National Healthcare for the USA

by sammielee24 348 Replies latest jw friends

  • sammielee24
    sammielee24

    All been heard before and simply fear mongering. The USA has the lowest health care rating in the industrialized world, it spends more per person, infant mortality is higher and people die younger, it performs more heart surgeries than any other country with NHC - yet patients live no longer, it performs more high tech testing using MRI/CT etc, yet produces less results, it has more people living without adequate, consistent or even equal healthcare, by its very own system it blocks preventative health care that would ensure preliminary care before people become so ill they require lengthier and more costly treatment - those are just the basics.

    In a system that is implemented for all people via national healthcare, hospitals and doctors are paid proportionately according to a systematic approved baseline. Research is still funded. Bush has decimated the Medicare and Medicaid system, capped rates, ignored the people and professionals that advised against it and created these problems.

    You don't need HMO' s in a national healthcare system. People will use community hospitals - that's what you pay your tax dollars into so you will use them. The idea of 'people not wanting to use a community hospital' is interesting - it speaks to a number of different issues. The number of poor use the hospital but the number of insured don't want to? Why is that? The hospital is only good for poor people? The service is only good for poor people? Would we rather not change the way the hospitals do business for all the people instead of creating greater social issues by fostering a belief that those with insurance and their families are somehow more deserving and better than others?

    Moving away from privatization requires restructuring on many levels and it takes time. It doesn't bankrupt facilities - it creates opportunity to realign a heatlhcare system that provides for all people - the rich, the poor, the indigent and the community at large. The reason for the 3 year recalculation would be to iron out the kinks, determine the funding based on need as populations shift and change. It takes everyone working together and not screaming at separate doors. It takes someone listening to professionals in other countries that make the system work there and using those ideas in the best way here.

    The national healthcare system can work. It will work. There is never going to be a right time to change - this agenda has been tossed around in every government that held office for 60 years now and each time, the corporations and industries that stood to profit from the health of the American citizen made sure by their $$$$ contributions to gov't, that it was squashed.

    Issues of illegal immigration and prisons need to be addressed - and should be addressed and voted on now. They won't be. Healthcare can't be held up because the adminstration can't get their act together on anything but the 'war on terror' and their belief in exercising their right to move funds and pass laws without ramifications and consideration.

    Maybe the 27.5 Trillion that has been moved around could be brought back to the table and used to push start healthcare. Maybe there could be more accountability at every govt level for the millions of middle class who, despite working as hard as every other person in the country, now find themselves falling behind in wages and living with no benefits including health insurance. Rather than propagandize the number of jobs created by not mentioning they are primarily in retail and service industries that pay the lowest wages without benefits, we should tell the truth of the economy as it is now. Healthcare can be streamlined and can be run more efficiently. It can be done to give access to those 45 million without any source of care.

    Where you see it won't work, where the obstacles are too great, where you see bankruptcies and nightmares - I see opportunity, equality, safety and health. It takes all of us working together for the common good of the people - not segretating ourselves with our paycheck into the haves and havenots of healthcare.

    swife.

  • LDH
    LDH
    People will use community hospitals - that's what you pay your tax dollars into so you will use them. The idea of 'people not wanting to use a community hospital' is interesting - it speaks to a number of different issues. The number of poor use the hospital but the number of insured don't want to? Why is that? The hospital is only good for poor people? The service is only good for poor people? Would we rather not change the way the hospitals do business for all the people instead of creating greater social issues by fostering a belief that those with insurance and their families are somehow more deserving and better than others?

    I was hoping you would ask that. Really. There are several reasons.

    1. What agencies do you think county employees work for? Hmmmm....county jail, county sherriff, county social services, county-based EMT and ambulance services, etc etc. So NO, if I were a county employee I would not want to be hospitalized at the facility where I am most likely to run into people who have, ah, encountered my 'services.'

    2. Additionally, there is a great divide here in Fresno culturally. There are many cultures which are here (a good thing) but many have neither an understanding nor respect of our rules. Namely, two visitors at a time. No visitors after 8. Have you ever had the pleasure of sharing a hospital room with a Southeast Asian patient who has 34 relatives squeezed into the space next to you, while your two visitors are reduced to yelling above the din? I didn't think so. Of course this says nothing about hospital quality of care, and everything about social differences. However it speaks to the fact that YES people have preferences about their medical care that have NOTHING to do with the quality of said care.

    In a system that is implemented for all people via national healthcare, hospitals and doctors are paid proportionately according to a systematic approved baseline.

    This pretty much says it all. Who 'systematically' approves the baseline? The same people who are 'approving' it now, causing facilities to go bankrupt?

    You don't need HMO' s in a national healthcare system.

    LOL what do you think a National Healthcare system is? Have you read the freaking proposals? It's a gatekeeper system, ooooh, shockingly, also known as an HMO.

    Lisa

    Can read between the lines Class

  • hamsterbait
    hamsterbait


    The US government spends BILLIONS every year -

    Providing food, military and MEDICAL aid to the third world and other countries.

    Why can't US citizens get some of those BILLIONS? Perhaps it would not be politically advantageous? Perhaps the Republicans or Democrats might lose their subsidies from the big businesses that already fleece the people?

    Not one opponent of an NHS for America has suggested that these other countries are getting a free ride at their expense. Not one of them has suggested worldwide economic catastrophe and socialism will come unless the US ceases such aid.

    Yet they clain the most advanced and richest country on the planet will go into economic meltdown if the government starts caring for its poor and needy and sick, in line with the CHRISTIAN beliefs which the (allegedly) born again christians in power claim to follow.

    Jesus said "remember the poor"

    They only remember the rich and where the next check for the presidential campaign comes from.

    HB (of the "Heaving Buckets" class)

  • sammielee24
    sammielee24

    1. What agencies do you think county employees work for? Hmmmm....county jail, county sherriff, county social services, county-based EMT and ambulance services, etc etc. So NO, if I were a county employee I would not want to be hospitalized at the facility where I am most likely to run into people who have, ah, encountered my 'services.'

    Gee that's too bad - why not? I worked in community services, knew all the people in the community - including hospitals, mental facilities, police and local govt levels. There was no issue. Why were there be? Every community doesn't have 100 people in it - if you take a community of 100,000 there is a good chance you aren't going to run into anyone you have 'serviced'. If I'm sick that's the least of my worries. In addition, there are generally private, semi private and ward rooms so again, you can utilize those options if they are available.

    2. Additionally, there is a great divide here in Fresno culturally. There are many cultures which are here (a good thing) but many have neither an understanding nor respect of our rules. Namely, two visitors at a time. No visitors after 8. Have you ever had the pleasure of sharing a hospital room with a Southeast Asian patient who has 34 relatives squeezed into the space next to you, while your two visitors are reduced to yelling above the din? I didn't think so. Of course this says nothing about hospital quality of care, and everything about social differences. However it speaks to the fact that YES people have preferences about their medical care that have NOTHING to do with the quality of said care.

    I accept that there are cultural differences and again, those need to be ironed out. The hospitals are within their rights to apply a limited number of guests in any room at one time - I've visited people where the rules are 'one person at at time' to 'open house'. If there is a problem, any hospital administrator can be advised of it and if people are active enough in voicing their concern, it will get changed. Policies are set for the benefit of all people in the hospital. It just needs to be enforced.

    As for your question about sharing a room - I shared a co-ed room with 3 other patients - 2 men and 1 woman. It could have been a challenge simply because of gender issues but I guarantee that when the men were being examined behind the curtain I could have cared less - I was too sick to worry about the noise, the people, the conversations and I would imagine that the men felt the same way. The only woman in there with me was a crier who had some very loud visitors and many of them - one gentleman called the nurse, complained and it was dealt with immediately.

    I don't see these objections as relevant to why the system won't work. I see them as concerns and while they may be viable, again, I reiterate - it is up to the people to work together to ensure a healthcare system is effective.

    swife.

  • sammielee24
    sammielee24
    Who 'systematically' approves the baseline? The same people who are 'approving' it now,

    Who have almost bankrupted this entire country - does that mean we continue to let them act in this same manner for another 50 years? There will be no country left by then. The people have power to change things but have become apathetic. As HB just said - let's hear some screaming from everyone about the millions upon millions handed over to other countries that could be spent here. Let's hear some screaming about loans to other countries that are never repaid that amount to billions of dollars. Lets hear some screaming about the handshakes between government and drug industries that keep prices higher and quantities lower in this country. Before we keep screaming against healthcare that would benefit all of the people - lets hear some screaming against the money that flies out of the country - money that could give a NHS a great start and benefit the entire country. The economy is a mess - more and more people are seeing the real value of their paycheck decrease as prices rise in every other way - if we do not change the system now, you can expect another 20 million to be uninsured in the near future. Employers cannot foot the bill. It must be done through taxes that ensure that all those working, pay into the system and have access to it across the board.

  • LDH
    LDH

    OOOOHHHH!!!! NHSI I can't wait!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/healthmain.html?in_article_id=401657&in_page_id=1774

    Lisa

    Who was it that said NHS wouldn't go broke? Class

  • siegswife
    siegswife

    Man, this thread developed quite a bit since the last time I was online. I realize that most of you are tired of it by now since it's no longer on the first few pages, but there are a few things I wanted to address. I haven't had the time until now, so here it comes popping to the top again.

    First of all, Lisa...I'm not the one who said you were better than other people...you did. If you don't want your words taken at face value, perhaps you should choose them more carefully. I do happen to consider you a generous and caring individual but I didn't find the way you expressed yourself in that particular comment very appealing or consistent with the opinion I have of you.

    Secondly, you mentioned how simple it would have been for us to continue our health insurance by opting for Cobra. Please! My husband was laid off and Cobra is very expensive. If I remember correctly it would have cost over $200 a week to continue our coverage. It just isn't realistic to expect people who are collecting unemployment to be able to afford Cobra.

    Thirdly, you mentioned to HempLover that insurance in offered through the school system. This is true, and we purchased that insurance for our daughter last year at a reasonable rate. The thing is that insurance only covers accidental injuries but it's good for a full year and something is better than nothing.

    That being said, for all my bitching and complaining about medicaid, I have to say that after contacting the chic in the special needs unit of the HMO I have through them I've been pleasantly surprised at how quickly she was able to hook me up so I could get the port I needed and I'll be starting chemo on Friday at the out of network hospital my specialist uses.

    I told Siegfried that I feel bad for even complaining about it because all of the professionals I've dealt with so far during this ordeal have been very concerned and are trying to make sure that I get quality care. Too bad that the federal government would have to be involved in a NHC system. If they left it up to the people who actually give a damn about providing health care it could possibly be a good thing. As it is now, I just don't put much stock in it working.

    Anyway, does anyone know why employees of small companies or self employed people aren't able to buy into group insurance plans at a reasonable rate ? Who or what is preventing that from happening now? I think that would alleviate some of the problems that are creating the health care crisis. Any thoughts on this from anyone who might want to continue this....err...discussion?

    Lea

  • sammielee24
    sammielee24
    Who was it that said NHS wouldn't go broke?

    18,000 people die every year in the USA because they do not have any health insurance. More babies die in the USA than other countries. Children in families without health insurance are sicker and have a higher rate of death. 98,000 people die in the USA from accidental or improperly prescribed medications in the USA per year. 45 million people live without any insurance or enough insurance to allow them adequate health care. A country can be broke on a lot of levels - moral, ethical and compassionate.

    "The type of medical services a patient receives often depends on whether the patient has health insurance. The second most significant factor is where the patient is treated. And quality does not consist of consumers being able to see the provider of their choice, or when and where they want to see them. Quality is receiving the right care, in the right setting, at the right time."

    "Experts in the field of quality assurance believe that the American health care delivery system is in need of fundamental change in order to achieve major improvements in health care quality. They stress that the current care systems cannot do the job. "

  • LDH
    LDH
    Who was it that said NHS wouldn't go broke?

    so you basically can't answer the question so you go off in left field....surprise.

    sw what I said is, YES, people who work hard are better people than lazy people....if that puts me in the "better" category so be it. I'll wear that label with pride.

    I don't know what state you live in so I can't advise you of resources but feel free to PM me.

  • sammielee24
    sammielee24
    Anyway, does anyone know why employees of small companies or self employed people aren't able to buy into group insurance plans at a reasonable rate ? Who or what is preventing that from happening now? I think that would alleviate some of the problems that are creating the health care crisis. Any thoughts on this from anyone who might want to continue this....err...discussion?

    Lea..I don't know about all of them so I can only speak for what I do know. The health insurance companies set the dollar figure for their plans so we assume that they set the dollar figure based on what services the people are using. The employer opts in or out, depending on their own cash flow. I know of companies that offer the bare minimum of coverage for their employees - the employee pays about $250.00 a month for his benefits which include a $5,000 yearly deductible and a copay. The family of the employee is not covered because the employer requires another $600.00 a month to do this. The employee is now paying $3,000 a year for his own health insurance that will give him catastrophic coverage but must use up his deductible first to even qualify to use the insurance. This means that if the guy keeps paying in at $3,000 a year, he were to pay out all of the deductible a year for various care, he is paying out $8,000 a year for his own health care.

    National healthcare taxes employees on income and employers on payroll. The taxes the employee pays out would be far less than the amount he currently pays out in care and the added benefit is that his whole family is covered. In addition if the employee finds another job that is better for him and his family, he need not be tied to the current job simply because he cannot afford to be without or change health insurance. No matter what job you take, a percentage of tax is put toward the healthcare service you use. National healthcare does away with inequities such as pre-existing conditions, income, employment because it covers everyone. There is no free ride because it is paid by all employee's and employers. Contrary to what you might have heard the route you usually take is patient to doctor. The doctor is your gateway to any specialist or extra tests you need and you make decisions on your care between the two of you. My mother has had the same doctor for 31 years and despite being seen by dozens of specialists, her doctor is her primary care giver and still takes the time to visit her at her home. That is national health care.

    sammieswife.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit