Gov't hc for the un-insured

Discussion in 'Healthcare/Insurance/Govt Healthcare' started by LilOlLady, Nov 27, 2009.

  1. LilOlLady
    Offline

    LilOlLady Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    7,841
    Thanks Received:
    660
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Location:
    Reno, NV
    Ratings:
    +761

    GOV’T HEALTHCARE OF THE UN-INSURED


    If gov’t doesn’t provide affordable HC for the un-insured, who will? Private HC system is not interested in and cannot afford to provide affordable HC for the un-insured. If they give affordable HC to the un-insured, they will not make a profit and the cannot stay in business without making big profits and in order to make big profits they have to ration healthcare. And we will not have Healthcare Reform but more of the same.
    Gov’t should not aid and abet Private Healthcare system by giving people any kind of subsidies, cutting taxes or otherwise, to buy into Private Healthcare. If it is affordable, it cannot be profitable.
    Healthcare for the un-insured can only be done by government control.
    If Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, Veterans HC,etc is socialized government HC , so be it. “Socialism”, just like “terrorist”, is just a “fear mongering word” thrown out by Right Wing Nut to scare and control people and it is working. So if Government take over of the healthcare system. What do we already have?
     
  2. jeffrockit
    Offline

    jeffrockit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Messages:
    1,341
    Thanks Received:
    165
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +165
    You are right about the private HC not interested in not making a profit but if you think that the govt is interested in our healthcare costs, you would be wrong on that point. They only want more power and control of us. Healthcare needs reform just not government reform. You can't possibly believe that the politicians really care about us. Just look at the way they waste taxpayer money and you should get what they truly want...to spend our money for their special interests.
     
  3. frazzledgear
    Offline

    frazzledgear Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    1,479
    Thanks Received:
    541
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +541
    1. Easily more than half of AMERICANS (not illegals) are without health care insurance by choice. The number without insurance is NOT the 45 million the left so frequently quotes -15 million of that number are known to be illegal immigrants. So we are talking about 30 or so million Americans without insurance at any given time. About ONE PERCENT of the entire population. I'm not interested in spending my money on health care insurance for people who aren't even supposed to be here -and good luck finding another nation that will buy YOURS if you sneak into their country and then expect them to foot your bills. Of the 30 million or so without insurance, about 60% are young, healthy people mostly in their 20s who have chosen to go without insurance. NOT because they can't afford it, but because they consider the expense to be a waste since they are the very least likely to use it even when they have it. For most young people, that is the perfect time to skip it for a few years if you are going to skip it at any time and for the vast majority it is also a rational, reasonable decision. Young, healthy people are highly unlikely to come anywhere close to using enough benefits to offset the cost of insurance. So more than half without insurance are not without because they can't afford it -it is because they don't WANT IT.

    And DON'T fall back on that "but what about those young people who end up in car accidents or suddenly get cancer and then everyone else has to foot the bill". In spite of the drama queen antics of Congressional Democrats, this actually does NOT represent a significant problem in our health care system and it isn't a cause for any of the real problems in our system. This is the same age group that has always been the least likely to buy health care insurance and the least likely to ever use it even if they had it. How DID this country manage all this time when the young have always done this? What is different now? Baby boomers.

    The reason Congress wants to FORCE them to buy health insurance under their bills is that unless these young, healthy people, who are the ones most likely to not need it at all and the very least likely to even use it at all -are forced to buy it anyway under a government run system, there won't be enough money coming in to pay for the government run program. The young and healthy are critically necessary which is why Democrats want to ORDER them to buy health insurance under their plans -or face a fine, jail or both. Oops, sorry -the MONEY of the young and healthy are critically necessary to Democrats -so Congress uses the PHONY ASS "but what about the person in a car accident" bit in order to justify depriving MILLIONS and MILLIONS of their freedom and right to spend their money as they judge best for them at that time of their life. The unexpected downside to forcing the young to buy health insurance against their will is that a significant percentage will start over utilizing the system and every time the taxes of everyone is raised to pay for this system, it only further encourages people to over utilize it. It means more and more people go to the doctor when they don't need to -making it unresponsive to those who actually NEED health care.

    2. If you look at the rest of those who are uninsured at any given time -80% will have health insurance again within THREE MONTHS. And more than 90% will by the end of one year. So we aren't talking about people who are chronically uninsured but only TEMPORARILY uninsured. The percentage of the entire 30 million or so who are chrocnically uninsured is actually a tiny fraction of 1%. Thisy does NOT represent the kind of "crisis" the Democrats are pretending it does in order to justify the most massive expansion of government and government POWER in our history -while destroying our health care system and allowing government to lay claim to 1/6th of our economy. Which already hasn't worked out well for others.

    Not unless you are silly enough to believe there is just no other way to help those who fall between the cracks in our system, even temporarily -unless we tear down and destroy what is actually recognized to be one of the best health care systems in the world and a system the vast majority in this country are satisfied with how it works for them. I guarantee you that after government gets its claws on it -it will NOT be among the top for long. But it definitely will cost us all a hell of a lot more in exchange for that.

    3. Maybe you haven't noticed but Medicare and Medicaid are broke. It is the GOVERNMENT RUN systems that are the most broken, far more than the private sector - so I have to wonder at those who insist the only possible cure is to double down on it. So even though the phony, lying ass Reid claims to have fixed Medicare in his bill -what he really did was strip about $500 billion from Medicare. And that means those on Medicare will be denied services, treatments, surgeries and medications that they receive now. They only way to allow Medicare to even continue after stripping $500 billion from it when it was already broke -is to stop paying for a whole lot more of the health care needed by those on Medicare. In order for the elderly to get the health care they NEED, they will either have to buy far more expensive additional insurance -or go without.

    But here is the real irony. Medicare was started BECAUSE this was the one age group that could not find affordable insurance in the private sector because they are also the ones in most need of health care and utilize it the most. Medicare is supposed to be an insurance policy that workers pay into all their working lives and only draw benefits upon retiring. But what Reid has concocted is government RENEGING on this entirely, forcing those on a fixed income and can least afford it to shell out big time in private policies in order to get the treatment and care they NEED -or go without and die early. JUST as is happening in the UK right now. And right back to the same old choice they were facing before Medicare -do they go to the doctor for help and eat dog food for a month, or forgo the doctor and just die prematurely -in either case with a much lower quality of life. We have now heard the Democrats' answer to that. It is Democrats who are actually telling the elderly "don't get sick and if you do, hurry up and DIE!" Not Republicans. Democrats are always accusing others of their own worst sins.

    The Democrats' idea of how to "fix" our system is to DENY health care to those who actually need it. For those who are younger, healthier and wealthier and DON'T need it. That is no fix, it is a recipe for a guaranteed collapse and many more millions of utterly miserable people than exist now.

    I think it is an indictment of our educational system that we seem to have bred so many people who are so unimaginative, so rigid in thinking, so unable to follow even a linear path of the consequences already laid out by example elsewhere -that people like you really cannot see any other possible answer about how to assist those who truly CANNOT afford health care and those who temporarily fall between the cracks than by insisting it means government must take it over entirely.

    The vast majority of people in this country can and do provide for their OWN health care insurance. And what the vast majority can do for themselves, government has NO right and no business to decide to start doing it for them. So where is the real trade off here? Government will confiscate a hell of a lot more of our money, ruin our health care system and turn it into one that is guaranteed to collapse and turn it into an overburdened, over utilized and unresponsive system for all of us and FAR, FAR more people will end up really, really unhappy than were before. Some "cure". I"ll take care of my OWN health care insurance thank you. So those who just cannot think outside of the box better figure out how -and find another way to assist those who truly cannot because ruining the entire system for everyone else while forcing them to foot the bill for that destruction is NO answer at all. It only means an increasingly nanny state -which is also an increasingly totalitarian state and is a total no go for me.
     

Share This Page