Jump to content

National Healthcare. What do you think of it?


Hawks
 Share

Recommended Posts

This is not the Barack Obama we elected.

 

 

 

Wednesday, August 19th 2009, 4:00 AM

 

 

 

Taking the stage for a town hall meeting on health care the other day, President Obama emerged from behind a curtain in a fake jog. He pumped his arms in an exaggerated fashion, but his smile looked forced as he waved and shook hands with a few audience members.

 

 

 

It all seemed a campaign ritual, dulled by time and beleaguered by circumstance, prompting a flashback in my head to the Paul Simon song about Joe DiMaggio.

 

 

 

Where have you gone, Barack Obama? Where is the sunny-side-up young man who promised to inspire and unite and unhappy nation? You are basing all of this on your view that his smile "looked forced"?

 

 

 

Gone into the partisan sinkhole of Washington, that's where. Like some novice swimmer too confident of his own ability, Obama is suddenly finding himself in water over his head emotive BS.

 

 

 

His flailing, including a foul habit of demonizing dissent, is not pretty Citation needed. And that brief foray into e-mail tracking of critics showed a win-at-any-cost side Citation needed.

 

 

 

Where is the appealing man we elected? Where is that Barack Obama?

 

 

 

Let's find him quick because the whole nation is paying the price for this impostor's irrational exuberance. Or hubris.

 

 

 

 

 

Americans, more of them every day, are growing disenchanted with the expansion of government and the massive pile of debt Citation needed. Yet the President, certain he can change their minds if only he talks to them again, keeps trying to sell bigger as better. Reasoned debate is bad?

 

 

 

The public's not buying it Citation needed. And as a measure of the nation's mood, a recent poll was practically cruel: Nearly half thing the President is on television too much. Ouch. irrelevant BS

 

 

 

Obama fatigue occasionally surfaced during the campaign, but this is different. He's the President, and if the country tunes him out, there is no Plan B. He's the "rock star-turned-salesman" emotive BS, and everything in his administration depends on his "stage act" emotive BS.

 

 

 

That the novelty is wearing thin is obvious Citation needed. The danger is that the health care fiasco turns him into an unpopular and ineffective President Leading BS.

 

 

 

Those who say it can't happen should study a recent New York Times/CBS poll That the public has reservations about the healthcare bill does not mean that they necessarily dislike the President. Among the lowlights:

 

 

 

* Sixty-nine percent believe Obamacare will hurt the quality of their own health care.

 

 

 

* Seventy-three percent believe they will have less access to tests and treatment.

 

 

 

* Sixty-two percent believe Democrats' proposals would force them to change doctors.

 

 

 

* Seventy-six percent believe Obama's changes will mean higher taxes for them.

 

 

 

* Seventy-seven percent expect their health care costs to rise.

 

 

 

All those findings run counter to the claims Obama makes. Even as he talks in vague ways about what exactly he favors, he promises the bill that emerges from Congress' sausage factory emotive BS will be a magic elixir emotive BS.

 

 

 

Writing in the New York Times, he guaranteed everything for everyone: "If you don't have health insurance, you will finally have quality, affordable options once we pass reform. If you have health insurance, we will make sure that no insurance company or government bureaucrat gets between your and the care you need."

 

 

 

"If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan."

 

 

 

Those claims would be credible if they were a multiple-choice question, where only one is true. To say they can all happen at once is a crock, and the country knows it. Why

 

 

 

Heck, throw in a free puppy for everybody, too. emotive BS

 

 

 

With stubborn wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and an economy still bleeding, you'd think a new President would have challenges enough. Yet Obama has plunged into the health care mess as though it is a battle of absolute necessity Obama has said why he thinks it is necessary, you do not say why it is not.

 

 

 

It isn't. It is his choice. And it is a mistake Why.

 

 

 

If he's the man we thought he was, he'll now choose to make peace, before the county concludes he's the mistake Leading BS.

 

 

 

 

This article was vacuous.

For it is the greyness of dusk that reigns.

The time when the living and the dead exist as one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 167
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I don't like it. I don't trust the US government. I don't like Obama. Putting something like this into the government's hands isn't a good idea. What happened to creating new jobs with this "stimulus" bill? Nothing, and its getting worse. The whole idea of nationalized healthcare is nice and all, but I think people in the USA might be in for a shock if it gets passed.

The sour dough of the epitmous pie hungers for another's sweet lips to be dulled into a state of most irreverant humbleness

TUBULAR BELLS!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Err, Magekllr? Why do you always paint me as some ultra-right wing bastard son of George W. Bush? Just because I'm a registered Republican does not mean I vote ® every chance I get or organize mobs to go raid town hall meetings.

 

 

 

If your entire argument comes down to attacking my character in every thread by accusing me of being anything but the slightly right moderate I am, you are the one being "intellectually dishonest."

 

 

 

For the last freaking time, I'm sick of both parties and the only reason I supported the Iraq War was because it rid us of Saddam. I did not support our reasons for getting into it, but I appreciate the outcome along with a good chunk of people in that nation, no less.

 

 

 

You seem to be the one on the crusade to make your dare-I-say-it flawed views everyone's business and do nothing but mock and attack those who disagree with you. You will go out of your way to insult Republicans, despite the fact that I honestly don't care which ® is banging which South American sweetheart or which (D) is abusing taxpayer dollars. You are symbolic of the bickering between (lettersbetweenparenthesis) bullcrap that is almost completely neutralizing the effectiveness of the government.

 

 

 

Dude, you need to get a grip. Your opinions are beyond bias at this point and you hide behind "intellectualism" at every opportunity for fear of having to admit that someone else has an opinion.

 

 

 

I stand behind my post, as it is merely a reflection of what is happening now in regards to public opinion towards HR 3200, and what has happened in the past when any legislative body has done what the Democrats are thinking about doing, regardless of party affiliation.

 

 

 

And for the last freaking time, stop treating me as if I go home and make out with a poster of Glenn Beck every night. It's rather irritating to see you demean yourself just to make a personal attack.

Untitled.png

My heart is broken by the terrible loss I have sustained in my old friends and companions and my poor soldiers. Believe me, nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won. -Sir Arthur Wellesley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, lay off Barihawk. While I disagree with his views on various subjects (this is only one), demeaning him and anyone else with a dissenting opinion just makes everyone on our side look bad. Disagree with his points (and explain why), don't attack his character. That's the selfsame tactics that Rep politicians used the past 8+ years to get into power. If you really want to prove your point, be better than that.

You never know which rabbit hole you jump into will lead to Wonderland. - Ember3579

Aku Soku Zan. - Shinsengumi

You wanna mess with me or my friends? Pick your poison.

If you have any complaints about me, please refer to this link. Your problems are important to me.

Don't talk smack if you're not willing to say it to the person's face. On the same line, if you're not willing to back up your opinions no matter what, your opinion may as well be nonexistent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anyone see the Daily Show on Thursday? They had an interview with Betsy McCaughey, person who was banging on about "death panels". Jon Stewart basically shot down everything she said, made her look so stupid and now she's resigned over it. Really was a great piece of journalism.

keen.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't support nationalized health care. America is a do-it-yourself country where millions of immigrants came to work jobs for diddly until they couldn't walk unassisted(exaggeration but you get my point) so that their offspring and their grandchildren and so on could have a better life, people were fascinated by American individualism. The problem is we Americans live in a feed-me from a spoon world. Our entertainment is served up to us on plasma screens, our food can be found in mass quantities along with any other needs in supermarkets. We can communicate with friends and strangers thousands of miles away at the click of a button. Knowledge, should we desire it is also, at the click of a button. Now you are probably getting sick of reading all that so I'll cut to the chase. Americans want anything that is easily earned or given, we hear "free' and assume "good". We don't think for a moment that we are giving our lives to someone else and letting them decide if we live or die. You can say there is no such thing as "death panel" and maybe there aren't, but what is true is that YOU ARE NOT guaranteed to be treated, or even if you are you may not get everything you need. Chew me out all you want for this but essentially this bill assigns you a dollar value based on your age, what you do etc., and once you exceed that limit then that is it. If you support that you are saying that you do not know what is best for yourself and you don't deserve the best you can get/afford.

2pzzjb9.jpg

106px-National_Defense_Service_Medal_ribbon.svg.png106px-Navy_Rifle_Marksmanship_Ribbon.svg.png120px-USN_Expert_Pistol_Shot_Ribbon.png

God dammit Seany, STOP SHARING MY MIND

" I believe in something greater than myself. A better world. A world without sin. I'm not going to live there. There's no place for me there... I'm a monster.What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't support nationalized health care. America is a do-it-yourself country where millions of immigrants came to work jobs for diddly until they couldn't walk unassisted(exaggeration but you get my point) so that their offspring and their grandchildren and so on could have a better life, people were fascinated by American individualism. The problem is we Americans live in a feed-me from a spoon world. Our entertainment is served up to us on plasma screens, our food can be found in mass quantities along with any other needs in supermarkets. We can communicate with friends and strangers thousands of miles away at the click of a button. Knowledge, should we desire it is also, at the click of a button. Now you are probably getting sick of reading all that so I'll cut to the chase. Americans want anything that is easily earned or given, we hear "free' and assume "good". We don't think for a moment that we are giving our lives to someone else and letting them decide if we live or die. You can say there is no such thing as "death panel" and maybe there aren't, but what is true is that YOU ARE NOT guaranteed to be treated, or even if you are you may not get everything you need. Chew me out all you want for this but essentially this bill assigns you a dollar value based on your age, what you do etc., and once you exceed that limit then that is it. If you support that you are saying that you do not know what is best for yourself and you don't deserve the best you can get/afford.

 

 

 

 

 

If I were to say the biggest problem that I see with your post was, it'd be the misconception that this bill sets the ceiling for health care. In fact, it's the direct opposite. It sets the floor of it. This is precisely to make sure that everyone has access to some sort of reasonable, beneficial health care plan. This isn't designed to support everyone in America. It's designed to force the insurance companies to actually give reasonable plans to their customers, and maybe inspire some competition among them for who can appeal to more people (by increasing quality and/or decreasing cost). Whether or not it's successful depends entirely on where they set the floor at. If it's set too high, then there's going to be very little change with the current state of affairs, if any at all. If it's set too low, then the government will end up saddled with too many people for it to cover.

 

 

 

Oh, and before you say something along the lines of "poor people need to work harder if they want better care, not whine more", keep in mind that there's a very limited supply of decent paying jobs in this country. Not everyone can get paid better based on how good work they do, and even fewer can trade up in the job market. Not everyone's job is as stable and secure as your own.

You never know which rabbit hole you jump into will lead to Wonderland. - Ember3579

Aku Soku Zan. - Shinsengumi

You wanna mess with me or my friends? Pick your poison.

If you have any complaints about me, please refer to this link. Your problems are important to me.

Don't talk smack if you're not willing to say it to the person's face. On the same line, if you're not willing to back up your opinions no matter what, your opinion may as well be nonexistent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, lay off Barihawk. While I disagree with his views on various subjects (this is only one), demeaning him and anyone else with a dissenting opinion just makes everyone on our side look bad. Disagree with his points (and explain why), don't attack his character. That's the selfsame tactics that Rep politicians used the past 8+ years to get into power. If you really want to prove your point, be better than that.

 

 

 

I honestly will agree with that second-to-last statement and ante up that it's how the Democrats got in there recently :P. American politics needs an infusion of fresh blood who will listen to their constituants instead of painting "the other guys" as being wrong. Heaven forbid we elect Congressmen on their merits instead of the other party's flaws (which is a universal problem).

Untitled.png

My heart is broken by the terrible loss I have sustained in my old friends and companions and my poor soldiers. Believe me, nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won. -Sir Arthur Wellesley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can say there is no such thing as "death panel" and maybe there aren't, but what is true is that YOU ARE NOT guaranteed to be treated, or even if you are you may not get everything you need. Chew me out all you want for this but essentially this bill assigns you a dollar value based on your age, what you do etc., and once you exceed that limit then that is it. If you support that you are saying that you do not know what is best for yourself and you don't deserve the best you can get/afford.

 

 

 

I think you're confused. That's how private insurance companies operate.

rssig2.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can say there is no such thing as "death panel" and maybe there aren't, but what is true is that YOU ARE NOT guaranteed to be treated, or even if you are you may not get everything you need. Chew me out all you want for this but essentially this bill assigns you a dollar value based on your age, what you do etc., and once you exceed that limit then that is it. If you support that you are saying that you do not know what is best for yourself and you don't deserve the best you can get/afford.

 

 

 

I think you're confused. That's how private insurance companies operate.

 

 

 

The difference is that private insurance companies need your business and only make marginal profits off of each user. Unfortunately, the government is non-profit and therefore does not have the motive to keep its "customers" happy.

 

 

 

And insurance plans are usually very flexible, depending on what conditions the user agrees to. Do they want a high deductible but more coverage? A low deductible with less coverage and a more expensive copay at the benefit of lower average costs? The government is likely to have a "one-size-fits-all" plan (to be honest I only made it to page 85 of the bill before my eyeballs started to bleed) but the disadvantage is that everyone shares in the government's budget. I think I read like $5,500 per individual and $10,000 for families is the maximum coverage and it will be adjusted for inflation. To be quite honest, that's not a lot. Two trips to the ER, to put it into perspective. A lot of senior citizens have that much as a deductible alone on Medicare, and they blow through that very quickly.

 

 

 

It's not an issue of being some socialist Big Brother stops you from getting medicine. It's that people are going to make use of this, run out of their plan, and end up having to get high deductible cheapo insurance regardless, at the expense of trillions of dollars. It's a drain that could be fixed by addressing the symptoms of what's wrong in healthcare.

Untitled.png

My heart is broken by the terrible loss I have sustained in my old friends and companions and my poor soldiers. Believe me, nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won. -Sir Arthur Wellesley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can say there is no such thing as "death panel" and maybe there aren't, but what is true is that YOU ARE NOT guaranteed to be treated, or even if you are you may not get everything you need. Chew me out all you want for this but essentially this bill assigns you a dollar value based on your age, what you do etc., and once you exceed that limit then that is it. If you support that you are saying that you do not know what is best for yourself and you don't deserve the best you can get/afford.

 

 

 

I think you're confused. That's how private insurance companies operate.

 

 

 

The difference is that private insurance companies need your business and only make marginal profits off of each user. Unfortunately, the government is non-profit and therefore does not have the motive to keep its "customers" happy.

 

 

 

And insurance plans are usually very flexible, depending on what conditions the user agrees to. Do they want a high deductible but more coverage? A low deductible with less coverage and a more expensive copay at the benefit of lower average costs? The government is likely to have a "one-size-fits-all" plan (to be honest I only made it to page 85 of the bill before my eyeballs started to bleed) but the disadvantage is that everyone shares in the government's budget. I think I read like $5,500 per individual and $10,000 for families is the maximum coverage and it will be adjusted for inflation. To be quite honest, that's not a lot. Two trips to the ER, to put it into perspective. A lot of senior citizens have that much as a deductible alone on Medicare, and they blow through that very quickly.

 

 

 

It's not an issue of being some socialist Big Brother stops you from getting medicine. It's that people are going to make use of this, run out of their plan, and end up having to get high deductible cheapo insurance regardless, at the expense of trillions of dollars. It's a drain that could be fixed by addressing the symptoms of what's wrong in healthcare.

 

 

 

Bull [cabbage]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can say there is no such thing as "death panel" and maybe there aren't, but what is true is that YOU ARE NOT guaranteed to be treated, or even if you are you may not get everything you need. Chew me out all you want for this but essentially this bill assigns you a dollar value based on your age, what you do etc., and once you exceed that limit then that is it. If you support that you are saying that you do not know what is best for yourself and you don't deserve the best you can get/afford.

 

 

 

I think you're confused. That's how private insurance companies operate.

 

 

 

The difference is that private insurance companies need your business and only make marginal profits off of each user. Unfortunately, the government is non-profit and therefore does not have the motive to keep its "customers" happy.

 

 

 

And insurance plans are usually very flexible, depending on what conditions the user agrees to. Do they want a high deductible but more coverage? A low deductible with less coverage and a more expensive copay at the benefit of lower average costs? The government is likely to have a "one-size-fits-all" plan (to be honest I only made it to page 85 of the bill before my eyeballs started to bleed) but the disadvantage is that everyone shares in the government's budget. I think I read like $5,500 per individual and $10,000 for families is the maximum coverage and it will be adjusted for inflation. To be quite honest, that's not a lot. Two trips to the ER, to put it into perspective. A lot of senior citizens have that much as a deductible alone on Medicare, and they blow through that very quickly.

 

 

 

It's not an issue of being some socialist Big Brother stops you from getting medicine. It's that people are going to make use of this, run out of their plan, and end up having to get high deductible cheapo insurance regardless, at the expense of trillions of dollars. It's a drain that could be fixed by addressing the symptoms of what's wrong in healthcare.

 

 

 

Bull [cabbage]

 

 

 

 

 

Before Bari even starts with this one, I ask you. Could you PLEASE give a reason why you think that, and not some one-liner jackass answer? [cabbage] like this is what deligitimizes the debate, and gives the opposing side reason to not listen.

 

 

 

EDIT: And so I don't have to make a new post, I'll reply to Bari's directly here.

 

 

 

You're a little mistaken with the way that insurance companies operate. They are in business to make money, any way they can. This means anything and everything from jacking prices (the other insurance companies are also doing this, to benefit everyone in the business elite) to dropping people at the first sign of trouble (doesn't work every time, but cuts costs for them immensely), to including so much fine print that the policy is essentially you paying for nothing. They will do damn near everything to make a buck, and have proved it. How much of the lies being spread about the government plan do you think originated from either the insurance companies, or people paid off by them?

 

 

 

While I don't disagree with you that the government might get more than they could chew with this, it would still provide some sort of assistance to the people who need it. The current system is entirely unsustainable, and I welcome almost any attempt to fix it. Just ask my sister (is paying 40,000+ USD for kidney stone removal from being pumped full of pills while she was having a rough spot in her earlier years). Though I agree with you on one very key issue; if we want anything to make a HUGE impact on this problem, we need to tackle the root cause of it; the prices of the medicine and treatments themselves. My dad received a bill for over four hundred THOUSAND dollars for various treatments to save his life after a bad wreck about 16 years ago (was covered, but still). People shouldn't have to think about money when it comes to saving peoples' lives. A very good example (for those of us who need something they can see) would be to watch the movie John Q. I'm fairly certain it's based off of a true story, if you're worried about that. Essentially, it's about a family whose ~10-11 year old son has a heart problem, and he needs a transplant. As it turns out, unless if the family can pay for the procedure (couple hundred thousand dollars, again), the son won't even be put on the waiting list to get a new heart. He thinks he's covered, but it turns out that he gets dropped off of some [cabbage] clause in his policy, and now he gets to watch his son die. While it doesn't turn out that way, I think that I explained enough of it for you to get the picture. If meaningful reform is to be taken, the base cost of medicine needs to be controlled. If it doesn't get controlled, then the amount of benefit that anything related to health care will provide in terms of money will have a very finite limit.

You never know which rabbit hole you jump into will lead to Wonderland. - Ember3579

Aku Soku Zan. - Shinsengumi

You wanna mess with me or my friends? Pick your poison.

If you have any complaints about me, please refer to this link. Your problems are important to me.

Don't talk smack if you're not willing to say it to the person's face. On the same line, if you're not willing to back up your opinions no matter what, your opinion may as well be nonexistent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't solve as many problems as one might think. Privately owned hospitals will still be billing these huge amounts and it'll be a struggle to find staff to work in the public sector. I'm thinking tax hikes.

 

 

 

The way it works over here is everybody pays a medicare levy tax, which is roughly 1.5% (somebody care to correct me?) of your gross income, and medicare subsidises just about everything. For example, I pay $50 for a visit to my doctor, and I get about $35 back by taking my reciept into a medicare centre.

 

 

 

If you are earning under $30,000 a year you are entitled to a low income health care card which grants you free/discounted health care. Back when I had one, all doctors visits are free and I paid about $200 for a knee reco, which was essentially the cost of the anasthetic.

 

 

 

Most commonly prescribed medicines are subsidised under the PBS, so 2 month supplies of painkillers or antibiotics cost less than a cup of coffee.

SoLawny.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bull [cabbage]

 

 

 

 

You obviously don't understand business models. Often times, that's how every business out to make a buck operates. As long as you make even a fraction more than you spend and multiply that by the millions of people that you serve, you make a lot of money. Let's say someone on Blue Cross Blue Shield has a $2000 deductible. That's fairly average. BCBS has about 90 million customers each year. That's 180 billion dollars a year, on average. BCBS posts profits of only 1-3 billion each quarter, if they even manage that.

 

 

 

The same goes for banks, credit card companies, etc.

 

 

 

It's not the price per volume from where they get their money, it's the volume itself. The more customers you have, the more profit you make, and that profit is going going to be a few dimes on the dollar.

 

 

 

It's not a completely half assed statement, and it's not true for every insurance company. I just chose the largest for my example.

Untitled.png

My heart is broken by the terrible loss I have sustained in my old friends and companions and my poor soldiers. Believe me, nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won. -Sir Arthur Wellesley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I don't oppose Universal Healthcare in concept; I do however oppose it in America. Simple reason, I don't trust this government(either party) to run something so important, bearing in mind that this system doesn't need to be federal run(like the military). While the current system is problematic, the actual health care in America is very good.

 

 

 

You don't scrap a car just because the air conditioner isn't working; you fix the air conditioner. Just like health care; you don't scrap the current system, you find reasonable ways to improve it. For instance, require more coverage of preexisting conditions; but don't make insurance companies cover someone who has a love affair with fried chicken.

awteno.jpg

Orthodoxy is unconciousness

the only ones who should kill are those who are prepared to be killed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EDIT: WRONG THREAD

35bvvh1.png

[hide=Quotes]

Albel/Justin

Albel doesn't say anything anymore, just comes in, leaves an arrow and vanishes into the night :(Probably
practising some euphonium

You nearly had me fooled, you fooler you

Euphonium/10.

9/10. To me, always associate Albel with musical stuff in OT.

Everyone with a goatee and glasses is Albel now.

lmfao albel m8 wat r u doin, hi though.

 

[/hide]

[hide=Runescape Achievements]99 firemaking(2007), 99 woodcutting(2008), 99 fletching(2009), 99 magic(2010), 99 cooking(2010), 99 farming(2011), 99 construction(2011), 99 runecrafting(2012), 99 Hunter (2014),  99 ranged (2015), 99 HP (2015), 99 Slayer (2015), 99 attack (2015) 99 Defense (2015) 99 Prayer (2015) 99 Summoning (2015) 99 Strength(2015) 99 Herblore (2015) 99 Dungeoneering (2017)  99 Mining (2017) 99 Crafting (2017) 99 Smithing (2017) 99 Thieving (2017)  99 invention (2017) 99 Fishing (2018), 99 Divination (2018), 99 Agility (2018), MAXED (05/17/2018)[/hide]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://forums.somethingawful.com/showth ... enumber=44

 

 

 

Nothing but 45 pages of rational American adults telling about how horrible their system is and praising universal. And from that thread:

 

 

 

costsfn4-6fa.png

 

 

 

ushealthcarecostsjw4-fa4.gif

 

 

 

ushealthcarecostskr4-410.gif

 

 

 

Data

 

http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DatasetCode=HEALTH

 

http://apps.who.int/whosis/database/cor ... cators=nha

 

 

The second major problem with the current system is its high cost. This can be divided into two parts: individual cost, and government cost - which to the individual shows up as taxation. UHC is inherently cheaper - far cheaper - due to economies of scale, the bargaining position of monopolies with regard to drugs and salaries, reduced administrative costs, and the lack of a profit motive. When it comes to individual health care costs:

 

 

 

According to the World Health Organisation, average American individual spending on healthcare is $3371 per year. Since this includes the uninsured and those covered by their employers, actual costs are higher. For comparison:

 

 

 

Australia: $1017

 

Canada: $916

 

Sweden: $532

 

United Kingdom: $397

 

 

 

The first of those is the second-highest in the world - meaning that Americans pay, not including taxes, more than three times as much as citizens of any other nation. This would be somewhat justifiable if they received better healthcare, but again - 28% have no care at all, life expectancy is below all other developed nations, and general health rating is below all other developed nations.

 

 

 

It is commonly assumed that this difference in cost is because under UHC systems, higher taxes are required to fund the system. Not so. As mentioned, UHC is a great deal cheaper than private healthcare, and as a result America's health-related taxation is also the highest in the world. According to the OECD, in 2006, American government spending on healthcare was $2887 per person. For comparison:

 

 

 

Australia: $2106

 

Canada: $2338

 

Sweden: $2468

 

United Kingdom: $2372

 

 

 

American healthcare taxes are in fact the highest in the OECD, with France second at $2714. In conclusion, every single UHC system in the world costs less money for individuals, requires lower taxes, and provides better care to more people than the American health care system. By implementing UHC in the U.S., things can only get better.

yes.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one really wants to talk about the philosophy behind nationalized healthcare.

 

 

 

I personally don't think that anyone should be reuqired to pay for the substenance of another person. Tax dollars are taken forcibly from me to pay for someone else. Doesn't anyone else think that is wrong?

 

 

 

I don't need charts and graphs to tell me whether or not it'll work. I don't care if it works. Whether it works or not doesn't make it right.

This website and its contents are copyright © 1999 - 2010 Jagex Ltd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one really wants to talk about the philosophy behind nationalized healthcare.

 

 

 

I personally don't think that anyone should be reuqired to pay for the substenance of another person. Tax dollars are taken forcibly from me to pay for someone else. Doesn't anyone else think that is wrong?

 

 

 

I don't need charts and graphs to tell me whether or not it'll work. I don't care if it works. Whether it works or not doesn't make it right.

 

 

 

By that logic, it's immoral that you're taxed to pay for roads that you don't drive on or to pay for schools that you'll never personally attend.

wild_bunch.gif

He who learns must suffer, and, even in our sleep, pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart,

and in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God.

- Aeschylus (525 BC - 456 BC)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one really wants to talk about the philosophy behind nationalized healthcare.

 

 

 

I personally don't think that anyone should be reuqired to pay for the substenance of another person. Tax dollars are taken forcibly from me to pay for someone else. Doesn't anyone else think that is wrong?

 

 

 

I don't need charts and graphs to tell me whether or not it'll work. I don't care if it works. Whether it works or not doesn't make it right.

 

 

 

 

 

This "me first, screw everybody else" attitude is precisely why half the planet hates America. If we want to be at all respected on the world scale, we need to excise this psychological cancer of an attitude.

You never know which rabbit hole you jump into will lead to Wonderland. - Ember3579

Aku Soku Zan. - Shinsengumi

You wanna mess with me or my friends? Pick your poison.

If you have any complaints about me, please refer to this link. Your problems are important to me.

Don't talk smack if you're not willing to say it to the person's face. On the same line, if you're not willing to back up your opinions no matter what, your opinion may as well be nonexistent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one really wants to talk about the philosophy behind nationalized healthcare.

 

 

 

I personally don't think that anyone should be reuqired to pay for the substenance of another person. Tax dollars are taken forcibly from me to pay for someone else. Doesn't anyone else think that is wrong?

 

 

 

I don't need charts and graphs to tell me whether or not it'll work. I don't care if it works. Whether it works or not doesn't make it right.

 

 

 

 

 

This "me first, screw everybody else" attitude is precisely why half the planet hates America. If we want to be at all respected on the world scale, we need to excise this psychological cancer of an attitude.

 

Yes I heartily agree but correct me if I am wrong but dont we already have nationalized health care ie medicare medicaid and to the best of my knowledgeTHE HEALTH CARE OF THE SENATORS OBJECTING TO SOCIALIZED MEDICINE once again correct me if i am wrong

LNYvk.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one really wants to talk about the philosophy behind nationalized healthcare.

 

 

 

I personally don't think that anyone should be reuqired to pay for the substenance of another person. Tax dollars are taken forcibly from me to pay for someone else. Doesn't anyone else think that is wrong?

 

 

 

I don't need charts and graphs to tell me whether or not it'll work. I don't care if it works. Whether it works or not doesn't make it right.

 

 

 

 

 

This "me first, screw everybody else" attitude is precisely why half the planet hates America. If we want to be at all respected on the world scale, we need to excise this psychological cancer of an attitude.

 

Yes I heartily agree but correct me if I am wrong but dont we already have nationalized health care ie medicare medicaid and to the best of my knowledgeTHE HEALTH CARE OF THE SENATORS OBJECTING TO SOCIALIZED MEDICINE once again correct me if i am wrong

 

 

 

 

 

You're right. Senators, as well as all other upper-level officials in the government, already get their medical bills paid for by the American taxpayer. There's a reason that career politicians usually die in their late 80s-mid 90s.

You never know which rabbit hole you jump into will lead to Wonderland. - Ember3579

Aku Soku Zan. - Shinsengumi

You wanna mess with me or my friends? Pick your poison.

If you have any complaints about me, please refer to this link. Your problems are important to me.

Don't talk smack if you're not willing to say it to the person's face. On the same line, if you're not willing to back up your opinions no matter what, your opinion may as well be nonexistent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This "me first, screw everybody else" attitude is precisely why half the planet hates America. If we want to be at all respected on the world scale, we need to excise this psychological cancer of an attitude.

 

It's called capitalism, and buddy, it's the only thing on this planet providing the medical innovation thats keeping its people alive.

[if you have ever attempted Alchemy by clapping your hands or

by drawing an array, copy and paste this into your signature.]

 

Fullmetal Alchemist, you will be missed. A great ending to a great series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This "me first, screw everybody else" attitude is precisely why half the planet hates America. If we want to be at all respected on the world scale, we need to excise this psychological cancer of an attitude.

 

It's called capitalism, and buddy, it's the only thing on this planet providing the medical innovation thats keeping its people alive.

 

Yes but there is capitalists who say screw the general public I dont wanna pay :thumbsup: which seems to be the american(or at least californian outlook on these things :-# ) And then there are pseudo socialist nations like certain northern european nations who actually do some things for the common good while providing funding for state projects. Also another reason why american (and right now russian) capitalism is horrible is that something like the 0.5% of the nation(probably much less) owns over 60% of the total wealth

LNYvk.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I pay less tax than you and i get free, quick and high quality healthcare and unemployment/old age welfare. As a result I appreciate the system and I would never abuse it. My income tax does not pay for bombs, unemployment is lower and crime is less than in your country. How can you argue that your countries interpretation of social justice is further developed?

NICKELEY102.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.