Destroying Healthcare in America

[Bujin]

Originally Posted by Jaer57

What happened to Obama's promise of allowing the voters to review legislation for 5 days before it's passed? When can I review this legislation? The sad reality is that like all politicians before him, they tell us what we want to hear and then implement their agenda. Change was a nice slogan; sad to see it was only that.

It's easy to point to a specific promise and project that to his entire 5 month administration; however, the facts don't agree with your conclusion. If you look at politifact.org, they list him as breaking 6 promises, while he has kept 31, reached a compromise on 8 others, 65 more are in the works, and 12 have stalled in the political process. When you look at the data, that means the ratio of "positive action" to "promises broken" is 17:1. Hardly a basis for a conclusion that he hasn't kept promises.

[Micael]

Originally Posted by daThomas

I challenge you that if the gov't can provide healthcare at a cheaper rate than private insurers, ALL THE BETTER. If the private insurers can't compete then perhaps illness is not a viable thing to profit from.

Why is it that you can't learn from other country's mistakes, or listen to people in this very forum who are from those countries, and telling you it's a mistake?

What exactly will your program "fix"?

[Toby]

Originally Posted by Bujin

If the government can't run anything, then a gov't run system will pose no threat.

That's like saying incompetent management at GM would pose no threat to the company. You get to tank the value of the 'company' and be worse off in the end.

[Bujin]

Originally Posted by Micael

you don't think those quotes were picked for a political reason, do ya?

They may have been picked for political reason, but why were they said?

[Bujin]

Originally Posted by Toby

That's like saying incompetent management at GM would pose no threat to the company. You get to tank the value of the 'company' and be worse off in the end.

I'm not making my point clearly, then. I meant that an incompetent government health care system couldn't possibly compete with the stellar private system we have now. And if it can, then isn't competition good?

[Toby]

Originally Posted by neoGTR22

Other institutions we all rely on that are governement run... [...]

how about the FCC "OMG the government is going to control what electronics we use, Socialists!" [...]

The FCC are Fascists. Get your epithets right.

[anthillmob]

I would say that free market proponents argue that FAIR competition is a good thing. State vs private business is neither equal nor fair, however I see your point (although I do of course disagree with it :-))

In terms of the statistics (which I have a policy of ignoring) I would point out that satisfaction with a service does not equal quality of service. There are far too many variables, including the fact that most of the population has nothing to compare with. Plus, bare in mind that in a lot of the countries, people don't seek medical attention except a last resort..... or if there is significant amounts of blood involved :-).

[Toby]

Originally Posted by neoGTR22

Not really because then you'll have a preexisting condition and they can just decide to not insure you.

Have you heard of HIPAA? Passed by that evil Republican Congress and signed by St. Bill? Frequently Asked Questions about Portability of Health Coverage and HIPAA

[Jaer57]

Originally Posted by daThomas

Your argument boils down to, "we either accept the method of healthcare delivery in which people profit from illness (which is the one that's failing by the way)" or "allow a gov't run CHOICE which you say will drive private insurers off the cliffs leaving nothing but gov't run healthcare". paraphrasing of course.

I challenge you that if the gov't can provide healthcare at a cheaper rate than private insurers, ALL THE BETTER. If the private insurers can't compete then perhaps illness is not a viable thing to profit from.

Not at all. I simply do not trust the current plan of a massive implementation to improve the healthcare system. I'm also not trying to polarize this issue; there is plenty or room for many points of view.

That leads me to my view on this debate; I would rather see this debate at the state level, and have each state come up with a government plan. There could be federal oversight or even intervention when things go wrong. I don't know the right answer to solving healthcare issues, but I am pretty sure that most of our politicians don't either. In this way, we could see what actually works and what doesn't, or at least have some real studies to guage what direction we go in.

However, since there is not consensus in how to implement such systems, it seems extremely risky to implement something on this scale without any real case studies. People refer to foreign countries all the time as the case studies, but most of these countries don't have our population and diversity. Some of these countries would better compare to a state rather than the whole U.S. What works for California isn't necessarily going to work for Texas, Rhode Island, Georgia, etc.

I guess all my argument boils down to is, lets slow down, and do this right from the bottom up, not the top down...

[Bujin]

Originally Posted by Micael

Why is it that you can't learn from other country's mistakes, or listen to people in this very forum who are from those countries, and telling you it's a mistake?

What exactly will your program "fix"?

Has anyone from another country posted, stating that our health care system is better than their's? I think only ryleyinstl posted about Canada, and I didn't see him state that it would be a mistake....particularly since he referred to our system as a "criminal operation".

And other country's citizens (Germany, France, and Canada) have a much higher satisfaction with their country's health care systems that ours, as I posted previously. How do you equate that with "other country's mistakes"? Except that ours is American, and by definition better?

[ChaoticOrder]

Come on people, discuss your political views somewhere else, do not clog up PreCentral.

[Bujin]

Originally Posted by ChaoticOrder

Come on people, discuss your political views somewhere else, do not clog up PreCentral.

Ha! It's Off-Topic: the Wild, Wild West of the PreCentral boards!

[Toby]

Originally Posted by Bujin

I'm not making my point clearly, then.

No, I think you're just getting caught up in the catch phrases.

I meant that an incompetent government health care system couldn't possibly compete with the stellar private system we have now. And if it can, then isn't competition good?

You're presenting a false dichotomy.

[Bujin]

Originally Posted by Toby

No, I think you're just getting caught up in the catch phrases.

You're presenting a false dichotomy.

Of course, I'm misled, false and "caught up in catch phrases"...after all, I disagree with you.

I'm sure our current system is terrific - I'm certain that the 15% of Louisiana's population just choose to be uninsured.

[Jaer57]

Originally Posted by Bujin

It's easy to point to a specific promise and project that to his entire 5 month administration; however, the facts don't agree with your conclusion. If you look at politifact.org, they list him as breaking 6 promises, while he has kept 31, reached a compromise on 8 others, 65 more are in the works, and 12 have stalled in the political process. When you look at the data, that means the ratio of "positive action" to "promises broken" is 17:1. Hardly a basis for a conclusion that he hasn't kept promises.

You're right; I apologize for the hasty conclusion. However, it is disheartening to see all of this massive spending in these short five months and not be cynical, no?

[ryleyinstl]

Originally Posted by ChaoticOrder

Come on people, discuss your political views somewhere else, do not clog up PreCentral.

Umm......this is the "off topic" area dude. Take a chill pill. Debate/flame wars are good for the democratic process. You should be happy we have this outlet or we just might shoot each other instead.

Your not trying to tell us what to do are you?

[Bujin]

Originally Posted by Jaer57

You're right; I apologize for the hasty conclusion. However, it is disheartening to see all of this massive spending in these short five months and not be cynical, no?

No apology necessary; I'm just a geek about justifying conclusions with data.

[daThomas]

Originally Posted by Micael

Why is it that you can't learn from other country's mistakes, or listen to people in this very forum who are from those countries, and telling you it's a mistake?

What exactly will your program "fix"?

Besides pointing to the obvious statistics of healthcare satisfaction in other countries which have already been pointed to in this thread and contradict your above statement and to which you replied you don't want to play post the most links....

Those other countries are complete democracies and I find it very difficult to stomach the idea that the citizens of those countries are incapable of making the changes they see needed by ballot in the past several decades.

So please, stop with the BS fantasy that people under European gov't health care are miserable and dying in the streets.

[daThomas]

Originally Posted by ChaoticOrder

Come on people, discuss your political views somewhere else, do not clog up PreCentral.

hi n00b.

Welcome.

[Bujin]

Originally Posted by daThomas

Those other countries are complete democracies and I find it very difficult to stomach the idea that the citizens of those countries are incapable of making the changes they see needed by ballot in the past several decades.

So please, stop with the BS fantasy that people under European gov't health care are miserable and dying in the streets.

But...but....those countries are.....not American. They're obviously a bunch of boobs.