. to agree on something,than 300 million Americans,from many different walks of life....some want it,but dont know how to pay for it,some want it,but wonder,WHO is going to run it,they may not like the choice of the one chosen,this group may like the choice,.....a hell of a lot of people,rich and not so rich,just happen to want private ins.....any how thats my take on this....

Population size doesnt matter because even here, its micromanaged.

In other words, you take a smaller area and provide facilities and access to that particular area and you do this for ALL areas. It doesnt matter if you have 10 areas to cover or 100 areas to cover.

I also dont agree with the fact that so many in the US want a private insurance scheme. It seems to me that support for a universal/single payer/socialized scheme has GROWN and grown quite a bit. The reason for this is insurance companies have become more and more inefficient, are giving customers less coverage, adding too many restrictions and less jobs are even offering the coverage which leaves the expense to the consumer and far too many cant afford it or consider it too exspensive.

Its driven people to look for how they can get the MOST for their money.

The nations with socialized care are spending LESS PER CAPITA than the US is. You can get more for your money that way AND there are many of these systems that show you can actually MIX private and universal care together with good results. There would still be plenty of privately owned doctors offices and hospitals who would no longer suffer not getting paid and who would compete for the universal dollars since they would be paid (a set rate) per patient and service they perform. They would save a great deal on bureaucratic costs (goes to profit), they no longer have to provide health insurance and they get paid promptly and no longer need an entire dept to track your ability to pay, to track down those who dont pay, fight with a gazillion different insurers, file different paperwork with each etc.

All they would need is your ID and social security number.

People no longer are restricted to a particular hosptial or doctor by an insurance company (of course geographic location would still mean you would only choose those near you).

Jellah....you make it sound so easy.....you live in a country the size of s.calif....the logistics and expense for a country the size of the US matters....when we hear the stories and see proof of the mess that exist in Socilised medicine,many feel whats the difference? they have problems too,and these are countries with MUCH less of a population to deal with....the Canadian debacle seems to be a favorite plan of the pro-national health people,why i dont know....ill keep the private plan i have.....and yes Jellah there are MANY people in this country who would rather keep their private plans over a tax-funded plan.....i have Blue Shield and they have covered EVERY test my wife needs,she has Epilepsy as well as a few other things,they covered her without batting an eye as to the cost of the test,and she has had the tests she needs all within a couple of weeks.....a guy i work with had to have a tumor removed,pre-cancerous,he had the surgery 2 weeks after it was found.....in Canada,he would still be waiting,and meanwhile the tumor grows.....and this i know for a fact because my sons good friend is a physician who married a Canadian and went up there to live and start a practice,he was down visiting and to satisfy my curiosity about this i told him about this guy....he said the guy would have had the surgery about 6-7 months later up there,after he moved up the list.....until i get presented with facts that tell me socialized medicine will be better OR at least as good,ill stick with a private plan.....

All I can do is reiterate once again that its micro-managed. You break everything down into smaller peices and service each peice according to the same template.

Here everything is broken down into kommuns. Each kommun has a few doctors offices...or more, it would depend on the size (population of the kommun).

If any kommun grows quickly, they will have to move fast to keep up and its likely they wont keep up as they should BUT since kommuns are small neighboring kommuns can handle spill-over usually. Its one of the better ways to handle the expansion (keep your areas to micro-manage small).

Switching doctors is EASY, SUPER easy. Its all in the computer data base and thats accessible from ALL OVER THE NATION cause they all have access to the same system. Its the same with pharmacy....my prescription can be filled at any one of them. I go in and they pull it up on the computer and fill it.

The problems (just like in a private scheme) is that people in more rural areas dont have access as great as those living in the more populated kommuns.

Canada doesnt have that waiting problem all over, they mostly have it in specific areas that have seen fast growth and health care isnt the only thing that has trouble keeping up....even all the private enterprises do as well. Thats not a problem that is caused by or even solved by private vs socialized.

Micro-managing is a very simple concept and its rather efficient....and most private businesses would also do it as well. You wont see a huge private hospital open up next to an already existing one UNLESS the area could support it. An area going without enough medical facilities is exactly where a new hospital would choose as its location. Why would it be any different in a socialized setting?

We have privately owned hospitals and doctors offices here and they get paid by the Swedish govt (which is the swedish people) per service and patient. They profit. They compete. If an area grows and has a shortage, then it means a new profitable oppurtunity has opened up. IF no one comes forward to fill that oppurtunity in the private sector the govt will put in a govt owned hospital then and it will STILL be medical professionals who are hired to run it (just like a private corp would do).