Myth busting universal healthcare

[Charles_Main]

The point is that a single payer system has inherent cost savings. It is more efficient than having 150 different insurance companies. All it means is that the government acts as the insurance company. That's it. Doctors still own there practices, and you can go to any doctor you chose.

Now that is BS, that may be how you envision it being here, but that is not how it is in most Nations with universal health care. You go where they tell you to go, and most of the time you wait in a long line to do it.

The thing is it works fine as long as you are healthy and only need regular scheduled check ups. The problems arise when you get sick and need quick treatment.

 

[jreeves]

The point is that a single payer system has inherent cost savings. It is more efficient than having 150 different insurance companies. All it means is that the government acts as the insurance company. That's it. Doctors still own there practices, and you can go to any doctor you chose.

Yep shelling out millions of dollars for prescriptions that were written by dead doctors...

and denying people who need treatment like the people in Canada.

Not to mention it would create a serious doctor shortage which has been experienced in Canada with a lot less diverse economic marketplace than the US.

 

[Prefx]

It's a misnomer if the tax rates equate to less spending than private insurance, which is the case for every country using a universal model, be it two or single-pronged. The debt problem you brought up is another straw man. Debt is not naturally incurred from spending, but the method of spending. Private debt has just as much affect as federal debt, as well. Seeing how most private debt is incurred from necessities and not frivelous consumption (as the media would like to portray - it's your fault), the fact all universal systems provide to more for less should be a good indicator, not a bad one.

Obviously free lunches don't occur; economics is a social science. It is never isolated to an individual case. What one does with a stick inevitably means another person can't use that stick.

 

[Chris]

Now that is BS, that may be how you envision it being here, but that is not how it is in most Nations with universal health care. You go where they tell you to go, and most of the time you wait in a long line to do it.

The thing is it works fine as long as you are healthy and only need regular scheduled check ups. The problems arise when you get sick and need quick treatment.

That is just not true, and I have posted links showing the truth.

 

[Chris]

Yep shelling out millions of dollars for prescriptions that were written by dead doctors...

and denying people who need treatment like the people in Canada.

Not to mention it would create a serious doctor shortage which has been experienced in Canada with a lot less diverse economic marketplace than the US.

You don't need to worry, your government job provides you with healthcare.

 

[jreeves]

It's a misnomer if the tax rates equate to less spending than private insurance, which is the case for every country using a universal model, be it two or single-pronged. The debt problem you brought up is another straw man. Debt is not naturally incurred from spending, but the method of spending. Private debt has just as much affect as federal debt, as well. Seeing how most private debt is incurred from necessities and not frivelous consumption (as the media would like to portray - it's your fault), the fact all universal systems provide to more for less should be a good indicator, not a bad one.

Obviously free lunches don't occur; economics is a social science. It is never isolated to an individual case. What one does with a stick inevitably means another person can't use that stick.

I shouldn't have to pay for other peoples healthcare through higher taxes. Besides the fact, creating regulations on small business, MCdonalds and Target type companies would create a terrible economic tailspin. Where unemployment and inflation rates would double due to higher costs for these businesses to operate.

 

[Prefx]

I have friends in Canada, I have family in Canada, heck - I've been to Canada, and not once have I seen/heard/smelled/telepathically sensed people denied treatment. This seems like another popular myth passed around the internets on unreliable websites. Certainly with a growth in the number of Americans fleeing North over the past 30 years, one has to wonder if these incidents are isolated in the remote tundra.

 

[Chris]

If you want to keep on lying about universal healthcare, don't read this link....

Universal health care - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Charles_Main]

I am for a system that Covers those who really need it, but not one that lumps all 300 million of us into it.

Seems reasonable to me.

However there would need to be ways to make sure people are not abusing it. As in people who can afford their own coverage who choose instead to use the Government system.

I am also for reasonable steps to organize the Insurance companies and stop wasteful spending and rediculas over charging.

I know over charging goes on all the time, You can not tell me that the follow up shots my dad got after each Chemo treatment really needed to cost his insurance Company 11,000 dollars.

11,000 dollars for one needle full of stuff. Now that is BS!!

 

[jreeves]

You don't need to worry, your government job provides you with healthcare.

When did I ever say that I work for the government? I don't, I work in the private sector.

 

[Charles_Main]

I have friends in Canada, I have family in Canada, heck - I've been to Canada, and not once have I seen/heard/smelled/telepathically sensed people denied treatment. This seems like another popular myth passed around the internets on unreliable websites. Certainly with a growth in the number of Americans fleeing North over the past 30 years, one has to wonder if these incidents are isolated in the remote tundra.

Nobody has said they are denied treatment bud. I have said they often have to wait a long time to get in to even be diagnosed.

When all you are doing is getting regular check ups, that are scheduled Months in advance it works fine. It is when you start to feel sick and try to get in right away and find you have to wait months to do so that it becomes an Issue.

As far as people feeling north from the US? what are basing that on that is total BS. The opposite is the case. Many people come here from up there, and from Europe because they can not get timely treatment up there. I have provided links about this in the past, of course most just ignored them.

 

[Prefx]

I shouldn't have to pay for other peoples healthcare through higher taxes.

That's the assertion. Are you basing it around the view that only negative liberties are legitimate? If so, the "right to an attorney" is an infringement of liberty. You're asserting that another person must be present.

Positive liberties are quite within reason. They are not based in force, merely the progression of society. If we can guarantee food to every child, then we do so. If we can guarantee emergency medical care to anyone, then we do so. These are based in incentives. I might add they're not that different. Air pollution laws could be ascribed as positive liberty and a protection of property, food for children is a method of protecting life, etc.

The call of taxation for this purpose being theft is really ludicrous considering the biggest act of theft is private ownership of natural resources. Products not made from man's toil should not become a source of wealth. Only labor.

Besides the fact, creating regulations on small business

I don't believe in regulating any companies for health care purposes, especially small businesses. I am a small business owner.

, MCdonalds and Target type companies would create a terrible economic tailspin. Where unemployment and inflation rates would double due to higher costs for these businesses to operate.

You're making the assumption that I'm behind the plan put forward by Obama and Clinton. I'm enraged about the prospects of a Democratic victory as well - and a Republican one. Both parties favor big government in the form of little r republicanism.

However, your claim about doubling unemployment and inflation seems far-fetched. From what I've read, small businesses will be exempt, and major corporations can either opt to provide their own plan, or pay into a tax system. If higher taxes did come about for corporations, it wouldn't be the first time, and one of the worst occasions of unemployment actually occured in 1985. Then again, for all his rhetoric, Reagan did pass some whopping tax increases...

complete BS

cbc.ca /canada/story/2007/07/30 /immigrants-us.html?ref=rss

The number of Americans admitted to Canada last year reached a 30-year high, with a 20 per cent increase over the previous year and nearly double the number that arrived in 2000.

The results of a survey, conducted by the Association for Canadian Studies, also revealed that the so-called "brain drain" of Canada appears to be narrowing.

The survey found that 10,942 Americans came to Canada in 2006, compared to just over 9,262 in 2005. In 2000, 5,828 came to the country.

While twice as many Canadians went to the States than Americans came to Canada, that ratio diminished between 2005 and 2006.

In 2006, 23,913 Canadians went to the U.S., resulting in a net loss of 12,971 to Canada when compared to the Americans coming to Canada.

But in 2005, the net loss to Canada was 14,668.

Just to reiterate: I said in my previous post, "[C]ertainly with a growth in the number of Americans fleeing North over the past 30 years, one has to wonder if these incidents are isolated in the remote tundra."

 

[Chris]

Nobody has said they are denied treatment bud. I have said they often have to wait a long time to get in to even be diagnosed.

When all you are doing is getting regular check ups, that are scheduled Months in advance it works fine. It is when you start to feel sick and try to get in right away and find you have to wait months to do so that it becomes an Issue.

As far as people feeling north from the US? what are basing that on that is total BS. The opposite is the case. Many people come here from up there, and from Europe because they can not get timely treatment up there. I have provided links about this in the past, of course most just ignored them.

Universal health care - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[jreeves]

how can we find out? that would be cool to find out what they actually legislated and appropiated in their day....!!!

care

Nearly 0 dollars...that's the answer.
New Deal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The New Deal represented a significant shift in political and domestic policy in the U.S., with its more lasting changes being increased federal government control over the economy and money supply, intervention to control prices and agricultural production. This was the beginning of complex social programs and wider acceptance of trade unions.[2] The success and effects of the New Deal still remain a source of controversy and debate amongst economists and historians.[3]

 

[jreeves]

That's the assertion. Are you basing it around the view that only negative liberties are legitimate? If so, the "right to an attorney" is an infringement of liberty. You're asserting that another person must be present.

Positive liberties are quite within reason. They are not based in force, merely the progression of society. If we can guarantee food to every child, then we do so. If we can guarantee emergency medical care to anyone, then we do so. These are based in incentives. I might add they're not that different. Air pollution laws could be ascribed as positive liberty and a protection of property, food for children is a method of protecting life, etc.

The call of taxation for this purpose being theft is really ludicrous considering the biggest act of theft is private ownership of natural resources. Products not made from man's toil should not become a source of wealth. Only labor.



I don't believe in regulating any companies for health care purposes, especially small businesses. I am a small business owner.



You're making the assumption that I'm behind the plan put forward by Obama and Clinton. I'm enraged about the prospects of a Democratic victory as well - and a Republican one. Both parties favor big government in the form of little r republicanism.

However, your claim about doubling unemployment and inflation seems far-fetched. From what I've read, small businesses will be exempt, and major corporations can either opt to provide their own plan, or pay into a tax system. If higher taxes did come about for corporations, it wouldn't be the first time, and one of the worst occasions of unemployment actually occured in 1985. Then again, for all his rhetoric, Reagan did pass some whopping tax increases...



cbc.ca /canada/story/2007/07/30 /immigrants-us.html?ref=rss

The number of Americans admitted to Canada last year reached a 30-year high, with a 20 per cent increase over the previous year and nearly double the number that arrived in 2000.

The results of a survey, conducted by the Association for Canadian Studies, also revealed that the so-called "brain drain" of Canada appears to be narrowing.

The survey found that 10,942 Americans came to Canada in 2006, compared to just over 9,262 in 2005. In 2000, 5,828 came to the country.

While twice as many Canadians went to the States than Americans came to Canada, that ratio diminished between 2005 and 2006.

In 2006, 23,913 Canadians went to the U.S., resulting in a net loss of 12,971 to Canada when compared to the Americans coming to Canada.

But in 2005, the net loss to Canada was 14,668.

Just to reiterate: I said in my previous post, "[C]ertainly with a growth in the number of Americans fleeing North over the past 30 years, one has to wonder if these incidents are isolated in the remote tundra."

I guess it all depends on what you call universal healthcare?
A Conservative Approach To Universal Health Care - Forbes.com
The National Federation of Independent Businesses--the largest U.S. small business lobbying group, with 350,000 members--announced its support for universal health care today, a seemingly surprising move from an openly right-leaning interest group.

For small businesses, the pain wrought by soaring health care costs is acute. Roughly 63% of all uninsured workers are either self-employed or work for firms with fewer than 100 employees, estimates the Employee Benefit Research Institute. And according to research by the 2007 National Small Business Association, only 47% of businesses with fewer than 500 employees offer health insurance, down from 58% in 1997.

There is one key difference between the NFIB's plan and the strategies trotted out by Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. While Democrats aim to mandate universal health care (by forcing some companies that don't provide it to pay a penalty), the NFIB is pushing to drive out enough cost in the system to make providing the coverage a more feasible choice for small business owners.

"You can't mandate something that people can't afford," says Todd Stottlemyer, president of the NFIB. "It's not that people don't want to provide coverage, but they can't afford to."

In many ways, the NFIB plan echoes strategies trotted out by Sen. John McCain, the Republican nominee for president--though McCain falls short of declaring universal coverage as a goal. Two of the shared proposals: purchasing health insurance across state lines and changing the tax code to allow both employers and individuals to claim deductions for purchasing health insurance. (Currently, only individuals with employer-sponsored coverage can claim tax deductions.)
Other NFIB proposals include portable health insurance (so people don't lose coverage when they switch jobs); more transparency on health insurance costs; and policy pooling to spread risk and reduce premiums. Their differences notwithstanding, both sides of the aisle seem to agree that expanding access to affordable health care is of dire importance.

To wit: Back in 1993, the NFIB played a key role in quashing the Clintons' health care plan. This time around, though, both the NFIB and the more moderate National Small Business Association (60,000 members) say they're willing to put the task of fixing a broken U.S. health care system ahead of partisan politics.

"A number of groups--particularly biz groups that historically have not been strongly in favor of universal coverage--seem to be going that direction," says Larry Levitt, vice president of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a Washington, D.C.-based health care research group. "There's a much greater inclination to look at broader reforms than in previous debates."

For its part, the NFIB has shown its willingness to make concessions to push health care legislation forward. Last November, it joined a coalition called Divided We Fail that includes two unlikely allies: the AARP; the Service Employees Union, the nation's largest union, with 1.8 million members; and the Business Roundtable, a big-business lobbying group.

Says Stottlemyer: "If you can fix health care for small businesses, you can fix it for America."

 

[Chris]

Universal coverage is cheaper. That is the point you are missing.

There are inherent cost savings in universal healthcare.

Mythbusting Canadian Health Care -- Part I | OurFuture.org

 

[jreeves]

Universal coverage is cheaper. That is the point you are missing.

There are inherent cost savings in universal healthcare.

Mythbusting Canadian Health Care -- Part I | OurFuture.org

No, I don't support mandating coverage of healthcare through govermental regulation for people and businesses that can't afford it. I support increasing portability and decreasing healthcare costs through transparency.

 

[Chris]

No, I don't support mandating coverage of healthcare through govermental regulation for people and businesses that can't afford it. I support increasing portability and decreasing healthcare costs through transparency.

That's because you have a government job with free healthcare benefits.

 

[jreeves]

That's because you have a government job with free healthcare benefits.

I don't work for the government, Nostradamus...

 

[Chris]

I don't work for the government, Nostradamus...

Who do you work for?