59% of U.S. doctors support universal healthcare

[Chris]

Doctors support universal health care: survey
Mon Mar 31, 2008

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - More than half of U.S. doctors now favor switching to a national health care plan and fewer than a third oppose the idea, according to a survey published on Monday.
The survey suggests that opinions have changed substantially since the last survey in 2002 and as the country debates serious changes to the health care system.

Of more than 2,000 doctors surveyed, 59 percent said they support legislation to establish a national health insurance program, while 32 percent said they opposed it, researchers reported in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine.

Doctors support universal health care: survey | Health | Reuters

 

[KittenKoder]

Of course they do, they stand to make a fortune.

 

[Chris]

Of course they do, they stand to make a fortune.

No, actually they will make less, but there paperwork, liability insurance, and overhead will be less.

 

[Oddball]

Suuuuuuuure they do.

Of course, the questions and methodology of the purported poll aren't mentioned.

 

[elvis]

Suuuuuuuure they do.

Of course, the questions and methodology of the purported poll aren't mentioned.

Of course not. How slippery of them.

 

[Chris]

Suuuuuuuure they do.

Of course, the questions and methodology of the purported poll aren't mentioned.

That is why every other Western democracy in the world has universal healthcare, because it is cheaper and better.

Only right wing Americans are too dumb to get it.

 

[Oddball]

Suuuuuuuure they do.

Of course, the questions and methodology of the purported poll aren't mentioned.

That is why every other Western democracy in the world has universal healthcare, because it is cheaper and better.

Only right wing Americans are too dumb to get it.

So typical of you to lamely attempt to divert from the fact that the questions and methodology of the alleged poll were omitted, to vomit up yet another of your platitudinous bumper sticker yammering points....Speaking of dumb.

 

[KittenKoder]

Suuuuuuuure they do.

Of course, the questions and methodology of the purported poll aren't mentioned.

That is why every other Western democracy in the world has universal healthcare, because it is cheaper and better.

Only right wing Americans are too dumb to get it.

Only partisan hacks like you are unwilling to look at all the factors. Go figure you would ignore all but the one common policy ... and even then you fail since your statement is completely false.

 

[Political Junky]

Suuuuuuuure they do.

Of course, the questions and methodology of the purported poll aren't mentioned.

You'll disagree with anything that counters your opinion. Not too bright.

 

[Political Junky]

Suuuuuuuure they do.

Of course, the questions and methodology of the purported poll aren't mentioned.

That is why every other Western democracy in the world has universal healthcare, because it is cheaper and better.

Only right wing Americans are too dumb to get it.

To the point that they totally ignore facts, so they can accept the crap fed them by big Pharma, and private insurance.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

B-b-b-b-but Chris!!! Giving health care to poor people will bankrupt doctors and DESTROY OUR FREEDOM!!! Do you want us to turn out like those failed slave socialist marxist states like New Zealand or Canada? God forbid!

 

[DamnYankee]

Doctors support universal health care: survey
Mon Mar 31, 2008

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - More than half of U.S. doctors now favor switching to a national health care plan and fewer than a third oppose the idea, according to a survey published on Monday.
The survey suggests that opinions have changed substantially since the last survey in 2002 and as the country debates serious changes to the health care system.

Of more than 2,000 doctors surveyed, 59 percent said they support legislation to establish a national health insurance program, while 32 percent said they opposed it, researchers reported in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine.

Doctors support universal health care: survey | Health | Reuters

It's still my opinion that they're doing it wrong.

That said,

Elijah Friedeman, the Millennial Perspective

John Stossel has written an exellent article for RealClearPolitics on the Obama healthcare plan. He takes a look at Canada and Great Britian to see how well their government run healthcare programs are working out.

In England, health care is "free" -- as long as you don't mind waiting. People wait so long for dentist appointments that some pull their own teeth. At any one time, half a million people are waiting to get into a British hospital.

And Canada is much worse.

In America, people wait in emergency rooms, too, but it's much worse in Canada. If you're sick enough to be admitted, the average wait is 23 hours.

More than a million and a half Canadians say they can't find a family doctor. Some towns hold lotteries to determine who gets a doctor. The losers must wait to see a doctor.


This from Canadian doctor David Gratzer:

"Literally we're surrounded by medical miracles. Death by cardiovascular disease has dropped by two-thirds in the last 50 years. You've got to pay a price for that type of advancement."

Canada and England don't pay the price because they freeload off American innovation. If America adopted their systems, we could worry less about paying for health care, but we'd get 2009-level care -- forever. Government monopolies don't innovate. Profit seekers do.

Those last two sentences encapsulate the argument for capitalism and free markets. Governement run programs will fail. Private enterprises are constantly improving and seeking to do better. A government run healthcare plan would ruin America's medical system, not improve it.

THE COMING OBAMACARE LAYOFFS FrontPage Magazine - The Coming ObamaCare Layoffs


Now, I'll leave it our peers in Canada and across the pond to comment on the commentary re. their health care situation.

 

[Oddball]

Suuuuuuuure they do.

Of course, the questions and methodology of the purported poll aren't mentioned.

You'll disagree with anything that counters your opinion. Not too bright.

Did I hear someone say "projection"

 

[Navy1960]

American Medical Association
October 2008

Q: What are the basic principles of the AMA proposal?

A: The American Medical Association (AMA) proposes that individuals and families receive financial assistance to purchase a health plan of their choice, with more generous assistance to those with lower incomes. The financial assistance could take the form of tax credits or vouchers and must be earmarked for health insurance coverage. Health insurance market regulations should be reformed to establish fair “rules of the game” that protect vulnerable individuals, without unduly driving up premiums for the rest of the population.

Q: How is the AMA proposal different or better than a single-payer system?

A: Both the AMA and the single-payer approaches emphasize the same goal of universal coverage, but they differ on how to implement it. The AMA does not believe that full government control is a workable model for the United States. Single-payer systems are plagued with an undersupply of medical personnel, long waiting periods and a lack of patient choice. Alternatively, the AMA proposal seeks to enhance patient choice and encourage patients to be conscious of health insurance costs, while also maintaining innovation in the private sector.

AMA position on single payer - PNHP’s official Blog

The AMA is aggressively involved in advocacy efforts related to the most vital issues in medicine today, including medical liability reform, Medicare physician payment reform, expanding coverage for the uninsured and increasing access to care, improving the public health, managed care reform, and others.

Medicare physician payment reform and regulatory relief
As the leading force in Washington for Medicare reform, the AMA will be relentless in the battle to replace the flawed Medicare physician payment formula.

Managed care reform
The AMA will continue to combat third-party interference with the physician-patient relationship, including advancing antitrust reform, eliminating unnecessary hassles and unfair payment practices; and fighting for reimbursement decisions that are based on optimal patient care, not economics

The enhanced premium assistance provisions would improve SCHIP’s ability to have a coordinated partnership role with existing private sector health insurance coverage and ease budgetary pressures on the SCHIP program in the process.
The AMA is pleased to see Congress take early action on this important issue, especially during these challenging economic times. With SCHIP reauthorized, we look forward to working with Congress on more comprehensive health system reform issues in a bipartisan fashion to expand coverage for the uninsured and expand choice of health plans for all Americans.

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/399/schip-chipra-pelosi-letter.pdf

The point of all that was to show that posting a poll from reuters of Doctors and then using that poll as an indicator for all Doctors is a false argument. Take for example the poll often stated that 79% of Americans support a "govt. option" well what they fail to tell you in that poll is that the data set consisted of 800 people of which 80% voted for Barack Obama, so what do you think the result of the poll would be? The AMA has stated clearly that it believes like I do that the healthcare reforms are needed and as many others do. They have also stated that a single payer of Govt. run insurance program like Medicare is NOT the best way to accomplish this as you can see, and it's a position I happen to agree with.

 

[Nik]

Of course they do, they stand to make a fortune.

How?

 

[KittenKoder]

Of course they do, they stand to make a fortune.

How?

Then they only have to bribe one group instead of several ...

 

[Nik]

Of course they do, they stand to make a fortune.

How?

Then they only have to bribe one group instead of several ...

You think Doctors bribe insurance companies? Bribe them to do what exactly?

 

[Bern80]

That is why every other Western democracy in the world has universal healthcare, because it is cheaper and better.

Only right wing Americans are too dumb to get it.

You haven't heard any of the horror stories of people waiting for healthcare in this utopia you call universal healthcare. Cheap healthcare does not equal quality healthcare Chris and that is exactley what the bulk of countries that have tried this have found.

Ladies Logic: More universal health care horror stories

http://www.commonfolkusingcommonsense.com/2008/05/27/universal-healthcare-horror-stories/

There's a couple to get you started. If you reduce cost, demand goes up, which means more people wait, which means more people suffer. Guess you didn't take basic principles of economics just like the president.

 

[Nik]

That is why every other Western democracy in the world has universal healthcare, because it is cheaper and better.

Only right wing Americans are too dumb to get it.

You haven't heard any of the horror stories of people waiting for healthcare in this utopia you call universal healthcare. Cheap healthcare does not equal quality healthcare Chris and that is exactley what the bulk of countries that have tried this have found.

Ladies Logic: More universal health care horror stories

http://www.commonfolkusingcommonsense.com/2008/05/27/universal-healthcare-horror-stories/

There's a couple to get you started. If you reduce cost, demand goes up, which means more people wait, which means more people suffer. Guess you didn't take basic principles of economics just like the president.

Oh, well, good thing there aren't any horror stories in the US.

Health Care Stories for America | BarackObama.com

Funny you coincidentally left out the people who get no healthcare at all because they can't afford it who suffer. Just because someone doesn't see a doctor at all because they can't afford it, instead of waiting to see one, doesn't mean the suffering magically goes away.

 

[Bern80]

Health Care Stories for America | BarackObama.com[/url]

Funny you coincidentally left out the people who get no healthcare at all because they can't afford it who suffer. Just because someone doesn't see a doctor at all because they can't afford it, instead of waiting to see one, doesn't mean the suffering magically goes away.

No system is perfect. Of course stuff that shouldn't happen will happen here too. But those of you who think universal, single payer, government run etc., whatever your preference is, is going to be better, you are dilluding yourself.

Look at the goal trying to be achieved here. The basic argument is that people who need healthcare would avail themselves of it, if not but for the cost. So Obama's solution in a nutshell is to lower the cost of healthcare. The rationale being that if barrier of cost is out of the way, there will be no issues in terms of access to healthcare. That's where the the solution falls apart and the economics I referred to come in. When something costs less the quantity demanded of it goes up. So the only thing you have accomplished is in what way people are prioritized in receiving healthcare. Instead of it being based on how they can pay (which really isn't true for the bulk of American's in the first place), it will based on one's level of need/pain. Which may seem more fair, but the new system hasn't accomplished anything. it clearly isnt' a better system in terms of actually helping people considering more people will be kept in pain than before. All you've basically said is that people who had coverage before should have to suffer as much as those that don't.