Quote:
Originally Posted by hkbajwa  But only if you can afford it. There is no doubt that the medical profession in the US has some of the most advanced and innovative medical treatments available in the world. But what's the point when only a certain portion of the population can afford these treatments. the question isn't whether the treatment exists... the wuestion is whether it is fair that only a certain number of people will be able to avail that system. |
We will most likely never agree on what is fair.
Quote:
Well a few points to ponder here. The only nations that envy the US medical system are third world countries where even basic healthcare facilities are hard to come by. I can assure you that no european nation envies the US medical system. While some of their own aren't the models of excellence ( NHA in UK being a prime example) the fact that healthcare is equally divided among all citizens is a very prized ideal. As a dane i have always felt sad whenever i see TV programs where some patients don't qualify for insurance etc ( i'm talkin ER, Scrubs etc). Personally it eases my conscience inthe face of all the inequality in this world of ours that at LEAST by paying taxes i can assure that every single person in my society gets treated.
|
I thought you lived in Pakistan. Denmark is a very small country geographically without 50 individual sovereign states. What may work there won't work here.
Quote:
It is tragic that MONEY is the qualifying factor in the event you need healthcare. Are you saying that money shows that you are "qualified" to be healthy? Are you saying that the amount of money you ahve clearly indicates how much healthcare you "Deserve"?
|
You have a limited and knowledge of our health care system, I see.
Quote:
I take issue with this statement too. We are talking about billionaires spending a few million more on taxes and we're talking about spending money on healthcare instead of the 531 BILLION spent by this admin on ridiculous military engagements.
We are NOT talking about average Joe being crushed under the burden of excessive taxation. In fact the brunt of the expense SHOULD be borne by the 371 billionaires you have int he US. Tax the top 5% earners in the US just 5% more in taxes. It certainly will not reduce their productivity, it will not lessen their life chances, it will not cause them to give up their cars and private jets, and it will not make one iota of a difference to THEM. It WILL however mean that perhaps MILLIONS more can receive the excellent healthcare that is available in the US.
|
Class warfare.....boy, I could have guessed that! Sure, soak the rich, they have enough for everyone.... It doesn't work. It's been proven. After a while, with no incentive, there will be no rich..... Many of those so called billionaires aren't even American citizens anymore and they live elsewhere for more favorable tax situations already. All that is left is the shell corporations that are "international" and their employees. There are 300,000,000 people here, and more pouring in illegally across borders all the time, and what you think would be fair would destroy the economy. I don't have any particular affection for the billionaires you think should be plundered and robbed of what they have earned, but I do respect the rights of people to keep their own money and property.
Experience demonstrates that with more people being covered, there is more utilization....should taxpayers be paying for boob jobs for women, and abortions, and while on the subject, what about liposuction for anyone who wants it? Should every person have access to reconstructive surgery to change their looks, get new nose jobs? AT SOMEONE ELSES EXPENSE??
We aren't total idiots here. When the income tax was supposedly passed, only 1% of the rich were supposed to be paying....guess who pays now? Once you pass a law, guess what, you are giving those lunatics in Congress precedent to raise the rates whenever they choose, and at times, tax rates here have exceeded 50%. Should every person who is unhappy or making bad choices have mental health coverage provided by someone who isn't? Guess what that causes.....lots of unhappy people....
Your notion that it's possible to soak the rich and no one else has already been considered and found wanting. These guys have been discussing these things for lots of years now.
Quote:
Lastly, EVEN if the government pays for healthcare, doctors will still be subject to stringent quality control standards, they will always make more according to the number of patients they treat, and they will always be subject to market forces. We are talking about cutting out the insurance companies AND about ensuring that NO TREATMENT is inaccesible to the population.
|
There you go.....doctors will be subject to huge fines or jail if they fill out a form wrong...or don't provide the level of care the government mandates....boob jobs for whoever, abortions on demand, liposuction for anyone who eats themselves out of a size 14, elective surgeries to anyone at all, at someone elses expense. NOT going to happen. What will happen instead is that govenment will decide what treatment you can have, and each and every year, more will be restricted, more will be denied, more will be decided by politicians than doctors, because financially your plan won't work. After cutting all sorts of procedures from the treatments available, they will raise tax rates and lower that down so only people making 100,000 a year will have to pay, and then people won't want to make 100,000 anymore...thus chipping away at the economy, and everyone earn less, have less, and in no time, everyone will be on the public dole. Already, 52% of the population here gets paid by government of one sort or another, either salaries or benefits. How long do you think the economy will last? Wheerever there are freebies, people go get them.... and if they are only free for people making less, people will make less. We've been that route already with welfare programs that nurtured a dependency culture in our inner cities. It was a disaster.
Quote:
Although i have no personal experience with Health Insurance compnaies, i have heard a few horror stories. ONE thing comes to mind. A person who has no insurance at the time they get diagnosed with ,let's say diabetes, will have a hell of a time getting insurance and scrounging up the cash required for treatment.
|
By law, he MUST be accepted by any HMO. By law, they must accept all comers....it's always been that way. Even if they haven't been covered for a long time, and don't QUALIFY for regular insurance, they can go to HMO's and get coverage and treatment they need. Everyone has heard horror stories.
Quote:
That's miserable for him and its inhumane. Insurance companies, because of their bottom-line concerns, want healthy clients. How does that help the sick ones?
|
See above.
Quote:
In fact how does a middle-income family in the US protect itself against the chief earner developing schlerosis, or Schizophrenia, or heart disease, or cancer? The problem with the insurance compnies is that the only way you can ACTUALLY be safe is by insuring urself against EVERYTHING.. which average Joe can't afford.
|
Ask my brother whose wife is dying of cancer right now. Her benefits haven't ended, and won't.
Quote:
So as a "service" the insurance saleman and the client sit together and gamble with his insurance to only include CERTAIN ailments and ignoring others. That just makes me wanna cry. HOW can you expect average Joe to be able to make a smart decision as to what disease he might get.
|
I guess you are guaranteed life and SAFETY and no problems where you live? You expect government to take responsibility for all this stuff? You EXPECT government to do a good JOB of it? Is everyone safe now we have a Homeland Security? How good is the FBI? How about Dept. of Education? Everyone learning like they should just because government takes on the task? Just what do they do anyway?
The illusion of safety for Americans went right out the window on 9/11. If anyone still feels safe, they have had their heads buried in the sand.
Quote:
I mean a good health insurance salesman will always look to give the coverage that will give the best profit. That means getting the client to pay for insurance he may never use, and ignoring those things that MIGHT happen to him.
there is a clear conflict of interest between the insurance company and the client.. i can not for the life of me understand how your society can allow that.
|
I know this is false, because that's what we did for decades....primarily provided health benefits to groups and individuals as well as life insurance. I personally have known hundreds, no, thousands of agents who served their clients well and honorably all that time. There are licensing requirements everywhere, and every different state has a Insurance Bureau where people can complain if they aren't treated fairly. There are professional associations who provide education and guidance to their members. There are a few bad apples, but they get rooted out by the system we already have in place, and tossed from the associations.
It's tragic that so few in the world have any idea of what a great job is being done by insurance professionals. You read about and hear the complaints, the bad things without ever noticing the billions and billions of dollars paid out in claims, in both health and life insurance. You don't notice that the companies exist, and their agents know this, TO PAY CLAIMS and they do just that.
You are in error if you think GOVERNMENT which does nothing well, would or could do a better job.
Oh, and we are not rich. We SERVE our clients, and they refer others to us, and because we compete by offering the services of many different companies and policies.
That ideal of communism cannot exist because of the greed, however small, of human beings...it's built into human nature, and no law will ever erase it or remove it. You would be stunned by the insurance FRAUD perpetrated on companies all the time....would this go away if government took over? NO..it would be EASIER. There is already huge fraud against government benefits in SSI entitlements, FEMA helping out folks in disasters, etc.
We don't want to encourage people to work less, claim more.... Ultimately, that is what happens. History demonstrates this clearly.
Social security demonstrates this clearly.
Protecting life, liberty, and the control of a persons own property ....these are the only valid jobs of govenment.
You have a right to life, but not the the labor or property of others....