Wealthy people can afford better healthcare

Amelia

Rookie
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
21,830
Reaction score
5,442
Points
0
Location
Packerland!
Wealthy people can afford better healthcare. That is a truism.

No matter where you are in the world that is so.

My question is for people who support universal/government health care ... is there a limit for you in what you would make available to everybody. There are always going to be expensive procedures which wealthy people can afford but which poorer people don't have access to, right?

If wealthy people can afford it, do you think the populace should be taxed until we've all somehow given enough so that everyone can have it?



I guess I'm in favor of "death panels" so-to-speak. (That was very unfortunate language which my side chose to use about something which I think would have to exist.) There has to be an upper limit on the level of care which is considered universal. There are all sorts of exotic and expensive treatments which could be available but we just can't afford to do it for everyone.



I know this is an old conversation for most of you. I haven't really given much thought to universal healthcare. I've basically been against it on general small-government and "we can't afford everything" principles since the 1980's.

My mother died of complications to a liver transplant and it was all so very expensive that for myself I thought I would choose no transplant if it ever came to that for me. But as I get older ... and as my husband gets older ... I view some things differently.


So ... if you are generally inclined toward some sort of universal / government health care, I'd like to know what it means to you. How great of care you think should be universal and what your sense of the limitations are.




So please humor me. If this subject is boring to you, pass by it. If you have something worthwhile to add, I'd appreciate it.
 

chikenwing

Guest
Joined
Feb 18, 2010
Messages
7,387
Reaction score
834
Points
190
Life is a grand thing,it can also suck to the max,just the way it is.Its far better to concentrate on the individual,rather the collective.
 

syrenn

Rookie
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
47,839
Reaction score
11,195
Points
0
Wealthy people can afford better healthcare. That is a truism.

No matter where you are in the world that is so.

My question is for people who support universal/government health care ... is there a limit for you in what you would make available to everybody. There are always going to be expensive procedures which wealthy people can afford but which poorer people don't have access to, right?

If wealthy people can afford it, do you think the populace should be taxed until we've all somehow given enough so that everyone can have it?



I guess I'm in favor of "death panels" so-to-speak. (That was very unfortunate language which my side chose to use about something which I think would have to exist.) There has to be an upper limit on the level of care which is considered universal. There are all sorts of exotic and expensive treatments which could be available but we just can't afford to do it for everyone.



I know this is an old conversation for most of you. I haven't really given much thought to universal healthcare. I've basically been against it on general small-government and "we can't afford everything" principles since the 1980's.

My mother died of complications to a liver transplant and it was all so very expensive that for myself I thought I would choose no transplant if it ever came to that for me. But as I get older ... and as my husband gets older ... I view some things differently.


So ... if you are generally inclined toward some sort of universal / government health care, I'd like to know what it means to you. How great of care you think should be universal and what your sense of the limitations are.




So please humor me. If this subject is boring to you, pass by it. If you have something worthwhile to add, I'd appreciate it.


You do know what the word triage is don't you?

I would have NO issue with that. I am sorry... a million dollar procedure that will only give someone another few months..... sorry, out of luck.

I am really sorry your baby needs that 5 million dollar fix.... but it is not cost effective.

 

Ropey

String tension is not infinite.
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2010
Messages
78,154
Reaction score
13,208
Points
2,220
Shitty health care for all and for those who can afford better?

They get better...
 
Joined
Aug 19, 2011
Messages
139
Reaction score
19
Points
16
Wealthy people can afford better healthcare. That is a truism.

No matter where you are in the world that is so.

My question is for people who support universal/government health care ... is there a limit for you in what you would make available to everybody. There are always going to be expensive procedures which wealthy people can afford but which poorer people don't have access to, right?

If wealthy people can afford it, do you think the populace should be taxed until we've all somehow given enough so that everyone can have it?



I guess I'm in favor of "death panels" so-to-speak. (That was very unfortunate language which my side chose to use about something which I think would have to exist.) There has to be an upper limit on the level of care which is considered universal. There are all sorts of exotic and expensive treatments which could be available but we just can't afford to do it for everyone.



I know this is an old conversation for most of you. I haven't really given much thought to universal healthcare. I've basically been against it on general small-government and "we can't afford everything" principles since the 1980's.

My mother died of complications to a liver transplant and it was all so very expensive that for myself I thought I would choose no transplant if it ever came to that for me. But as I get older ... and as my husband gets older ... I view some things differently.


So ... if you are generally inclined toward some sort of universal / government health care, I'd like to know what it means to you. How great of care you think should be universal and what your sense of the limitations are.




So please humor me. If this subject is boring to you, pass by it. If you have something worthwhile to add, I'd appreciate it.
Well, wealthy or not, if the knowledge is not available for a disease, all the money in the world isn't going to cure you. Money could not cure Ted Kennedy of cancer, nor Farrah Fawcett, nor Patrick Swayze. Money could not cure or fix Christopher Reeve when he broke his neck. Rich people get MS, Alzheimer's, and the like, all the money in the world is not going to fix them. They die right along with us poor folk. A billionaire gets hit by a bus, he's just as dead as a poor person. When the time comes when I am no longer totally independent to care for my own personal needs, I'd just as soon be dead. Maybe they put some rich guy on the transplant list sooner, but there is still no guarantee his body won't reject it, and if it does, nothing they can do. All the money in the world won't reverse it. rich people aren't any healthier than the rest of us.
 
Last edited:

bill5

Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2011
Messages
394
Reaction score
34
Points
16
So please humor me. If this subject is boring to you, pass by it. If you have something worthwhile to add, I'd appreciate it.
Dreamer.

I am not inclined to "universal care" so not sure you want my response, but some have at least touched on the problem (if only briefly/lightly) which you present, ie where to draw the line. Short answer to me is "when in a life-saving situation," but even that has many aspects with complex questions and answers. There is not pat answer, of course, and yes some kind of "triage" is needed. I'd love to see it such that anyone regardless of $ available could get access to that, but I doubt it's economically feasible. Offhand I wish I had more to add, sorry, but will kick it around and get back.
 

Katzndogz

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
65,656
Reaction score
7,474
Points
1,830
Equal health care for everyone is impossible unless it's the lowest common denominator of NO HEALTHCARE for anyone.

Even if you were to have some kind of universal health care based on parity, not every doctor is equal. The expertise of one surgeon is not going to be equally shared by all surgeons.

There is no such thing as equality.
 

initforme

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2011
Messages
14,259
Reaction score
1,719
Points
265
I believe everyone should have access to quality healthcare. And it should be affordable. What we have now is not affordable for many. Nobody should have to live in debt because of an illness. My theory? If you owe $100,000 in care? Pay $30 a month. If thats all that you can afford then good enough. If we value life then thats the way it should be.
 

Katzndogz

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
65,656
Reaction score
7,474
Points
1,830
I believe everyone should have access to quality healthcare. And it should be affordable. What we have now is not affordable for many. Nobody should have to live in debt because of an illness. My theory? If you owe $100,000 in care? Pay $30 a month. If thats all that you can afford then good enough. If we value life then thats the way it should be.
Try that at the gas station when you have to get to work.
 

initforme

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2011
Messages
14,259
Reaction score
1,719
Points
265
Our healthcare is overpriced. We can pay our premiums religiously to our lovely I mean greedy health care companies and they can say no at any time. Something is very wrong with the system. But as long as there are billions to be made we really wont try fixing the problem. Hence money is more important than life in america.
 

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
56,619
Reaction score
14,310
Points
2,180
Location
In a Republic, actually
My question is for people who support universal/government health care ... is there a limit for you in what you would make available to everybody. There are always going to be expensive procedures which wealthy people can afford but which poorer people don't have access to, right?
Of course, a single payer system – which would essentially be an expended form of Medicare – would follow the same rules with regard to what is currently not provided. For example:

Medicare does not cover all health care services. Health care services not covered by Medicare include, but are not limited to:

alternative medicine, including experimental procedures and treatments,

acupuncture, and chiropractic services (except when manipulation of the
spine is medically necessary to fix a subluxation of the spine. A subluxation is when one or more of the bones of the spine move out of position);
most care received outside of the United States;

cosmetic surgery (unless it is needed to improve the function of a malformed part of the body);

most dental care;

hearing aids or the examinations for prescribing or fitting hearing aids (except for implants to treat severe hearing loss in some cases);

personal care or custodial care, such as help with bathing, toileting and dressing (unless homebound and receiving skilled care) and nursing home care (except in a skilled nursing facility if eligible);

housekeeping services to help you stay in your home, such as shopping, meal preparation, and cleaning (unless you are receiving hospice care)

non-medical services, including hospital television and telephone, a private hospital room, canceled or missed appointments, and copies of x-rays;

most non-emergency transportation, including ambulette services…

Medicare Interactive - Script
Those who can afford it may purchase the items above if they wish; or better yet, buy actual health insurance – they way it was originally designed, to address emergency care, not health maintenance.
 
Last edited:

Katzndogz

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
65,656
Reaction score
7,474
Points
1,830
If you feel that your were unfairly denied medical care sue the company.

You will not get to do that with government bureaucracy.

I have a friend who is from England. He was in the hospital over there. It's free. The medical care is free.

He said his entire hospital stay cost just under $30,000 American. You want clean sheets, slip a little to the person whose job it is to change the sheets. You want your medication - on time. It will cost you. The nurse expects a tip. Mop the floor in your room, get that test in time to do some good, how about just getting your food within two hours. Everything is in cash. If you have a complaint about the eternal hand out. File a complaint. It will go to the local government office for review. It's better than your dentist who will give you instructions over the phone on how to pull your own teeth.

If you are seriously ill in the US, go to a charity hospital. Cedars Sinai is a world class hospital. It's a charity hospital. City of Hope is known all over the world for its care. It's a charity hospital. Sick children go to places like St. Jude Children's Hospital. There are many charity hospitals that are so good, people PAY to go there. My husband was in Cedars for a month. He was in the Max Factor cardiac wing in intensive care. We never got a bill. As we had no money, the Max Factor Foundation picked up the bill.

Whatever is wrong with health care in this country won't be fixed by universal government provided health care. The government is more interested in letting people die as a cost cutting measure than insurance companies are.
 

Katzndogz

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
65,656
Reaction score
7,474
Points
1,830
Oh please, botox for the poor! They can pay.
 

SmarterThanHick

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
2,084
Reaction score
241
Points
48
It's hilarious that the group who generally protests beneficial healthcare change is the group getting screwed over the most by the current setup. The poor get it for free because everyone else pays for it. The rich get premium services for their money, and the middle class get stuck with the bill of the poor AND their same non-premium healthcare. But "how dare you make MY tax dollars pay for the poor!" No no, that would be silly when you're already paying for the poor.

And I agree that it was ridiculous palin branded the misnomer "death panel" to the ability of a patient to talk to their doctors about end of life care at a ploy for cheap political points.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top