Health Care

[Jazzy]

The United States and Mexico are the only countries of the 34 members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) that do not have universal health care.

Proponents of the right to health care say that no one in the richest nation on earth should go without health care. They argue that a right to health care would stop medical bankruptcies, improve public health, reduce overall healthcare spending, help small businesses, and that healthcare should be an essential government service.

Opponents argue that a right to health care amounts to socialism and that it should be an individual's responsibility, not the government's role, to secure health care. They say that government provision of health care would decrease the quality and availability of health care, and would lead to larger government debt and deficits.

Debate Question:

Are you a proponent or opponent? (Please explain your choice)

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Government health care always equals worse care for the whole. Rationing of health care happens every time with government treating people like numbers instead of human beings. Just look at the sad state of the VA no matter how many scandals of poor care shown on our heroes things steadily get worse. With private organizations government can hold poor care of people accountable. With government in charge rarely if ever the are the people in charge ever held responsible for the death or poor care of people. NO THANK YOU EVER ON GOVERNMENT HEALTH CARE IN ANY FORM.

 

[Dee]

Come on, seriously? We apply socialism to our country every day. Public schools are an example of how we utilize socialism. Opponents? Go ahead and pay for your children yourselves instead of making the tax payers do it. Like getting money from Social Security and disability insurance for whatever reason? Pfft, fuck that. Do it yourself. Save it up like a productive member of this society would and pull your own weight, you slacker. Don't have a car to drive in? Let's raise the amount of money it would take to operate our public transportation systems.

Am I making my point clear enough? The people here in America are very hypocritical and extremely picky and choosey with what they believe is "fair" to pay for and what is not fair. You can't be for one service in certain cases and not for other services. You either understand why it works or why it doesn't work. Yes, however, I understand sometimes it doesn't work, especially, in this case, with those horrid insurance companies who end up screwing everyone over. In any case, the theory and practice of socialism can work well enough, but there are just certain things that we need socialism for and we can't keep making it out to be this evil practice.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Come on, seriously? We apply socialism to our country every day. Public schools are an example of how we utilize socialism. Opponents? Go ahead and pay for your children yourselves instead of making the tax payers do it. Like getting money from Social Security and disability insurance for whatever reason? Pfft, fuck that. Do it yourself. Save it up like a productive member of this society would and pull your own weight, you slacker. Don't have a car to drive in? Let's raise the amount of money it would take to operate our public transportation systems.

Am I making my point clear enough? Yeah, I hope so. The people here in America are very hypocritical and extremely picky and choosey with what they believe is "fair" to pay for and what is not fair. You can't be for one service in certain cases and not for other services. You either understand why it works or why it doesn't work. Yes, however, I understand sometimes it doesn't work, especially, in this case, with those horrid insurance companies who end up screwing everyone over. In any case, the theory and practice of socialism can work well enough, but there are just certain things that we need socialism for and we can't keep making it out to be this evil practice.

There is nothing we need socialism for. Applying it to our country everyday does not mean it is a good thing. It just means people are used to being slaves of it.

Those so called horrid insurance companies have a far better track record providing better care with far less denials then government has ever provided. Give me a insurance company without government interference any time over expecting the same treatment from government.

 

[Dee]

Come on, seriously? We apply socialism to our country every day. Public schools are an example of how we utilize socialism. Opponents? Go ahead and pay for your children yourselves instead of making the tax payers do it. Like getting money from Social Security and disability insurance for whatever reason? Pfft, fuck that. Do it yourself. Save it up like a productive member of this society would and pull your own weight, you slacker. Don't have a car to drive in? Let's raise the amount of money it would take to operate our public transportation systems.

Am I making my point clear enough? Yeah, I hope so. The people here in America are very hypocritical and extremely picky and choosey with what they believe is "fair" to pay for and what is not fair. You can't be for one service in certain cases and not for other services. You either understand why it works or why it doesn't work. Yes, however, I understand sometimes it doesn't work, especially, in this case, with those horrid insurance companies who end up screwing everyone over. In any case, the theory and practice of socialism can work well enough, but there are just certain things that we need socialism for and we can't keep making it out to be this evil practice.

There is nothing we need socialism for. Applying it to our country everyday does not mean it is a good thing. It just means people are used to being slaves of it.

Those so called horrid insurance companies have a far better track record providing better care with far less denials then government has ever provided. Give me a insurance company without government interference any time over expecting the same treatment from government.

Really? So denying a woman care for breast cancer and taking weeks, months, if not years to try and fight that and having her die in the end anyway is "taking care" of our citizens? Right. I can already tell we automatically don't agree with anything either of us is saying, so I'm not going to try and push my point.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

The only thing socialism creates is lazy and dependent people more then happy to live off of the bread crumbs of government which saps any will to be something better then the heard. And people like this in our government just feed off of the misery.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Come on, seriously? We apply socialism to our country every day. Public schools are an example of how we utilize socialism. Opponents? Go ahead and pay for your children yourselves instead of making the tax payers do it. Like getting money from Social Security and disability insurance for whatever reason? Pfft, fuck that. Do it yourself. Save it up like a productive member of this society would and pull your own weight, you slacker. Don't have a car to drive in? Let's raise the amount of money it would take to operate our public transportation systems.

Am I making my point clear enough? Yeah, I hope so. The people here in America are very hypocritical and extremely picky and choosey with what they believe is "fair" to pay for and what is not fair. You can't be for one service in certain cases and not for other services. You either understand why it works or why it doesn't work. Yes, however, I understand sometimes it doesn't work, especially, in this case, with those horrid insurance companies who end up screwing everyone over. In any case, the theory and practice of socialism can work well enough, but there are just certain things that we need socialism for and we can't keep making it out to be this evil practice.

There is nothing we need socialism for. Applying it to our country everyday does not mean it is a good thing. It just means people are used to being slaves of it.

Those so called horrid insurance companies have a far better track record providing better care with far less denials then government has ever provided. Give me a insurance company without government interference any time over expecting the same treatment from government.

Really? So denying a woman care for breast cancer and taking weeks, months, if not years to try and fight that and having her die in the end anyway is "taking care" of our citizens? Right. I can already tell we automatically don't agree with anything either of us is saying, so I'm not going to try and push my point.

I have no idea what you are getting at above except that would be government health care denying such care putting her in a long waiting list for treatment. Or denying the medicine because she is either to old or the treatment for the medicine is deemed to expensive.

 

[Dee]

I can understand why you believe that, but I disagree completely. I do, however, agree that it does create SOME lazy people who want handouts from the government by doing nothing at all. That's going to be difficult to deter, but what about all the mentally and physically disabled people? What about the people who were injured AT work and no longer CAN work, but have to find a way to live somehow? What about elderly folks? What about those who've had a major medical issue in their lives, have been piled medical bills, and are now bankrupt because of it? What are these people supposed to do? Who's going to hand them money if they physically cannot work?

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

I can understand why you believe that, but I disagree completely. I do, however, agree that it does create SOME lazy people who want handouts from the government by doing nothing at all. That's going to be difficult to deter, but what about all the mentally and physically disabled people? What about the people who were injured AT work and no longer CAN work, but have to find a way to live somehow? What about elderly folks? What about those who've had a major medical issue in their lives, have been piled medical bills, and are now bankrupt because of it? What are these people supposed to do? Who's going to hand them money if they physically cannot work?

You may disagree but just look at our inner cities to see how government handouts have destroyed the family unit and taken any will for people to overcome there poverty. Instead they whine and cry about everyone keeping them down except the very oppressors that keep them addicted to the freebies. Its pathetic they cannot see they are the hookers and the government is there pimps.

You are talking about a few percentage points of our population that need that kind of help. And it was never intended to be the federal governments job to do this except for our vets. Each state was meant to handle and care for the people on how the people of that state decided.

 

[Dee]

You are talking about a few percentage points of our population that need that kind of help. And it was never intended to be the federal governments job to do this except for our vets. Each state was meant to handle and care for the people on how the people of that state decided.

If you could possibly, I'd like to see the approximate number of people who abuse the system. Have you done some research on these inner city folk utilizing social services? That'd be interesting to know your findings.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

I can understand why you believe that, but I disagree completely. I do, however, agree that it does create SOME lazy people who want handouts from the government by doing nothing at all. That's going to be difficult to deter, but what about all the mentally and physically disabled people? What about the people who were injured AT work and no longer CAN work, but have to find a way to live somehow? What about elderly folks? What about those who've had a major medical issue in their lives, have been piled medical bills, and are now bankrupt because of it? What are these people supposed to do? Who's going to hand them money if they physically cannot work?

I bet people would rather have superior health care and be bankrupt then get mid rate doctors and poor care which makes there loved ones dead. You can always come back from being broke. You cannot get back a loved one when they are dead.

When I first got married my wife got a serious medical condition I was the only one working at the time and she had no insurance. It cost a fortune and I was not nearly making the money I am now. We sold a car. Got rid of cable. Did not eat out for two years at least. And made a whole laundry list of cuts to send out monthly payments with the doctors who were all willing to work with us. And I would do it all again happily to know government is not involved in health care.

I have seen government health care in action in Britain. It killed my step grandmother who needed a heart scan. 7 month waiting list for that scan and she died of a heart attack 5 months in.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Capitalism here in the states brings you to a open MRI you can get the same day! Good luck getting a MRI of any kind open or not the same day in any socialized health care government. But don't worry the leftists are working really hard to ruin that so everyone can EQUALLY suffer and wait months for something like a MRI.

Have already decided if our health insurance goes down I will be doing meta share that government has no say on how it operates. Or other programs similar to it.

https://mychristiancare.org/Medi-Share/


Have also researched into doctors who provide all your health care needs and you just pay them a monthly fee directly.

But I will do jail time before I submit to any kind of obama care or pay the fines if I end up with no insurance.

 

[Dee]

I can understand why you believe that, but I disagree completely. I do, however, agree that it does create SOME lazy people who want handouts from the government by doing nothing at all. That's going to be difficult to deter, but what about all the mentally and physically disabled people? What about the people who were injured AT work and no longer CAN work, but have to find a way to live somehow? What about elderly folks? What about those who've had a major medical issue in their lives, have been piled medical bills, and are now bankrupt because of it? What are these people supposed to do? Who's going to hand them money if they physically cannot work?

I bet people would rather have superior health care and be bankrupt then get mid rate doctors and poor care which makes there loved ones dead. You can always come back from being broke. You cannot get back a loved one when they are dead.

When I first got married my wife got a serious medical condition I was the only one working at the time and she had no insurance. It cost a fortune and I was not nearly making the money I am now. We sold a car. Got rid of cable. Did not eat out for two years at least. And made a whole laundry list of cuts to send out monthly payments with the doctors who were all willing to work with us. And I would do it all again happily to know government is not involved in health care.

I have seen government health care in action in Britain. It killed my step grandmother who needed a heart scan. 7 month waiting list for that scan and she died of a heart attack 5 months in.

That's exactly what's happening here, and has been for a very long time. It's odd to me that people don't realize that. And even if we do get health care sooner than some, which is completely wrong most of the time about these "waiting lists", at least, for serious emergencies, the amount it takes to pay off medical bills is completely and utterly outrageous. Thousands for a trip in an ambulance. A couple more thousand to spend a night or two in the hospital. And then even more money if you need some sort of surgery. And that is WITH insurance, not to mention the medications administered to someone during their hospital stay. These people are dying just as much as people in Britain or other countries who have a national health care, and even if they aren't dying, they're coming out of it with thousands and thousands of dollars in medical bills they'll be paying for the rest of their lives.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

I can understand why you believe that, but I disagree completely. I do, however, agree that it does create SOME lazy people who want handouts from the government by doing nothing at all. That's going to be difficult to deter, but what about all the mentally and physically disabled people? What about the people who were injured AT work and no longer CAN work, but have to find a way to live somehow? What about elderly folks? What about those who've had a major medical issue in their lives, have been piled medical bills, and are now bankrupt because of it? What are these people supposed to do? Who's going to hand them money if they physically cannot work?

I bet people would rather have superior health care and be bankrupt then get mid rate doctors and poor care which makes there loved ones dead. You can always come back from being broke. You cannot get back a loved one when they are dead.

When I first got married my wife got a serious medical condition I was the only one working at the time and she had no insurance. It cost a fortune and I was not nearly making the money I am now. We sold a car. Got rid of cable. Did not eat out for two years at least. And made a whole laundry list of cuts to send out monthly payments with the doctors who were all willing to work with us. And I would do it all again happily to know government is not involved in health care.

I have seen government health care in action in Britain. It killed my step grandmother who needed a heart scan. 7 month waiting list for that scan and she died of a heart attack 5 months in.

That's exactly what's happening here, and has been for a very long time. It's odd to me that people don't realize that. And even if we do get health care sooner than some, which is completely wrong most of the time about these "waiting lists", at least, for serious emergencies, the amount it takes to pay off medical bills is completely and utterly outrageous. Thousands for a trip in an ambulance. A couple more thousand to spend a night or two in the hospital. And then even more money if you need some sort of surgery. And that is WITH insurance, not to mention the medications administered to someone during their hospital stay. These people are dying just as much as people in Britain or other countries who have a national health care, and even if they aren't dying, they're coming out of it with thousands and thousands of dollars in medical bills they'll be paying for the rest of their lives.

Government beginning in the 1960s have ruined competition in our health care system with things like Medicare. Kinda like what the government has done to colleges with the outrageous prices for a education. If government had gotten out of health care system we would have competition for the best prices of procedures with hospitals and doctors working to give the best care. Would have doctors spending more time with the patients because competition would demand it.

Hospital Competition Improves Quality and Lowers Cost

Then government programs like Medicare and Medicaid with low payment outcomes for doctors and high paper work required from government which requires hospitals and doctors to hire larger staffs also contributes to our outrageous prices. I asked one of my doctors earlier this year if your patients went to paying only cash only for your visits what would you do. He said he would let go 80 percent of his staff and he could lower visit prices.

Get government out of health care and we would have prices dramatically decrease over night. There was a time when people only had insurance for catastrophic problems and people would pay out of pocket for the minor ailments. While every hospital and private practice doctor would take in a number of people for charity to treat the poor.

And finally the millions of illegals we do nothing to get rid of while government uses all of our money to treat these peoples medical issues. And the ones the government do not treat hospitals are wrongly forced to spend the money to treat illegals medical problems.

 

[DrLeftover]

I've been trying to come up with one large (several million participants), citizen facing (non-military to eliminate the VA mess from contention), US Federal Program that has run for a long period of time- say twenty years or more, that can be called A Success.

Let's see, WIC? hardly, there are several merchants who have dropped out of the program because their reimbursement from the program, when billed honestly, does not cover their expenses.
For Instance:

Q. What forms of payment are accepted at ALDI stores?
A. We accept cash, PIN-based debit cards, the Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) and Link cards. At this time we do not accept checks, credit cards or the Women, Infants and Children program (WIC).

https://www.aldi.us/en/services/faqs/

Maybe... say, state schools? Post Office? Section 8?

Come on, I need some help here.