Do You Want Universal Healthcare?

[DanFNP]

I know this topic has been discussed before on this site..but, I was curious for an updated response. How many of you would be willing to pay more taxes for universal healthcare? I find it egregious that the US has put a cost on maintaining/saving ones life! I traveled to Europe and the thought of them having to bring their checkbook to the hospital aroused literal laughs. It's the same notion that we'd have to whip out our debit card to firefighters before they turned the hoses on our burning homes. It's sad. I think the overall costs of UH would be beneficial...in fact, the raised taxes would still probably be lower than our rising premiums every 2 weeks! Thoughts?

[Mijourney]

My understanding is that health insurance has almost always been for catastrophic and chronically ill patients. Health insurance is disease driven. Physicians and other practitioners get paid lots of money to treat disease not provide preventative health care. Look at your diagnosis codes and procedure codes that are used for the reimbursement of health care services. They are predominately disease-oriented. Health insurance, as I understand it, was actually started as a result of financial losses due to the Great Depression. People could not afford the doctor or the institution any more. In fact, hospitals experimented with insurance before the depression. Insurance at that time was used for times of sickness or injury. So, I don't believe basic care played into the equation until many decades later.

I agree with earle58 that many people cannot afford basic care. Like compulsory K-12 education, I think it should be an entitlement so that the vast majority of people can seek to maintain relatively good health and offset declines and major expense as long as possible. I feel that our reimbursement system as well as our mentalities need to be re-evaluated so that we can take the high road to prevention. Right now, with the way things are set up, we're going right into a path of financial doom and destruction. With the change in reimbursement towards preventative health care, I think that we may see some insurers, pharmaceuticals, and LTC facilities lose traction. Of course, the pharmaceuticals may then turn around and see who can create the best anti-aging pill and so on. Then consumers will consume that. Like I wrote earlier, my views could change tomorrow.

[Mimmm]

Even though it is government run each healthcare trust is responsible for it's own budget and we are very accountible to the public which is enforced by public groups. With this accountablity comes the appropriate budget and the responsibility for that.

Sharrie,

I really appreciate the time you took to explain, in more detail, how your health system works. Although you have stated a few fustrations with how the health system functions, it sound like overall you are satisfied and happy with how healthcare is working for you. My concern with starting UHC in the U.S. still remains for many reasons. I still feel that govenrment assistance should be offered those who need it (such as medicare to the elderly and those with, for example, mental illness). But...to provide government funded healthcare to the entire country will decrease quality, efficiency and create unnecessary dependance on the government. I don't mean to say you should not have UHC in your country, if it is what is working best for th U.K. then that is great. Sounds like both government and privately run healthcare has its own types of problems. If there was the perfect solution we would not be debating this topic.

[XB9S, BSN, MSN, EdD, RN, APN]

Even though it is government run each healthcare trust is responsible for it's own budget and we are very accountible to the public which is enforced by public groups. With this accountablity comes the appropriate budget and the responsibility for that.

Sharrie,

I really appreciate the time you took to explain, in more detail, how your health system works. Although you have stated a few fustrations with how the health system functions, it sound like overall you are satisfied and happy with how healthcare is working for you. My concern with starting UHC in the U.S. still remains for many reasons. I still feel that govenrment assistance should be offered those who need it (such as medicare to the elderly and those with, for example, mental illness). But...to provide government funded healthcare to the entire country will decrease quality, efficiency and create unnecessary dependance on the government. I don't mean to say you should not have UHC in your country, if it is what is working best for th U.K. then that is great. Sounds like both government and privately run healthcare has its own types of problems. If there was the perfect solution we would not be debating this topic.

Ohh now this is going to be a long post and I apologise, I don't usually write essays here but this thread has got me all passionate about our healthcare

You are right I am on the whole fairly satisfied with the healthcare provided in the UK, the delegated budgets gives a personal responsibilities to the managers in charge which helps keeps spending within reasonable limits. There are many challenges but there are so many good things in it as well.

I really do think that healthcare for all is a good thing, and I know there have been many debates about why should I pay for someone elses healthcare but you will get those who find ways to get tax payers to pay for thier care what ever system is in place, unless you insist on a cash up front system and I can't see that working in most A and E's.

Also I am not sure that universal healthcare leads to dependence, if anything chronic disease managment and health promotion is huge here, enabling and promoting good health to all. For example, as part of my job I run a surgical clinic to screen patients pre-operatively for fitness for anaesthetic, even here a great deal of time is spent with health promotion and life style changes to promote good health, I love this aspect of my work. By improving outcomes of chronic disease and simple things like smoking cessation, health and diet advice we can reduce the impact of these things on our healthcare system.

Our GP's have incentives to meet governement targets such as hypertension control, diabetes screening and management, womens and men health clinics. Prevention of complications of chronic disease is a big thing. The fact none of our patients have to pay for these consultations and the prescription charges are minimum (if anything depending on where you live) means that even those who can't afford to pay health insurance can have access to services that will maintain good health.

I am not sure you can compare healthcare in different countries, it would be like comparing apples to oranges, we all have different cultures and values. I have been brought up in a country with universal healthcare, it is something that I believe in and would want to protect, I am not sure our system would be right for the US. You have so many huge hurdles to get through. Your insurance companies earn far too much money to allow UHC to come in without a fight, there is the issues of standardising pay and conditions, all of your hospitals are individual businesses. (This is my understanding of it, please forgive me if it is wrong) To change any of this is going to be momumental and I am really not sure how you could go about it.

If I could give a personal example, last year as a result of poor anatomy and a quick turn I dislocated my patella, in doing so I damaged quite a bit of the underlying structure. I had to take 2 months off work, this was fully paid, I recieved emergency treatment, physio therapy and orthopaedic reviews for 12 months afterwards. I didn't have to part with a penny or worry about financial difficulty. In returning to work I was unable to keep the pace of a ward round so my work helped me to adapt and continue with my job but with a less wards to cover so less moving around. I had no improvment so needed surgery this year, and have undergone major surgery to my knee to repair the damage, had medications post op for pain and nausea, physiotherapy and follow up appointments, I have seen orthopaedic surgerons, GP's, specialist nurses, pharmacists and have had 4 months off work. I still have not had to part with a penny or worry about pay as I am still being paid from work.

Had I lived in the US I wonder what the story would have been, I don't know if I could have had the time off work, so may not have had surgery which would lead to arthritic changes and problems in maybe 5 years.

This year I am really glad I live in the UK and have had access to this. I know that your healthcare insurance would cover much of the care and I do pay for the care in my taxes but it's the rest, the benefits of working for the NHS as well that I like

[RN1982]

I do not think UHC will decrease the quality or efficiency of U.S. healthcare. From Sharrie's post it seems that its quite efficient.

[Turd.Ferguson]

Your insurance companies earn far too much money to allow UHC to come in without a fight...

"The industry as a whole routinely denies, delays and defends claims – all in the name of the “bottom line."

http://law.freeadvice.com/insurance_law/insurers_bad_faith/ten-worst-insurance-companies.htm

[advocateforsafety]

I am an athiest but you can't deny that our countries laws and basic moralities are based on christian principles. It is in most all aspects of goverment, its even on our money. That is my point. We should at very least help our fellow man so that he or she may strive to reach the "american dream". Health care is a right by virtue of being a human that lives in a civilized nation such as ours. That is my opinion anyway.

[rph3664]

I'm not insured and I've only been "middle-class" for the past few years.

And one of the reasons "basic health care" got so expensive is because insurance companies would cover it and so the price got ratcheted up.

Of course, there is probably no going back to the day when you paid your doc with a chicken dinner.

steph

A while back, I heard about a man who needed some expensive dental work but didn't have insurance (or it didn't cover that procedure) and really didn't have the money, but he owned a pet supply store and had some high-end aquarium equipment that was a few years out of date. Because of this, he couldn't sell it or send it back, and it was gathering dust in his storage room. He asked the dentist if he would take his payment in aquariums, and the dentist said yes after seeing the equipment and now has a fancy aquarium in his waiting room, and two in his house.

I have also heard about hospitals that were willing to forgive part or all of a bill in exchange for volunteer hours. This has mostly been done in areas with a high unemployment rate, for outpatient procedures or to eliminate a copay.

[Spidey's mom, ADN, BSN, RN]

A while back, I heard about a man who needed some expensive dental work but didn't have insurance (or it didn't cover that procedure) and really didn't have the money, but he owned a pet supply store and had some high-end aquarium equipment that was a few years out of date. Because of this, he couldn't sell it or send it back, and it was gathering dust in his storage room. He asked the dentist if he would take his payment in aquariums, and the dentist said yes after seeing the equipment and now has a fancy aquarium in his waiting room, and two in his house.

I have also heard about hospitals that were willing to forgive part or all of a bill in exchange for volunteer hours. This has mostly been done in areas with a high unemployment rate, for outpatient procedures or to eliminate a copay.

My little hospital gave a 30% discount if you paid your bill immediately. I had some lab charges I wrote a check for and got the discount.

Our docs make house calls. No charge.

Yeah, life would be better in many ways if we could turn back the clock.

steph

[Spidey's mom, ADN, BSN, RN]

I am an athiest but you can't deny that our countries laws and basic moralities are based on christian principles. It is in most all aspects of goverment, its even on our money. That is my point. We should at very least help our fellow man so that he or she may strive to reach the "american dream". Health care is a right by virtue of being a human that lives in a civilized nation such as ours. That is my opinion anyway.

This essay has been linked before but it says exactly what I think about health care - that it is not a right.

http://www.bdt.com/pages/Peikoff.html

. . . . .How would these alleged new rights be fulfilled? Take the simplest case: you are born with a moral right to hair care, let us say, provided by a loving government free of charge to all who want or need it. What would happen under such a moral theory?

Haircuts are free, like the air we breathe, so some people show up every day for an expensive new styling, the government pays out more and more, barbers revel in their huge new incomes, and the profession starts to grow ravenously, bald men start to come in droves for free hair implantations, a school of fancy, specialized eyebrow pluckers develops -- it's all free, the government pays. The dishonest barbers are having a field day, of course -- but so are the honest ones; they are working and spending like mad, trying to give every customer his heart's desire, which is a millionaire's worth of special hair care and services -- the government starts to scream, the budget is out of control. Suddenly directives erupt: we must limit the number of barbers, we must limit the time spent on haircuts, we must limit the permissible type of hair styles; bureaucrats begin to split hairs about how many hairs a barber should be allowed to split. A new computerized office of records filled with inspectors and red tape shoots up; some barbers, it seems, are still getting too rich, they must be getting more than their fair share of the national hair, so barbers have to start applying for Certificates of Need in order to buy razors, while peer review boards are established to assess every stylist's work, both the dishonest and the overly honest alike, to make sure that no one is too bad or too good or too busy or too unbusy. Etc. In the end, there are lines of wretched customers waiting for their chance to be routinely scalped by bored, hog-tied haircutters some of whom remember dreamily the old days when somehow everything was so much better.

Do you think the situation would be improved by having hair-care cooperatives organized by the government? -- having them engage in managed competition, managed by the government, in order to buy haircut insurance from companies controlled by the government?

If this is what would happen under government-managed hair care, what else can possibly happen -- it is already starting to happen -- under the idea of health care as a right? Health care in the modern world is a complex, scientific, technological service. How can anybody be born with a right to such a thing?. . . . . "

steph

[leslie :-D]

This essay has been linked before but it says exactly what I think about health care - that it is not a right.

http://www.bdt.com/pages/Peikoff.html

. . . . .How would these alleged new rights be fulfilled? Take the simplest case: you are born with a moral right to hair care, let us say, provided by a loving government free of charge to all who want or need it. What would happen under such a moral theory?

Haircuts are free, like the air we breathe, so some people show up every day for an expensive new styling, the government pays out more and more, barbers revel in their huge new incomes, and the profession starts to grow ravenously, bald men start to come in droves for free hair implantations, a school of fancy, specialized eyebrow pluckers develops -- it's all free, the government pays.

steph

this is where it started off on the wrong foot.

in re to the 'haircuts', those who started showing up daily, should have immediately been denied access.

it should be based on need, not want.

as human beings, we have a right to have our health maintained.

within those rights, s/b responsiblities from the consumer and expectations from the govt.

once we, the consumer, start 'expecting' beyond what is reasonable, then it becomes an entitlement.

for govt to not distinguish betw right and entitlement, is a costly flaw.

i don't believe in long posts so getting back to the hair example, had our 'loving govt' expressly stated the terms of the universal contract, including how often and other limitations, this would not have happened.

it has to be constructed in a way that benefits are clearly defined.

had this been done in the first place, haircuts would have never gotten so out of control.

and what govt allows us to get haircuts on a daily basis, anyway?

leslie

[Jamesdotter]

I'd be interested to know where Peikoff's investments are.

[Spidey's mom, ADN, BSN, RN]

I'd be interested to know where Peikoff's investments are.

At the end of the article:

Almost ten years ago, Leonard Peikoff predicted that our medical system would be dismantled. Looking at the young people in the crowd, he remarked:

"If you are looking for a crusade, there is none that is more idealistic or more practical. This one is devoted to protecting some of the greatest [men] in the history of this country. And it is also, literally, a matter of life and death---YOUR LIFE, and that of anyone you love. Don't let it go without a fight!"

From "Medicine: The Death of a Profession" by Leonard Peikoff from concluding remarks from 1985 presentation with Dr. Michael Peikoff.

Dr. Leonard Peikoff, author of The Ominous Parallels and Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand was a long-time (30 year) associate of the novelist/philosopher Ayn Rand and upon her death in 1982 was designated as her intellectual and legal heir. He received his Ph.D. from New York University in 1984 and taught at Hunter College. Over the years, he has served in the capacity of professor of philosophy, lecturer and chairman of the board of the Ayn Rand Institute and is currently one of the principal lecturers and instructors of the Objectivist Graduate Center. He has lectured extensively at such prestigious speakers' forums as Ford Hall Forum in Boston on several topics including philosophy and current events. Additionally, outside of academia, he has taught courses on philosophy, rhetoric, logic and Objectivism audio version of which are available from Second Renaissance Books listed above.