Vent thread "universal" health care

Again, your "understanding" falls far short of how a universal healthcare system works. Those people who fall under that 8%v provision receive the state standard for Medicaid, or if their age provides, Medicare. What the universal system will do is provide affordable care for those who cannot afford insurance but still do not qualify for Medicare/Medicaid.

I get it though; don't let facts get in the way of your personal bias Now start posting some "literature" on death panels and "the government takeover." Don't forget your foil hat :)

And just who gets to decide if a person or family can "afford" or not afford to buy this mandated insurance. One family may feel they cannot afford it even though they are outside the "get it free" boundary. Then what?

And car insurance is required, but still, there are many who do not have it, either because they feel they can't afford it, or because they are irresponsible....in either case, they don't HAVE to have a car, so this analogy doesn't hold water.

*Owning and driving a car isn't a right.

*Basic and affordable access to healthcare, while not a "right" in the U.S., is so in other countries such as Canada, Great Britian, Germany, Sweden, Japan, shall I go on?

Your income and where you fall re the poverty line dictates what you will pay. Again, the individual mandate is what makes this feasible for insurance companies; otherwise they will continue to cover only healthy people, and find new and clever ways to deny and drop those who aren't. Medicare covers everyone in its age bracket because everyone who has a paycheck pays in; the same with social security.

I have to say that I was probably the most vocal supporter of universal, socialized healthcare...until I moved to the United Kingdom. Having had socialized healthcare for almost 10 years I can guarantee that it isn't equal and it isn't free. Taxes are outrageous (and on everything). You don't have to pay for health care in the UK but unless you are well off then you wouldn't be able to pay for health care anyway-by the time you are taxed on the TV, car, anything you buy (add 20% on every purchase), income taxes, house tax, stamp tax....the list goes on and on. Plus, don't try telling them that you can't tolerate a medication-unless that particular doctor has diagnosed an intolerance (E.R., family practice, hospital) then they must go by standard care system due to costs.

Going to the hospital?-don't forget everything you will need when you are there. My daughter was in the hospital for three days. Somebody must stay and provide basic care for the family member (bathing, food, etc) because nurses and doctors only provide medical services such as IVs and emergency care-my daughter had to sit in clothes that she had vomited and feces on in the ER for an hour while my husband went back to get new clothes, a washcloth, and soap. Plus, there was no change of sheets when I got her clean because it wasn't "time".

Also, after forty years the UK is saying their system is going bankrupt-they aren't going to be able to sustain it even after all the money going in.

Do I believe in basic, universal care-yes! However, in my changed opinion socialized medicine isn't it-at least not the current models that we have out there today.

Again, your "understanding" falls far short of how a universal healthcare system works. Those people who fall under that 8%v provision receive the state standard for Medicaid, or if their age provides, Medicare. What the universal system will do is provide affordable care for those who cannot afford insurance but still do not qualify for Medicare/Medicaid.

I get it though; don't let facts get in the way of your personal bias Now start posting some "literature" on death panels and "the government takeover." Don't forget your foil hat :)

usually this degree of animosity/insults comes when a person can't defend their position. It automatically sends me in the opposite direction of their thought process. I don't see where your argument is valid, when you, yourself admit that there are still persons who will NOT be paying in, therefore getting free care.

To those of you who appear to be saying that healthcare should not be free , that everyone should pay . What are you going to do with those that need healthcare and cannot afford it (Charity alone cannot cover those that are unable to pay for their healthcare ) .So will you at that point simply deny healthcare ?.

usually this degree of animosity/insults comes when a person can't defend their position. It automatically sends me in the opposite direction of their thought process. I don't see where your argument is valid, when you, yourself admit that there are still persons who will NOT be paying in, therefore getting free care.

I stated my position succinctly and accurately in my previous posts. Unless you have something valid to add, please continue to take yourself in the opposite direction of my thought process.

Edited to add:

I am so tired of hearing people who have absolutely no clue how the "other half" lives complain about so-called socialized healthcare. It turns my stomach to see how many people would come into the local free clinic trying to manage brittle diabetes with diet alone because they can't afford their insulin. I saw far more people who fell into the gap of not qualifying for state/federal aid yet not able to afford insurance, rather than those who had Medicare or Medicaid. Then people who have never had to buy just 4 or 5 day's worth of their meds at a time get catchy sound bytes off of Fox "news" or off a Tea Party website and start bleating that the government is trying to "socialize" medicine. Yes, I have a lot of animosity toward those people. But you infer from my irritation with close-minded individuals that I'm unable to defend my position? Let's go!

I stated my position succinctly and accurately in my previous posts. Unless you have something valid to add, please continue to take yourself in the opposite direction of my thought process.

Edited to add:

I am so tired of hearing people who have absolutely no clue how the "other half" lives complain about so-called socialized healthcare. It turns my stomach to see how many people would come into the local free clinic trying to manage brittle diabetes with diet alone because they can't afford their insulin. I saw far more people who fell into the gap of not qualifying for state/federal aid yet not able to afford insurance, rather than those who had Medicare or Medicaid. Then people who have never had to buy just 4 or 5 day's worth of their meds at a time get catchy sound bytes off of Fox "news" or off a Tea Party website and start bleating that the government is trying to "socialize" medicine. Yes, I have a lot of animosity toward those people. But you infer from my irritation with close-minded individuals that I'm unable to defend my position? Let's go!

why are you persisting in being antagonistic? This isn't going to get you were you want to go. If you would be so kind as to read my post again, I said usually. I do have a grasp of the point that there needs to be change. But YOUR denial that there would be free care takes away credulity from the rest of your argument. It is human nature to have less value for that which you are given free, with no obligation to give back.

The debate re. free care is futile . No care is free , somebody will have to pay!. But there will always be those who are unable to pay ( who vastly outnumber those who choose not to set aside money whether through insurance premiums or savings to cover potential healthcare liabilities ).The best way to cover these costs is to spread the risk as broadly as possible over a large varied pool of premium payers ( which is the goal of all insurance) .

The choice is stark either we find some way to cover healthcare for all , or some will be denied healthcare ( for chronic / non urgent care )which is morally reprehensible to me .

Everyone deserves some sort of coverage. It is not the role of Government to provide that coverage. Everyone should have to sacrifice a little to provide this coverage for themselves. The Government should only help out those who truly need help. It is too easy for people to get on the Government teet. Millions of people say they cant' afford coverage for themselves or their families and make more money than me. They drive nicer cars than me. They have nicer clothes than me. They carry a nicer purse than my wife. It is reprehensible. Where is the personal responsibility?

If you have nothing you cannot sacrifice to pay for coverage .

Many who are not dead beats ( that are usually pointed at as the parasites who suck upon the government teat ), the ones who have these nice things are often the same ones who rail against mandated insurance , whilst pushing the risk of their lack of insurance onto the rest of us tax payers .

You cannot have it both ways if you think that everyone deserves some form of healthcare and you don't want the government to provide it , then you must if you want private insurance coverage for all ( this being the alternative to a government / tax financed system ) ensure that everyone who can afford it has insurance and those who genuinely cannot afford healthcare are provided the financial support to obtain insurance to gain coverage.

You cannot have people freeloading the healthcare system by shifting the responsibility of covering the risk a health crisis to us the taxpayers , rather than paying for the healthcare insurance they choose not to have .None of us have insurance because we hope to make a claim , we have it to cover the risk and pay in the unfortunate event that we need to make a claim . We are in effect paying for other people irresponsibility ( the cause of the claim ) whilst hoping for nothing in return ( who wants to have an accident etc. which makes it necessary to file a claim ) .

Indeed where is the personal responsibility ?

I get it though; don't let facts get in the way of your personal bias Now start posting some "literature" on death panels and "the government takeover." Don't forget your foil hat :)

An ad hominem attack insulting my intelligence is not an effective way to strengthen your argument. You made the patently false assertion that somehow, nobody would be receiving free health insurance because everyone (your word) will now be magically paying in to the new system. I refuted this with a linked source. You really should have just admitted you were wrong on this one; the personal insult did not help your position.

One more thing about gov't subsidized insurance - my current employer-based family health insurance plan amounts to 12.5% of our combined gross monthly income - 56% MORE than what Obamacare declares as a level deserving of federal subsidization. Should I just let the government steal money from your paycheck to pay my insurance? Hell no! Yes things are tough for us on my EMT wages and my wife's part-time income, but I'll forgo the new iPhone, premium cable channels, and dinners out in order to pay for what we need.

What the universal system will do is provide affordable care for those who cannot afford insurance but still do not qualify for Medicare/Medicaid.

Ok, so now this is an entirely different claim. Let's talk about this. First, define "affordable". Since I cannot afford health insurance under the 8% rule (nevermind that I am already paying for it), how exactly is Obamacare going to make my health insurance more affordable? By creating a massive new Federal bureaucracy?

And don't just say, "the individual mandate will make more people pay in to the system". This is a non-starter: the individual mandate is unConstitutional! The federal government cannot force a citizen purchase a product or service. This argument is no different from me saying, "I'd have a nicer car if I took the one out of my neighbor's garage". Both are equally illegal.

Now, perhaps you have read all 2700 pages of the bill and fully understand it; if so, please explain to me where in the bill I can find the percentage decrease that I will see in my health insurance premiums. I look forward to seeing the extra money back in my paycheck.

Oh by the way, if Obamacare is going to provide superior, lower-cost health care, how come hundreds of big businesses, unions (Yes, unions!), and insurers have petitioned for and received WAIVERS to be EXEMPTED from the provisions of the law? (google it if you don't believe me; it's true, and trying to insult my intelligence wouldn't make it less true).