The case for Universal Healthcare

Discussion in 'Healthcare/Insurance/Govt Healthcare' started by Chris, Jul 26, 2009.

  1. Chris
    Offline

    Chris Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2008
    Messages:
    23,154
    Thanks Received:
    1,958
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +2,089
    The Case for Universal Health Care in the United States

    Why doesn’t the United States have universal health care as a right of citizenship? The United States is the only industrialized nation that does not guarantee access to health care as a right of citizenship. 28 industrialized nations have single payer universal health care systems, while 1 (Germany) has a multipayer universal health care system like President Clinton proposed for the United States.

    Myth One: The United States has the best health care system in the world.
    Fact One: The United States ranks 23rd in infant mortality, down from 12th in 1960 and 21st in 1990

    Fact Two: The United States ranks 20th in life expectancy for women down from 1st in 1945 and 13th in 1960

    Fact Three: The United States ranks 21st in life expectancy for men down from 1st in 1945 and 17th in 1960.

    Fact Four: The United States ranks between 50th and 100th in immunizations depending on the immunization. Overall US is 67th, right behind Botswana

    Fact Five: Outcome studies on a variety of diseases, such as coronary artery disease, and renal failure show the United States to rank below Canada and a wide variety of industrialized nations.

    Conclusion: The United States ranks poorly relative to other industrialized nations in health care despite having the best trained health care providers and the best medical infrastructure of any industrialized nation

    Myth Two: Universal Health Care Would Be Too Expensive
    Fact One: The United States spends at least 40% more per capita on health care than any other industrialized country with universal health care

    Fact Two: Federal studies by the Congressional Budget Office and the General Accounting office show that single payer universal health care would save 100 to 200 Billion dollars per year despite covering all the uninsured and increasing health care benefits.

    Fact Three: State studies by Massachusetts and Connecticut have shown that single payer universal health care would save 1 to 2 Billion dollars per year from the total medical expenses in those states despite covering all the uninsured and increasing health care benefits

    Fact Four: The costs of health care in Canada as a % of GNP, which were identical to the United States when Canada changed to a single payer, universal health care system in 1971, have increased at a rate much lower than the United States, despite the US economy being much stronger than Canada’s.

    Conclusion: Single payer universal health care costs would be lower than the current US system due to lower administrative costs. The United States spends 50 to 100% more on administration than single payer systems. By lowering these administrative costs the United States would have the ability to provide universal health care, without managed care, increase benefits and still save money.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. Political Junky
    Online

    Political Junky Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    19,557
    Thanks Received:
    2,948
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,538
    :clap2:
     
  3. code1211
    Offline

    code1211 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    5,999
    Thanks Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +845

    "the best health care" and these statistics are interesting to post together, but may or may not have any relation to each other.

    All of these stats have more to do with personal choices than the care recieved should some health crisis arise. Red meat and overeating among the most prevelant.

    How is the consumption of McDonalds world wide compared to USA?

    Save money? How much longer will it be before the Massachussetts plan is bankrupt?

    The acid test of this plan will be this:

    If the Senate and the Congress vote to adopt this, they must also vote to dissolve the current plans that they are using and use only this plan as their medical coverage.

    If they do not do this, it is inferior. Period.
     
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2009
  4. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    Single Universal HC would bring some reductions to the cost of HC insurance premiums as 25% of all HC rpremiums are spent on administrative costs.

    Compared to 5% administration expenses spent on all medicade and medicare.

    Nevertheless I do not believe Single Payer Universal HC will really solve the problems we're facing.

    We must increase the supply of HC at the same time in order to really take this problem by the balls.

    As organizations like the AMA actually work to LIMIT the number of MDs, they are working to keep the cost of medicine up, not working to bring it down.
     
  5. AVG-JOE
    Offline

    AVG-JOE American Mutt Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Messages:
    22,888
    Thanks Received:
    4,882
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    Your Imagination
    Ratings:
    +7,017
    I disagree. When you are comparing market outcomes for a population of 30 individuals, their personal choices make a huge difference on the study outcome, but when comparing a population of 300 million individuals, marketplace and business environment are what will affect the numbers. The statistics posted are easy enough to read without interpretation.

    Regarding the 'acid test' you are dead-nuts, right-on-the-money correct. If congress does not put themselves on to the EXACT SAME PLAN that the rest of us get, it is time to storm the castle with pitch-forks.

    Starting in 1984 all newly hired federal employees, including congresscritters, were put on FICA Social Security and the Civil Service plan began to be grandfathered out. As soon as we can get rid of the congressional deadwood, especially in leadership, hired before 1984, making sure Social Security is properly funded will become a priority.

    -Joe
     
  6. AVG-JOE
    Offline

    AVG-JOE American Mutt Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Messages:
    22,888
    Thanks Received:
    4,882
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    Your Imagination
    Ratings:
    +7,017
    You got that right, Bro'. It is disgusting the amount of professional care, like homeopathic medicine and herbal products that are at the least dismissed, and at most illegal due to the power of drug lobbyists and the fear of competition that the people those lobbyists work for have.

    Every time I pick up an herbal or supplement, I look at the bottle and see "The effectiveness of this product has not been studied by the FDA". Why the fuck not?!?!?

    We, The People should be providing information to the populace, not just arresting people for selling grapefruit as a 'cure' for scurvy.

    -Joe
     
  7. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    Iatrogenesis doesn't just effect patients.

    It's actually killing our economy, too.
     
  8. alan1
    Offline

    alan1 USMB Mod Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2008
    Messages:
    18,845
    Thanks Received:
    3,577
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Shoveling the ashes
    Ratings:
    +3,769
    Seems you have fallen for what is commonly known as a "Logical Fallacy". Fallacy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Just because A happened, then B happened, that doesn't mean that A caused B.
     
  9. Chris
    Offline

    Chris Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2008
    Messages:
    23,154
    Thanks Received:
    1,958
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +2,089
    It's true.

    Our businesses can't compete because they have to pay for healthcare for their employees and none of the businesses in the other 28 industrialized nations have to.

    We really are a laughingstock.
     
  10. johnrocks
    Offline

    johnrocks Silver Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,919
    Thanks Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    West Monroe, La.
    Ratings:
    +279
    And according to one of the most liberal leaders in Canada,on his very own website.

    "And today, five million Canadians do not have a family doctor. One million patients are on waiting lists for care".

    They are much smaller population wise than us and after almost 40 years under their plan,still has that problem? Of course he blames it on private clinics which is bs.
    Hiring More Doctors and Nurses and Renewing Health Care | NDP
     

Share This Page