yourdomain.com

[David R Gold]

GOP won't stop it. The Left is relentlessly pushing this notion. I have always believed this was coming. The trashing of the current system by the RATS and the media are leading to an eventual uprising by the masses. We have yet to see the necessary moves toward privatization and Health Savings Accounts. Therefore, we have the combination of out of control government involvement (Medicare and Medicaid costs grow in double digits every year) and an incredibly inept and bureaucratic private insurance system.
Remember,if you think it's bad now. Wait until it's free.

Wash Post

[WBR]

[B. Ungaro]

So what is Socialized Medicine? Are we talking about Single Payer, Universal Health Coverage? If so, it does not have to be Socialized in any way. It can be self supporting, similar to the Highway Program and similar to the Post Office. I believe that we Americans have the knowledge to make it work.

It will piss off the Blood Sucking Health Care Providers who will have to compete with other legitimate outfits. We can retain the profit motive but it will have to be less than a windfall.

If done correctly, we could all get a reduction in our health care cost. What are the chances?

[nagash]

Reduction in health care costs? Only after the hospitals close.

Look at the situation where I live. The hospitals are already screaming that every one of them is in the red or just over the break-even point. The copays for an ER visit average between $50 and $150 depending on your insurance
That's just to walk through the front door of a hospital. EX: it's Sunday afternoon and you have an ear infection. Not bad enough to kill your hearing (yet) but bad enough to put you in extreme pain. You have a choice to make, and the choice to make is so drastic that you may find the will to chance waiting for Monday morning. If you go to the hospital (your normal Dr.'s office doesn't open until Monday morning) to get diagnosed and get started on the antibiotics and ibuprofin, it will cost you x to get in. Whatever x is it's more than quadruple what you would pay to see your normal doctor.
That's how the hospitals are making what little money they are. When you talk about 'free care' you talk about wiping out copays, which wipes out any incoming money to a hospital.
Who's going to cover the cost? The government? Don't make me laugh. All that will succeed in doing is bankrupting the country.
And what of the side effects of free care. What will the government do to lower costs? That's a no-brainer. They'll institute a ton of laws designed to get us to eat only certain foods so we'll all slim down and a majority of health issues will disappear.
Welcome to the end of life as we know it.
_________________
As I am, so shall ye be.

[David R Gold]

See what I mean, dear readers. Bungalow Bill thinks it might work. We are doomed.

Here is some hope. A Senior at The U. Of Tennessee writes this column in the student newspaper.
SOURCE

Columnist examines health issue

Volume 97 Number 31
Tuesday, September 28, 2004

Printer friendly version
One of the greatest dreams of American liberals is a nationalized health care system similar to the one in Canada. They argue in favor of such a system because they believe health care is a basic "right," and because they believe the current system is flawed beyond repair. As with most problems, they advocate government solutions, not private enterprise solutions. Unfortunately, the government has an abysmal record of correcting problems, and American health care would be no exception.

First, let's examine the "right to health care" claim. Obviously, there is no right to health care established in the U.S. Constitution. However, we do have a moral right to health care, some will argue. Unfortunately, those who make this argument do not understand what a "right" is.

A "right" is the ability and autonomy to perform a sovereign action. In a free society founded on the ideal of liberty, an individual has an absolute ability to perform such an action - so long as it does not infringe upon the rights of another individual. Health care is not speech: In order for you to exercise a theoretical "right" to health care, you must infringe on someone else's rights. If you have a "right" to health care, then it means you must also have the right to coerce doctors into treating you, to coerce drug companies into producing medicine and to coerce other citizens into footing your medical bill. This is Orwellian. "Freedom" for you cannot result in slavery for others. Thus the concept of a "right" to health care is an oxymoron: It involves taking away the rights of other individuals.

Surely, though, we can agree that doctors, the pharmaceutical industry and insurance companies earn excessive profits, you say. Well, that depends on what your definition of "excessive" is. Doctors literally hold the lives of their patients in their hands. How much is someone who saves lives everyday worth? The same is true of pharmaceutical companies. While it has become fashionable to condemn their profits, the fact is that these profits fund medical research, which leads to more medicines being produced, and, consequently, more lives saved. Insurance companies spread the cost of health care among many people who might not otherwise be able to afford it, and thus make health care readily available for many.

While on the topic of profits, we should examine them. The word "profit" is considered to be a dirty word by many on the political left, but why? What makes a profit bad? Nothing. On the contrary, profits are very positive. When you come to class in the morning, there is a good chance you either drive a car or ride a bus. Do you think the bus driver and the workers who built your car or the bus did so that you could get to school on time? Of course not, they did because they wanted to make money. Yet their pursuit of a profit benefited them as well as you.

Adam Smith once said, "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest." As we have seen, profits and self-interest are not bad things.

Let's pretend, for a moment, that the left gets its way, and the United States adopts a universal health care system. This profit motive will effectively be removed. Doctors will then be government employees, and, as such, have far less accountability, as well as lower pay. Could we still expect the best and brightest to strive to be doctors? Probably not. More than likely, they will pursue other careers where they can make more money.

Some love to bemoan the fact that the United States is one of the few industrialized nations without a government health care system. Yet they rarely note that the United States produces disproportional amounts of the new, life-saving drugs, largely because of the profits drug companies make. Will we continue to produce these drugs if we abolish the profit motive? Not likely. Chances are, they will not be produced at all, and more people will needlessly suffer and die as a result.

When we examine countries that have embraced socialized medicine, we find long waiting lists, expansive red tape and little concern for the individual. Do you really want to be told which doctor to go to? Do you want to wait years to have necessary medical procedures performed? If so, then socialized medicine is for you.

But if you believe in individual rights, competent healthcare and sound economic policies, we must get the government out of the doctor's office.

- John Brown is a senior in political science. He can be contacted at jbrown44@utk.edu.

[B. Ungaro]

Well, not only can it work, it will work. My family doctor who used to swear against Single Payer, Universal Health Coverage is now for it. He is just one of many doctors who have realized that the FRAGMENTED, over priced current system is not only hurting the citizens but also the Doctors.

Keep in mind that when you put what the Government Spends on Charity Care and what we spend on PREMIUMS in one POT, it would probably pay for health care for EVERYBODY. Annnnnd if it did not and required subsidies from our Government, it would be PROPER use of our TAX DOLLARS. Instead of spending the money on Halliburton, let's spend it on the CITIZENS and those legally in the USA.

[dcannady]

[B. Ungaro]

Dcannady,

You must think that we Americans are bunch of degenerate, power hungry, inconsiderate lunatics. I see it different. I see my American brothers and sisters as kind, friendly, warm and giving.

Get over it. It's coming. Hellalujah.

[Fox]

Commie medicine in the United States would not only be a disaster for us, but the entire world. The world depends on our ability to innovate and create new treatments and medicines and make them affordable for the masses. Commie medicine would kill the goose that laid the golden egg and the worst part about it, we will not even know what could have been possible had we not followed that course.
_________________
Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated. (Applause.)

[B. Ungaro]

Not so, We have Commie Highway System in the USA, yet we are cgeapest and most innovative in construction. Just look at our Mix Masters. AMAZING STUFF.

[nagash]

The problem with the health system does not have to do solely with the people it supposed to help (us). We're just one contributing factor.
If it goes social then we are the only problem with the system, and to solve the problem, the government can pass any laws it wants to make us as fit as possible so we do not contribute to the problem of health care.
After all, a hospital with no patients is a cheap hospital to run (see a movie titled Article 99 to see where I'm coming from).

I'm sure that Bill looks forward to such a day but I have no intentions of eating or drinking foods I don't like or to stop playing my video games (if I'm sitting down then I'm not exercising).
_________________
As I am, so shall ye be.

[B. Ungaro]

Examples prove that I am right and you folks are peeing against the wind.

[boedark]

[nagash]

You want an example, Bill?

OK, class. Everyone interested in this board watch a movie called Article 99. It's a comedy, but it should be a tragic wake-up call. That's the future of medicine. Where do you think I got the line 'A hospital with no patients doesn't cost any money'.

And no hospitals will have no patients, except maybe the mental ones, because we'll all be eating processed foods with no taste and no substance so that we all slim down and erase all the health problems associated with eating, which would cut the health budget in half at the minimum. If that's what you consider an ideal life, then you are not sane.
_________________
As I am, so shall ye be.

[B. Ungaro]

The other extreme is gourmet meals prepaired to individual preference.

Universal Health Care would provide something in the middle, for everybody. There would be no need for CHARITY and BEGGING.

Now, if you wanted gourmet meals with vibrating beds, you could still have supplemental private coverage above and beyond what the standard coverage would provide.