[ingelein]

Originally Posted by manofcare

Great example from the north, a land where great liberal thinking has created the perfect utopia for the sick. In Canada they have universal health care, but the lines are extremely long. The government did what it does best, passed a law to force all patients to be seen within four hours of admission. Now the patients are stacked in ambulances out side of the hospital and not admitted because the load is too high to see them within the mandated time frame. See, problem solved. Not admitted, and clock does not start until admitted. Ohh, but what about the ambulance being out of service while granny has an MI? Well, they could always pass a law that granny can only code on Thursdays. Governments are always so good at this kind of stuff, huh?

So where are all the stacked bodies waiting for health care in Germany, France, Sweden ,all the Scandinavian countries countries for that matter ? My relatives in Canada and Germany have told me they would NOT trade their system for ours any day. Fear mongering .

[amj12]

How are schools paid for, or fire departments, or police, or libraries, we don't have a right to these services either, do we?

wow..here I thought we were talking about universal healthcare. Thanks for that quick lesson on where my tax money already goes. I'm well aware.

As for my opinions on universal healthcare, they are just that my opinions. I am entitled to them just as everyone else on this site is entitled to theirs. No one person's opinion is right or wrong. I was simply supplying some facts for someone who may not know that most countries pay for their universal healthcare by taxing the working population. People need to be informed about this b/c healthcare has beome a huge platform in the upcoming election. And as far as I'm concerned to each his own. I couldn't care less whether someone is for or against this. I have my opinion and that is all that matters.

[ingelein]

By Ingelein: How are schools paid for, or fire departments, or police, or libraries, we don't have a right to these services either, do we?

By Amj:
wow..here I thought we were talking about universal healthcare. Thanks for that quick lesson on where my tax money already goes. I'm well aware.

As for my opinions on universal healthcare, they are just that my opinions. I am entitled to them just as everyone else on this site is entitled to theirs. No one person's opinion is right or wrong. I was simply supplying some facts for someone who may not know that most countries pay for their universal healthcare by taxing the working population. People need to be informed about this b/c healthcare has beome a huge platform in the upcoming election. And as far as I'm concerned to each his own. I couldn't care less whether someone is for or against this. I have my opinion and that is all that matters.

Of course you are entitled to your opinion,this is a debate, is it not? I was asking a legitimate question, it was not meant to be a personal attack for Pete's sake. You are CORRECT, health care has become a huge problem, I am personally living this problem in real time.

[/quote]

Originally Posted by amj12

I couldn't have said it better myself. My main problem with universal healthcare is how do we pay for it? It is paid for by taxing the people. Though I would love to live in a world where everyone receives adequate healthcare I'm not willing to pay for the healthcare of the bum down the street who won't get a job b/c they feel they are entitled to a better one. It doesn't give those w/o a job any more motivation to find one. B/c now they are virtually recieving free healthcare from everyone who works and pays taxes. Nice thought, but no thanks.

[ZASHAGALKA]

Originally Posted by Mschrisco

Where does this thought come from? Now you are saying that not only will people stay sicker-more will die when receiving greater access to health care?
Please, you gotta explain this one to me.

Gov't restricted care isn't greater access to health care. It's not even close. On balance, it is MUCH LESS access to care. If you give access to a minority AT THE COST OF ACCESS to the majority, on balance, you have decreased access.

'Access to a waiting list is NOT access to health care'. - Canadian Supreme Court.

There are better ways to give access to the minority than taking away choice from the majority.

Gov't restricted health care is anti-choice.

~faith,
Timothy.

[ZASHAGALKA]

Originally Posted by Woodenpug

It does seem that an idealized theoretical system call a "free market" is compared to real world examples of "socialized health care." Those real world examples stand up fairly well to the idealized theory of a "free market." That is what the facts show and links to those facts are listed in several posts. UHC would put the government control, which exists, has always existed, and will always exist, into a centralized, highly transparent system. Currently, it is all but impossible to see the incredible amount of control the government has over health care. The real world "free market" simply gives you the illusion of government non-involvement. If you truly favor less government control over health care, you would favor UHC or another system where the laws affecting health care would be more transparent.

As you say, that gov't control now exists, and always existed. I find it ironic, having pointed out the problem, you make a rather illogical conclusion: more of the problem is the solution.

You point out the problem: gov't control. Gov't restricted health care is gov't control; it IS anti-choice.

~faith,
Timothy.

[ZASHAGALKA]

Originally Posted by jjjoy

I personally tend to get rather turned off, though, when you start to preach the wonders of the free market and of choice and the horrors of socialism and big government. It feels like being prosthelytized to (did I spell that right?). If anyone is going to have a conversion experience, it generally won't be from a patronizing speech that overgeneralizes (government involvement is ALWAYS bad) and uses scare tactics (you might die waiting for your health care!).

I admit that some proponents of liberal/leftist ideology use the same tactics (for profit business is ALWAYS bad; you might die waiting for your insurance approval!) and that turns me off as well.

Then understand one of MY key points. There are better ways to reach universality. Much better ways.

UHC has NOTHING to do with universality. It is, and always has been, a proxy fight over political ideology.

The debate turns you off because, at its essence, the idea of gov't control has nothing to do with actual health care so much as it does gov't control.

Ask Viking if he can envision ANY solution for health care that DOESN'T involve total Federal control of health care dollars. Do YOU think no such solutions exist absent total Federal control?

~faith,
Timothy.

[BlueRidgeHomeRN]

Originally Posted by ZASHAGALKA

How does anybody make a profit selling phones to people that are completely broke and phoneless? But, they do. More people in poverty have cell phones than not.

How does anybody make a profit selling cars to people that are completely broke, but carless? But, they do. More families in poverty have cars than not.

How does anybody make a profit selling television sets to people that are completely broke and tv-less? But, they do. The average poor household has a television set.

See the thing about the free market is that a competitive market will expand to capture the absolute maximum audience. Socialists think of the free market as a bunch of rich people smoking cigars and slapping themselves on the backs for how they 'got' the little guy.

Except.

In a truly free market (not the gov't protected market of health insurance), the dirty little secret is the rich cannot become rich without having a market to sell their products.

The rich can't become rich while the poor become poor if you need a growing middle class to buy your products. It's a symbiotic relationship. YOU need somebody rich to have the assets and desire (to be rich) to craft a product to sell to you. THEY need you to have enough money to BUY their products.

The market will reach out for the maximum market to compete in. It's the way it's always worked. It is the best combination of quality and price, for the absolute most people.

The gov't simply cannot provide a better price, higher quality, OR, more universal coverage. The gov't just isn't that good a competitor, much less a monopoly.

Does it matter if EVERYBODY is covered if 47 million people won't get the care they need because of wait lists? More people will stay sick and more people will DIE waiting for care under a rationed system than can access the system today.

Gov't restricted health care just isn't very compassionate.

~faith,
Timothy.

Great review of Econ 101 for anyone who forgot--
or slept through it!!

[BlueRidgeHomeRN]

Originally Posted by ingelein

How are schools paid for, or fire departments, or police, or libraries, we don't have a right to these services either, do we?

GLAD YOU GOT IT!!

No, we do not have a "right"....in the above cases, LOCAL communities have decided, based on the voice of voters, what is best for them, and that they can afford.

I live in a small city [here in Virginia, Cities are free standing--NOT in a county. Wierd, but relevant, so bear with me] My city is surrounded by four large counties.

Whem DH and I moved here from FL, we looked at taxes and services for all five governments. Some have paid EMS and fire, some volunteer; some take trash to a dump, others have curbside on demand pickup; some have great public transportation, others none; some have A+ schools, others--not. The city has two out of three hospitals. You get the idea.

We chose to buy our home in the city, despite higher taxes, for libraries, schools, paid 24-hr EMS, parks, garbage pickup, and other services. We PAY for these through higher taxes.

The counties have made other decsions-that work for them.

None of this is a "right". A local area could decide it can't afford paid law enforcement, or libraries, or parks, or whatever. THIS IS THE VOTERS' CHOICE".

THIS IS ALSO THE REASON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD GUARD THE BORDERS, PRINT THE MONEY, CONTROL INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND stay the H*ll out of everyday life.

Let the flaming about how I am so rich and lucky begin..

[ingelein]

Originally Posted by BlueRidgeHomeRN

GLAD YOU GOT IT!!

No, we do not have a "right"....in the above cases, LOCAL communities have decided, based on the voice of voters, what is best for them, and that they can afford.

I live in a small city [here in Virginia, Cities are free standing--NOT in a county. Wierd, but relevant, so bear with me] My city is surrounded by four large counties.

Whem DH and I moved here from FL, we looked at taxes and services for all five governments. Some have paid EMS and fire, some volunteer; some take trash to a dump, others have curbside on demand pickup; some have great public transportation, others none; some have A+ schools, others--not. The city has two out of three hospitals. You get the idea.

We chose to buy our home in the city, despite higher taxes, for libraries, schools, paid 24-hr EMS, parks, garbage pickup, and other services. We PAY for these through higher taxes.

The counties have made other decsions-that work for them.

None of this is a "right". A local area could decide it can't afford paid law enforcement, or libraries, or parks, or whatever. THIS IS THE VOTERS' CHOICE".

THIS IS ALSO THE REASON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD GUARD THE BORDERS, PRINT THE MONEY, CONTROL INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND stay the H*ll out of everyday life.

Let the flaming about how I am so rich and lucky begin..

I was being facetious.I do think it is our right as citizens of an advanced country to have theses services , as well as health care that all can afford.

[Jolie]

Originally Posted by ingelein

I was being facetious.I do think it is our right as citizens of an advanced country to have theses services , as well as health care that all can afford.

Then it's time to set priorities. Much as some people wish it were so, government does not have an unlimited supply of money, (or any supply of its own) and can't provide everything that everybody wants or thinks they have a "right" to. Perhaps you need to trade in your library card, paid fire and EMS protection, 4-lane highways and public parks so that everyone can have healthcare. Individuals, families and businesses must exist on a budget within their means. Government needs to do the same.