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.
For the record, you pondered why I would discuss this in a separate thread: I didn't create this thread, I was only responding to it.
As far as this quote above, I am entitled to behavior and actions with MY OWN EARNINGS that you might consider to be selfish. The thing about freedom is that I don't have to account for my freedoms to the gov't, to you, or to anybody.
You might consider my position selfish. I'm fine with that.
I consider the concept of GRH to be foolish. If it could accomplish its stated goals, I STILL would not be on board, but at least, I would not actively resist it. Alas, it cannot. The laws of supply and demand are more powerful than the laws of "have cake; eat it, too."
I choose not to spend money on foolish projects. I don't consider that to be selfish. I consider it to be prudent.
~faith,
Timothy.
I figured the topic to be republicans and the fact many of them support UHC, but you continued to argue why UHC is a bad idea, which repeated what you said in other thread. I apologize for criticizing you for that, because it's no biggie to me.
I also apologize if you were feeling I was trampling on your freedom to express how you would like to account the government to spend your money. That is 100% fundamentally American and I would never suggest any of us to not have that right.
I don't consider your overall opinion selfish, because you've made it with intelligence, although I disagree. I do think the statement "Explain to me why I must give up the healthcare I have so that someone else can be covered?" is selfish to me, but you certainly are entitled to that, and I'm sure many other people feel the same way. Please don't consider that a personal attack, I'm not calling your selfish, just that idea.
I think UHC would be money well spent. I'm weary of my patients having to stay in the hospital longer because they don't have insurance for rehab, or home health benefits. I'm ashamed there are two levels of care where I work. Those with insurance go upstairs to a nice rehab and get therapies many hours a day. Others sit and rot on my unit on 10 minutes of therapy a day, spenting time in an acute care setting when they need to move on. I'm tired of severely injured patients who need skilled nursing care, sitting in an acute care setting for weeks and months on end because no one will pay for a nursing home. I hate having someone stay in the hospital extra days just because they can't afford a platform walker and a shower chair. It would be money well spent and might even save a bit. So if I had to adjust my own personal healthcare a bit so everyone could get the same treatment, I'd be willing to do so. As I've said my benefits are already restricted by the HMO, so if it become "government restricted health care" as you like to call it, it probably wouldn't change my benefits all that much anyway.
I don't consider your overall opinion selfish, because you've made it with intelligence, although I disagree. I do think the statement "Explain to me why I must give up the healthcare I have so that someone else can be covered?" is selfish to me, but you certainly are entitled to that, and I'm sure many other people feel the same way. Please don't consider that a personal attack, I'm not calling your selfish, just that idea.
I think UHC would be money well spent. I'm weary of my patients having to stay in the hospital longer because they don't have insurance for rehab, or home health benefits. I'm ashamed there are two levels of care where I work. Those with insurance go upstairs to a nice rehab and get therapies many hours a day. Others sit and rot on my unit on 10 minutes of therapy a day, spenting time in an acute care setting when they need to move on. I'm tired of severely insured patients who need skilled nursing care, sitting in an acute care setting for weeks and months on end because no one will pay for a nursing home. I hate having someone stay in the hospital extra days just because they can't afford a platform walker and a shower chair. It would be money well spent and might even save a bit. So if I had to adjust my own personal healthcare a bit so everyone could get the same treatment, I'd be willing to do so. As I've said my benefits are already restricted by the HMO, so if it become "government restricted health care" as you like to call it, it probably wouldn't change my benefits all that much anyway.
So well stated. I have had the same reaction many times to the opponents of UHC. Michael Moore's point about everyone sharing the pie together is making many of the same arguments. Everyone needs a seat at the table when it comes to health care.
The insurance companies fight every attempt at reform. Why go for incremental reform that leaves some people out?
It is time for guaranteed healthcare for all.
Schwarzenegger Fights To Save Health Plan
CHICO, Calif. -- When Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger unveiled his $12 billion universal health-coverage plan earlier this year, he cast himself as the rescuer of a broken system.
"I feel strongly that the people of California have sent me to Sacramento to tackle those big problems," the Republican governor told voters at an elementary school here recently. "They have seen me on the screen to be the big action hero, so they know that I can be the big action hero also in Sacramento."
Mr. Schwarzenegger would force all Californians to buy insurance, while compelling insurers to accept all customers -- even those with medical problems. Businesses that don't offer coverage to employees would pay 4% of their payroll costs into a state fund to help subsidize those who can't afford insurance....
...The state's largest insurer, the WellPoint Inc. unit Blue Cross of California, is warning that "ill-considered reforms" could damage the state's health-care market. It recently ran radio and print ads reminiscent of the "Harry and Louise" campaign that helped upend Hillary Clinton's national health-care plan in 1994....
I personally support the idea of America switching to Universal Healthcare, especially after watching Michael Moore's Sicko, just wanted to know everyone else's thoughts about Universal Healthcare
I don't have a strong opinion about universal healthcare. I think those that advocate it are missing some important facts, and those that denounce it completely are a bit closed-minded.
My question for all of you is, what would be the implications of a universial healthcare-type system in the US on nurses, nursing salaries, job outlook, etc... ???
once we agree to this we can haggle about the details.
okay, let's look hard and rationally at this. how is health care more of a right to life than food, shelter, education, and [for adults] a means to earn a livelyhood? [one cannot do any of the above without all of the above.]
if it is different or more important, why? ( no cheating on "everyone needs it-"everyone needs the others, also!)
if it is not, should "we" be providing all the rest universally as well?
once we iron this out, then we can haggle about the details!!
pickledpepperRN
4,491 Posts
We need to do something. Most Americans are insecure regarding healthcare.
Just the stress of this worry probably harms some peoples health as much as many unhealthy habits.