Government Health Care

[Winchester]

Although many in government are seeking ways to increase government control and government money is the best way to control a group. Threatening tax exemption status keeps religious groups relatively docile, for instance.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='Marie-Therese' date='28 August 2009 - 05:10 PM' timestamp='1251493819' post='1957400']
The biggest problem in the current system, IMHO, has much less to do with the structure of insurance companies and more to do with the rampant perception of litigation as a remedy. Doctors no longer practice medicine in order to heal, the practice defensive medicine from a checklist. People have a misguided belief that doctors can fix anything, and when they aren't able to, that somehow we should just sue them into oblivion.[/quote]


I was watching a town hall meeting in Reston, VA on C-SPAN last week (I actually watched it twice) and Howard Dean was one of the presenters. The question was asked why tort reform was not part of the health care bill. Dean was honest and said that those writing the bill did not want lawyers coming after them.... that they could not take on everyone who would oppose the bill and add lawyers to it, too. Sad, but true.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='fidei defensor' date='29 August 2009 - 02:45 AM' timestamp='1251528312' post='1957672']
You only think that because you want to believe "public option" means that the government takes complete control when in reality, it's only an [i]option[/i] along side private insurance. I don't see what interest the government would have to put insurance companies out of business other than some vast conspiracy (which i don't buy, sorry)
[/quote]

So where the HR 3200 states that after the bill becomes law "Grandfathered" Insurance companies will not be allowed to take on new clients is just a vast conspiracy that the writers of that bill are part of? And when the elected supports of that bill and others say similar things they are also part of the vast conspiracy?

[elizabeth09]

The goverment should have some role in the heath care. We should at least pay for at least 60% of it. But I think that we, the people, once have the goverment paying for things, then the people will want more free stuff, like paying for ours, the people, college.

[Marie-Therese]

[quote name='elizabeth09' date='29 August 2009 - 01:27 PM' timestamp='1251566855' post='1957909']
The goverment should have some role in the heath care. We should at least pay for at least 60% of it. But I think that we, the people, once have the goverment paying for things, then the people will want more free stuff, like paying for ours, the people, college.
[/quote]


1. The government doesn't pay for anything. Taxpayers give money to the government, and then the government spends the tax revenues.

2. There is no such thing as "free stuff." Someone has to pay for it. I can assure you, the government never gives away ANYTHING for free. There is always a cost associated with it somewhere. If they aren't getting money from you by way of tax revenues, then they are getting a vote from you by way of making you the beneficiary of some government program where they let you think that you are getting something for free.

This is the essence of government. I think the biggest debate is not that the underprivileged should be assisted with their needs, but in how that should be accomplished. In past days much was done on the community level, when families still existed and neighbors knew each other. I still believe that is the best way to handle things, but as our culture has grown more mobile and the extended family community has begun to evaporate, people look increasingly toward a central organization to assist with these issues, ergo, government involvement.

It is an extremely complex issue.

[Hassan]

[quote name='picchick' date='25 August 2009 - 12:06 AM' timestamp='1251173185' post='1955924']
<br /><br /><br />

I voted no. We do not need government care in order to have health care for all. Let's look at all the things that our governemnt has screwed up.
[/quote]



For example that trashy, third rate military.

[Winchester]

If the government runs health care, we are paying for 100% of it.

People are already getting free health care. The idiots who've established welfare didn't put the right restrictions on it, so we've created a sense of entitlement that's spread even through the working classes.

We have a right life, so we have a right to health care. We are not, however, entitled to health care. Our leaders are simply not intelligent enough to develop a decent view of the role of government. This is what happens when we champion putting the common in charge of the nation. We get government by feelings.

Government should move slowly, but people want it to rush. Then they complain that the rules aren't effective. Well, most congressman appear to be, at best, marginally literate. Our President can say: "hope" and "change" and we think that's awesome. Yeah! Hope! Wooo!

Our population is not diminishing due to lack of health care. The shiftless get their friggin medicines. They get bags of them. Huge bags full of medicines. They take 800 dollar rides in ambulances for headaches. There's nothing we can do because the stupid idiots running the government think everyone is entitled to free stuff. They're not. You're not. I'm not.

[picchick]

[quote name='rachael' date='27 August 2009 - 06:23 PM' timestamp='1251411801' post='1957050']
Then how can costs be reduced...?
[/quote]
I think there are a couple of ways that it can be reduced. As a start, hospitals need to have EVERYONE (housekeepers, nurses, aides and DOCTORS) reduce waste. Some of the things they can do? Shut off lights, only get what you need in a procedure, WASH YOUR HANDS, et. al. These, in the greater picture, seem like useless actions but in long run I think it would lessen the cost of health care. Furthermore, government agencies keep imposing new things for us to do. Some of it I see as necessary for the health and safety of our clients. However, for example, they have now made a new way to dispose of medication and rappers. We have 3-5 boxes to throw stuff in. One is a blue box that I believe all non hazardous waste can be thrown into. Then we have a black box for hazardous. Then there is a red box for blood and body fluids. Then there is a pink box for something else. Why do we need all these boxes? Why not throw all the medication rappers in the same box? Then treat it all like hazardous waste?

and....

[quote name='Marie-Therese' date='28 August 2009 - 05:10 PM' timestamp='1251493819' post='1957400']
The biggest problem in the current system, IMHO, has much less to do with the structure of insurance companies and more to do with the rampant perception of litigation as a remedy. Doctors no longer practice medicine in order to heal, the practice defensive medicine from a checklist. People have a misguided belief that doctors can fix anything, and when they aren't able to, that somehow we should just sue them into oblivion.

Not to say that people should not have recourse for true malpractice; of course our system allows for individuals to seek remedy for such instances. However, people think that if they aren't completely cured every time, then the doctors must be at fault. Doctors, in order to head off a lawsuit, order every test under the sun for some of the most mundane symptom sets. Every time a person comes in with a sore leg they get an MRI. Because of this extreme overuse of the most expensive diagnostic tests, insurance companies are forced to structure coverages in order to curtail expense. Not to make the insurance companies blameless, because they are profit-making animals and looking for a way to make a buck. But it is easier to save money when the things you are paying for cost less. Insurance companies can't continue to pay more for procedures and keep premiums low too.

In the end, it all comes down to the overwhelming sense of entitlement in our country. People think that lawsuits fix everything, and they don't. All this is removing the free market's ability to regulate cost and making government intervention more and more likely. It is a vicious cycle with a number of different external variables playing a part.
[/quote]

I agree with this.

The government being involved is not going to lessen the costs of health care. This has to take place on individual levels. Governement involvement will only make more costs for those of us who can "afford" health care.

[quote name='Hassan' date='29 August 2009 - 01:39 PM' timestamp='1251567549' post='1957916']
For example that trashy, third rate military.
[/quote]

[img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif[/img]
oh...you mean the one that protects you?

It is not perfect but this is something I think the government needs to institute. And then of course we have a right to protect ourselves. But as a country we need some sort of "mass protection".

Edited September 1, 2009 by picchick

[elizabeth09]

Marie-Therese, you are right. How about we tell this to the people who want free stuff?

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Groo the Wanderer' date='27 August 2009 - 05:59 PM' timestamp='1251406748' post='1956996']
Besides...one of the first functions the US govt performed was the postal service. 233 years later and they STILL can;t get it right AND they are going bankrupt. You telling me you want the same idiots that can't consistently put my mail into MY mailbox running health care in this country? RIIIGHT! Take the red pill please.
[/quote]

My mail arrives just fine... maybe your mail carrier doesn't like you.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' date='28 August 2009 - 11:56 PM' timestamp='1251514592' post='1957606']
The people of the United States will not stand for socialized health care. People will elect Obamas and Pelosis while they spew their rainbows and sunshine...but when it impacts them, their votes will walk, I guarantee it.
[/quote]

Guarantee that statement all you want, but back in the 50s, people used to say the same thing about abortion. It went something like this: "How can abortion be legalized??? This is America!"

Post-60s, the common argument goes more like this: "How can abortion be illegal??? This is America!"

This is America: if we vote for government-sponsored health care, we will get it.

Edited September 3, 2009 by LouisvilleFan

[nowak.chris]

The gov. should have a role, oh wait it already has it: medicare.

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='picchick' date='01 September 2009 - 02:35 PM' timestamp='1251830155' post='1959458']
Why not throw all the medication rappers in the same box? Then treat it all like hazardous waste?
[/quote]
I may be misunderstanding what you're saying, but there's a good reason for that, that does indeed reduce costs.
Hazardous wastes need to be disposed of in a proper manner, most of which are more labor intensive or energy consuming (i.e., incineration or similar), and consequently more costly than what is required of disposal of household wastes. As far as I am aware, the hospital will usually contract this out to their waste management provider. By increasing the volume of the hazardous wastes with rubbish that could simply be put in a landfill with all other non-hazardous wastes, this increases expenses for the hospital - costs are actually being reduced by sorting them out according to their type.

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' date='03 September 2009 - 10:19 AM' timestamp='1251987581' post='1960314']
Guarantee that statement all you want, but back in the 50s, people used to say the same thing about abortion. It went something like this: "How can abortion be legalized??? This is America!"

Post-60s, the common argument goes more like this: "How can abortion be illegal??? This is America!"

This is America: if we vote for government-sponsored health care, we will get it.
[/quote]
Yes, but the issues are very separate to many people. Abortion is considered a "convenience" by the kool-aid hydrated masses. When the upper class who fuel campaigns have to wait for three hours for their flu shots, they're not going to like their candidate as much, because the candidate just made a large [i]in[/i]convenience in their life. Completely socialized health care will not/would not last in this country.

[Slappo]

Government plays a big big role in health care already...

for instance, the fact that an emergency room cannot refuse you care... that is government. There already is national health care.