After posting the piece about Nurses traveling to Germany and reading the feedback. I would like to open up a debate on this BB about "Universal Health Care" or "Single Payor Systems"
In doing this I hope to learn more about each side of the issue. I do not want to turn this into a heated horrific debate that ends in belittling one another as some other charged topics have ended, but a genuine debate about the Pros and Cons of proposed "Universal Health Care or Single Payor systems" I believe we can all agree to debate and we can all learn things we might not otherwise have the time to research.
I am going to begin by placing an article that discusses the cons of Universal Health Care with some statistics, and if anyone is willing please come in and try to debate some of the key points this brings up. With stats not hyped up words or hot air. I am truly interested in seeing the different sides of this issue. This effects us all, and in order to make an informed decision we need to see "all" sides of the issue. Thanks in advance for participating.
Michele
I am going to have to post the article in several pieces because the bulletin board only will allow 3000 characters.So see the next posts.
Repercussions of the week-old strike at a Hershey Foods Corp. plant in Canada are being felt in the candy maker's hometown (Derry Twp., Hershey,PA).
Production has not been increased at Hershey's plants in Derry Twp. and
elsewhere, although that could happen with a prolonged strike. Instead,
the impact is more subtle, and potentially long lasting.
The walkout by nearly 600 workers at Hershey's plant in Smiths Falls,
Ontario, and their contract negotiations with management are being closely
monitored by the union representing nearly 3,000 Hershey employees in
DerryTwp.
Interest is keen because Hershey's decisions on which of its dozen plants
in the United States, Canada and Mexico gets new production work hinge on a
variety of factors, including the cost of doing business at each facility.
"Each plant competes with the sister plants," said Robert Feaser, business
manager for Chocolate Workers Local 464, which represents workers at Hershey's West Chocolate Avenue and 19 E. Chocolate Ave. plants. "They make the stuff at the cheapest place they can do it. Whatever one plant can get has an overall effect on what other plants get."
If the striking workers in Canada get what they are seeking -- early retirement incentives with no reduction in benefits in exchange for smaller raises -- union workers at other Hershey plants will no doubt take notice when their contracts expire, Feaser said. "We should be comparing notes with one another," Feaser said of his Canadian counterparts. Such a comparison is difficult, given the starkly different health benefits and somewhat different pension plans available to workers in Canada and
the United States. In 2002, Hershey workers in Derry Twp. went on strike for six weeks over the company's plan to require employees to contribute more toward their health-benefit costs. Workers agreed to a contract that kept their health insurance co-payments stable for four years in exchange for smaller pay.
Comment: Much has been written about the competitive advantage of
Canadian businesses over those in the United States due to the government provided health care coverage in Canada. It is interesting to see that these macroeconomic differences also impact the microeconomics of competing plants within the same company. Establishing a national health program in the United States would certainly simplify these issues, not to mention the obvious fact that it would ensure
Specializes in LTC,Hospice/palliative care,acute care.
Study: Taxes Pay for Most Obesity Costs.......
Question:
What ethical responsibility do taxpayers have to healthcare problems related to lifestyle choice??
Universal healthcare will cause all taxpayers to pay for all of the lifestyle choices of other people, even if you exercise eat right, do not smoke, and take care of yourself......
Question-what healthcare problems are deserving of your tax dollars? I would vote to draw the line on artificial feeding....I would not treat any one for aspiration pneumonia more then once if they had advance directives stating they never wanted any artificial feeding.I would balk at my tax dollars paying to house patients that will always be dependent for care..let their families bear that burden-they choose to give them life so let them care for them....generation after generation....Sounds harsh and ridiculous doesn't it? No one can decide whose life is more valuable other then the person living it....Not me-not you
My name is Troy and i was wondering if you could please send the link to this article because i wanted to see the charts and graphs that did not appear.
Specializes in burn, geriatric, rehab, wound care, ER.
OK, I agree I'm biased coming from the UK, but I still can't understand why the USA doesn't have good, old-fashioned universal healthcare just like most of the rest of the industrialized world. After all we are number one- right? And no, I'm not saying that the National Health System in the UK is all that! I'm over here, aren't I? But I came across an article "Time to Socialize Medicine" by Timothy Noah (http://www.slate.com/id/2153275/)the other day that got me thinking about it in a different light. The article mentioned that big corporations were going broke with the cost of healthcare and which linked me to another article that claimed that American industry could no longer be competitive in a global market, because the cost of health care was eating away at the bottom line
(U.S. Firms Losing Health Care Battle, GM Chairman Says
So if the corporations are really the ones that are running the country, just like all the liberal progressives are saying, are people like me that want universal healthcare just lobbying the wrong people? Shouldn't we be reaching out to those "evil" corporations, extending the hand of "bipartisanship" to achieve a common goal? If the corporations got rid of that cost, their profits would go up, everybody gets affordable healthcare and everybody's happy. Maybe they could even see their way to giving us a pay raise!?
Anyway, just a thought - the democrats have the house and senate, bipartisanship is in the air and George Bush is meeting with the heads of three big US automakers today to discuss, amongst other things, the cost of healthcare. Maybe we'll all get lucky - here's hoping.
Look for it soon I would think. We are blind to the fact that our health care "system" is more expensive (massive administrative costs in part) yet produces poorer results. But when the big auto makers start to stomp their feet saying they can't compete with other countries because of health care costs in this country (whether this is truly the reason is debatable) then look for some possible changes. Corporations are starting to expand in other countries in order to save costs from providing health care to employees.
People in the U.S. seem to think that health care coverage for its citizens means socialism, which is silly. Isn't it about living in a civilized society? In reality it's about Public Health, and not having coverage (altho in some ways we do, as it's called the Emergency Room - which is really an $$$ way to provide coverage) is a Public Health Crisis. I'm sure I'll receive some flames, but I'm not backing down :) .
You aren't biased. Altho the health care system in the UK has it's own problems, at least people are generally covered.
Specializes in burn, geriatric, rehab, wound care, ER.
It seems you might be right. I just got my new copy of ENA connection which has a piece on John Kitzbhaber, MD an ER doc and former Oregon governer who has started a movement for universal healthcare using the US public education system as a model i.e. we are all entitled to it, it's publicly subsidized, everyone contributes to it and if you can afford to, you can buy more if you'd like. I checked out the website (About the Archimedes Movement | Archimedes Movement) and it seems that the movement is spreading from Oregon into Washington and California. Sounds promising.
Yes, the Canadian model might be similar. Everyone has basic coverage, the administration is done by a private source, claims paid for by the government. If you want different or expanded coverage, you are free to pay for private insurance if you want.
Because, as the 20th century amply showed, communism doesn't work, anywhere it's tried.
As far as looking for a model similar to our public school system: that system is fundamentally broken. If you doubt that, look at how many American parents opt out of that system. And look how our public school students compare to those educated practically anywhere else.
When you play to the lowest common denominator, what you get is the lowest common demoninator.
Oh, and ask the NHS nurses in the UK what THEY think about their wonderful system.
But, here's hoping that Hillary burns herself on this third rail again.
"Close enough for government work" just isn't a phrase most people want associated with their health.
Communism? How did communism come out of this conversation? That's absolutely laughable. Our public educational systems are "broken" because parents have given up responsibility in being a part of the education of their children. Plus, the media has let us all know how horrible education is in this country, no? Send your kid to a public school, and what a horrible parent you are. I have friends with kids in both public and private, and all are doing fine. They are involved and help in their education.
Kids start school much earlier in many other countries, and their education isn't based upon self-esteem building type crap. And, IMO people in this country have grown lazy and complacent, believing their birth right is continuous prosperity w/o having to work for it.
Nowhere did we say the NHS is perfect either. London is struggling too, but my husbands father is in London with heart disease and he has received perfectly good care. He didn't come running over to the US, even tho he could have.
70% of Canadians say that their biggest fear is being forced to adopt a US Health Care type system. You think our "System" is superior? Much has indicated otherwise.
When companies continue to expand overseas because of health care costs in this country, and you no longer have a job, and are subjected to diseases from untreated people walking around, you might change your mind.
Communism? How did communism come out of this conversation? That's absolutely laughable. Our public educational systems are "broken" because parents have given up responsibility in being a part of the education of their children.
And the problem with our health-care system is because it's a 3rd party payor system, people have given up the responsibility to be part of their own health-care solutions.
How is bringing that 'full circle' a better solution?
What our healthcare system needs is some good ole capitalist reforms that make people, as you say, MORE connected to the process - not less.
The problem with 'standardized' healthcare is that 'standard' is all too often, quite substandard. No thanks.
What you fail to realize is that most people here wouldn't trust the gov't to take care of their dog. You aren't going to get a groundswell of American support to turn their healthcare over to such renowned inefficiency.
.thumb.gif.041bac93584716f6dc9882dcd8cf500a.gif){kind=small}
fergus51
6,620 Posts
[