[SmilingBluEyes]

Originally Posted by sanctuary

When people realise that Insurance Institutions are the reason that health care costs so much, we will be on the way toward mending our system here. If we pay a single payor, (yes, the government) directly, there would be no increase in fees paid, or co-pay, or whatever. Large insurance companies pay MILLIONS to their CEOs, who take our payments and gamble on the stock market. Take profit out of health care, and we could afford the care we have now, and more. It is always about the money in the US.

You get NO argument from me on this. I already see this as the problem. Why so many don't is beyond me.

[gwenith]

Originally Posted by jenruth

Very true. It could never be completely free. What worries me about socialized medicine, is that it would remove the individual person's power of choice. Every aspect of one's healthcare would be directed and managed by bureaucrats. Noncompliance would result in being refused insurance coverage. And what would be done with people in high-risk groups for certain diseases and conditions? Such a system might refuse them any insurance coverage.

This is one of those myths that seems to persist. Yes if you turn up to a public hospital you do not get a choice of who you see but I think that is the same everywhere. We do, however get a choice of GP - basically whoever you want but the GP does not care for you in hospital unless you are going to a private hospital - public hospitals yp no choice - you will be placed under a consultant which will be whoever is on for that day but often the consultant who is seeing you as a public patient would also see you as a private patient if you so chose.

Since ours is a two tier system we have the choice of having private health insurances as well so if we want to we CAN have a choice.

Even in the public hospitals there is a an opt out option. You can ask for another doctor if you have an issue with the person currently treating you - it is not often done but the option IS there.

[fergus51]

I've never understood why people think that either Gwenith. When a baby is born in my hospital here in California, they get the neonatologist that happens to be on. They don't get to go through a menu to pick one. It's no different than in Canada. I have been sick and worked in both countries and don't see a real difference when it comes to decision making. It's between the patient and the doctor. I don't know any docs who make decisions based on insurance companies or the government.

[kpapi]

Originally Posted by SmilingBluEyes

I am not at all smart on the issue, I readily admit. I have nothing but questions myself:

Like IF we justify spending the bucks to build bigger, better weapons systems, enough to destroy the world- 2000 times over......

And IF we can spend big bucks on charity overseas, foreign worker recruitment, etc.....

And IF we can afford mass bail-outs of failing corporations in the form of "corporate welfare"........

IF we can continue to cover illegal and undocumented immigrant/indigent care......


IF we can spend millions to celebrate the inauguration of a President (not just Bush)......

then why can't we insure the WORKING POOR?????!!!!!!! You know, the poor average sucker who DOES hold a low-paying, unbenefitted job? The ones we are seeing increase in numbers EVERY year that passes as companies just cut these benefits out from under them?????? The one whose working backs on which building a great nation's progress rests????

Anyone????

As I said, I am not too damn smart after all. I just have that BURNING "why" question that I can't seem to get any answers to.

Why indeed!?! When you get the answer to these questions, please share them. I too have been asking myself those very same questions.

[Nancy2]

Originally Posted by gwenith

This is one of those myths that seems to persist. Yes if you turn up to a public hospital you do not get a choice of who you see but I think that is the same everywhere. We do, however get a choice of GP - basically whoever you want but the GP does not care for you in hospital unless you are going to a private hospital - public hospitals yp no choice - you will be placed under a consultant which will be whoever is on for that day but often the consultant who is seeing you as a public patient would also see you as a private patient if you so chose.

Since ours is a two tier system we have the choice of having private health insurances as well so if we want to we CAN have a choice.

Even in the public hospitals there is a an opt out option. You can ask for another doctor if you have an issue with the person currently treating you - it is not often done but the option IS there.

If you choose to buy your own insurance, do you get a tax credit for not being in the socialized program?

[StNeotser]

Originally Posted by jenruth

Very true. It could never be completely free. What worries me about socialized medicine, is that it would remove the individual person's power of choice. Every aspect of one's healthcare would be directed and managed by bureaucrats. Noncompliance would result in being refused insurance coverage. And what would be done with people in high-risk groups for certain diseases and conditions? Such a system might refuse them any insurance coverage.

Having been a patient under the UK National Health Service and had private health insurance in the US I'd just also like to add this;

The majority of Americans have no choice in who insures them; that choice is made for them by their employer.

The insurer then makes choices on which doctors are in network. PPO's are obviously better than HMO's. In my experience, the choice is far less in the US system.

I can't see an argument for less choice under a universal healthcare system.

Having lived under both systems I can tell you that the six of one, half a dozen of the other argument runs true.

However, I do feel more comfortable with a society that believes in healthcare as a right, not a privilege.

[menetopali]

the US system needs a major overhaul. the two-tier system sounds like a good way to go to me as it provides some base level of care to all (and i would even be willing to pay extra in taxes if it were managed well and shielded from predatory lawyers). maintaining a second tier private system maintains the profit motive and will produce more medications and medical interventions that will benefit everyone as well. JMHO

[Indy]

"Did you ever stop to think how much the IRS spends in payroll to it's own employees each year? How much of our taxes would actually be available to the defecit if we were at a flat tax and all those people were not on the government payroll? No, it would not pay the national debt, but it sure would help a LOT. And still there are arguments FOR socialized medicine?"

I have to admit, I am sorta fond of the flat tax idea, but I don't know what army it would take to actually DO this, as you're asking the government to fire a whole messload of government employees, and to spend their money in a more commonsense manner.
-Indy

[talaxandra]

Originally Posted by Nancy2

If you choose to buy your own insurance, do you get a tax credit for not being in the socialized program?

All tax payers in Australia (over a threshold income) pay a Medicare levy. People who earn over $50,000 PA pay an additional surcharge equal to 1% of their taxable income unless they have private insurance (for me this works out to be lower than top level insurance with super extras). People who join a private insurance fund after the age of thirty have to pay additional fees on an age-based schedule, an inducement to have young healthy people contribute to the private system.

Just a quick word on choosing your own doctor - as Gwenith said, you can pick your own GP, and you still have full say in any fee-paying medico (eg specialist). Outside my own specialties I have no idea which surgeons etc I want, so I'm happy to go with the doctor on duty, unless a friend or colleague has a suggestion, and then I can just say that I'd prefer X, or would like a second opinion from Y. It doesn't happen often, but it certainly does happen, with no major drama.

[marvelous_truth]

Originally Posted by Indy

"Did you ever stop to think how much the IRS spends in payroll to it's own employees each year? How much of our taxes would actually be available to the defecit if we were at a flat tax and all those people were not on the government payroll? No, it would not pay the national debt, but it sure would help a LOT. And still there are arguments FOR socialized medicine?"

I have to admit, I am sorta fond of the flat tax idea, but I don't know what army it would take to actually DO this, as you're asking the government to fire a whole messload of government employees, and to spend their money in a more commonsense manner.
-Indy

I am glad that some advocate more efficient tax system. The IRS itself is a complete fraud but doing away with it would be more monumental than what you are suggesting.