Universal Healthcare

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Taft, May 4, 2004.

  1. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #1
    Check out this story: http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/05/04/health_care/index.html

    From it, two big conclusions can be drawn:

    1) The US does not have the undisputed best healthcare in the world.
    2) We still pay more for our healthcare than any other country. By a far margin.

    So we don't have universal healthcare. That must mean the free market will automagically find us all the best prices right? Wrong!

    And what does this say to the poor in this country? Since a poor person isn't gaurenteed healthcare here, they will end up paying far more for their healthcare here than in any other country. And what do they get for that extra cost? According to this study, not much.

    Since the free market has provided us with neither the best price or in the highest quality in this case, maybe its time to try something else. Does anyone agree?

    Taft
     
  2. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #2
    Yes, I think universal healthcare would be wonderful, but in the current political environment, I am at a loss as to how it would happen...lobbying by various elements of our current mediacl system (which gain from the current system) like drug companies, hospitals etc would distort the costs/benefits as well as saying things like "it will stifle innovation..." etc. Also, although many have shown that Universal Healthcare can be acheived at little more than we currently spend, in reality it would probably result in a tax-increase, which is anathema to the public, even if the increase was less than their private insurance premiums...it is a perceptual battle...the rich already can afford top-notch medical, and the poor, may not have the political strength to change things...
     
  3. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #3
    I agree, Taft, eliminating the middle man(insurance companies) who make millions or rather billions off the sick and injured would go a long ways to help pay for this. There should be a basic package everyone gets with perhaps options for those who need or want more. Its time to move into the 21st century and not having basic healthcare while we throw billions away in bombs for Iraq just isnt right. Republicans will be screaming!
     
  4. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #4
    I haven't registered to read the article, but I notice the only comparisons are between the US and "four other English-speaking industrialized countries". Presumably that's Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK? Seems foolish and a bit lazy not to look at the French, German, Italian and Japanese.
    And, for that matter, the Scandinavians.
     
  5. Taft thread starter macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #5
    Sorry, I thought all the news articles on the site were available without registration. Here's the text:



     
  6. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #6
    Thanks, Taft. It sounds remarkably inconclusive. I still think it would have been much more useful to have stepped outside the English-speaking world.
     
  7. Taft thread starter macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #7
    I agree. It does sound inconclusive, at least in terms of the CAUSE of the individual failing of each system.

    But I think that the fact that a "socialized" healthcare system such as the UK's can compete with the US's in terms of quality at a much lower price to users of the system says something. For so long we've heard that privatizing EVERYTHING is the way to increase quality and decrease cost. I'm not so sure.

    I will concede, however, that external factors such as excessive litigation probably play a part in the total cost figures. How much, and how these costs could be controlled, are still unknown.

    Taft
     
  8. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #8
    This isn't really a "new study" -- I posted an LA Times article about it several months ago. In fact we've known for decades that we pay more for our health care and get less of it -- a lot more for significantly less. If that doesn't motivate our politicos to fix the problem, then nothing will.
     
  9. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #9
    ...just so long as people have a choice as to participate or NOT in this health care system...
     
  10. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #10
    In the UK, and elsewhere I believe, everyone contributes to the Health Service through National Insurance contributions, a weekly or monthly deduction. If you want to go private, with or without private insurance, you still can, of course, but you still pay the contributions to the NHS. The reasoning is that nobody in society benefits from those who can't afford medical attention being ill, a concept that does not seem to have much currency with you.
     
  11. SlyHunter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #11
    So what doesn't give them the right to steal from those who produce and give to those who don't.

    My mother came up to me one day complaining about our health care system. She couldn't afford to buy these new fangle pills where one keeps you from getting heartburn all day. They cost 1 dollar a pill too expensive for her budget shouldn't the government pay for them? I pointed out she can afford Tums and they do the trick. It is not up to the government to save her from pain or suffering. She can't afford a limo so she drives a 15 year old crappy car does she think the government should buy her a new one?

    How about someday when we can do heart transplants, liver transplants, forced growth organs via cloned cells in tanks, or even brain transplants to a empty husk grown from stem cells to be a perfect human specimen. Do you really think the government should pay so it is provided for everyone? I think not.
     
  12. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #12
    What makes you say it's stealing? We, the taxpayers, agree that it's worth it. Your poor mother probably would too. She wouldn't get a new car, but she would get an affordable public transport system.

    I think that is perfectly reasonable. Why not? Your system results in a lot more people in bad health. Cui bono?
     
  13. SlyHunter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #13
    I am a tax payer do I have the right to say its not worth it to pay someone elses medical bills? Do I have a right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Life, liberty and Property aren't those my rights? Wasn't our country developed to protect the individual from the masses?

    Freedom of speech was not written to protect the government from the press.
    Freedom of religion was not written to protect the government from religion.
    And the right to life, liberty, and property was not put in so I can pay your medical bills.
     
  14. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #14
    Property? That's a new one. Was it really to "protect the individual from the masses"? What on earth does that mean? I think I've must have read a different edition.

    Nobody said they were. In an unfair world, it's just a fairer way of arranging things, as far as I'm concerned. You can let everybody rot if you want to, but I wouldn't like to live in such a selfish society.
     
  15. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #15
    Haven't you ever heard of, "life, liberty and the pursuit of property"? It's in the new, revised Declaration of Dependence.
     
  16. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #16
    I thought it must be: I was reading the King James version. Silly me! :rolleyes:
     
  17. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #17
    To get the full meaning, you have to go back to the original text in ancient Urdu.
     
  18. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #18
    Babelfish is SO unreliable these days... :D
     
  19. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #19
    That must be in the 'living breathing document' known as the US Constipation. :p
     
  20. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #20
    What if we, the taxpayers, agree that we should enslave all the 'yardies' since they do not even approach the 51% required to make the "Yardie Enslavement Act" impossible? Ever heard of the term "Tyranny of the Masses"?
     
  21. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #21
    It's "voters", not "taxpayers". You've effectively voted to do that, that's why so many are in prison. It's not "Tyranny of the Masses", it's called a "democratic majority".
     
  22. SlyHunter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #22
    Wasn't it a "democratic majority" that burned the witches in Salem?
     
  23. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #23
    Its almost as if SlyHunter is giving his "reasoning" as a joke, as to exaggerate the ridiculous. Think "Ali G" of Macrumours.

    Haha, reeeeeally. :p

    Canada rules!! Sweden is probably tied in terms of healthcare. Japan has the longest lifespan in the world today (from birth). The US is on the lower quartile on a huge list of Western countries.
     
  24. Thanatoast macrumors 6502a

    Thanatoast

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    Denver
    #24
    The phrase was originally "life, liberty and property" before it was put into the Declaration. They changed it at the last minute, I forget why. No, seriously.

    As for universal healthcare, if it's cheaper, makes everyone healthier, and screws over the insurance companies, I'm all for it. The difficulty, I think, lies in determining what procedures are elective and which are necessary, and which the national system will cover.
     
  25. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #25
    No, that was a patriarchal dictatorship.
     

Share This Page