MANDATORY health insurance, part 2 - Page 47 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-30-2011, 10:46 PM   #921
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
mobvok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: boom clap
Posts: 4,435
Local Time: 10:53 AM
The IPAB is one of many liberal proposals to cut Medicare spending.
__________________

mobvok is offline  
Old 06-30-2011, 11:08 PM   #922
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
Nancy Pelosi is out with the predictable boilerplate liberal rejection of any proposal to rein in out-of-control entitlement spending..
From another thread:-

Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500
So you feel a person with no insurance has a right to walk into a hospital; get lab work, physician care, medications and possibly a room and meals--for free?
Sure. Why not?

You realise the system you described is in place in many countries around the world, some poorer than the US, and ALL of which, every single one, spend less than the US on health care costs as a % of GDP.

You realise that most of these countries have higher life expectancy than the US, in spite of being, in many cases, no wealthier, and in some, significantly less so?

Have you ever considered the possibility that the reason US healthcare is dramatically more expensive than elsewhere precisely because of the ideologically based and non-rational bias against 'socialised' medical care that right wing politicians shill for and people like you vote for?
__________________

financeguy is offline  
Old 06-30-2011, 11:33 PM   #923
The Fly
 
DesiresFire27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 139
Local Time: 06:53 PM
I have friends overseas and in canada that say they love united health care. I also have a friend here in the states that has medicare and she says that if united health care gets passed here, she's screwed. I guess whatever happens happens, Rome wasn't built in a day.
DesiresFire27 is offline  
Old 07-01-2011, 11:34 AM   #924
ONE
love, blood, life
 
ryancoke71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 14,678
Local Time: 02:53 PM
My son was severely sick as an infant. So sick, they couldn't treat him in the town where I live. So a private plane (air ambulance) flies my husband, my baby and I to Toronto for what I can only describe as a miracle. One of the best hospitals in the world at my fingertips. I didn't pay a penny. I love Canada's healthcare system. It isn't perfect, but I never, ever take it for granted.
ryancoke71 is offline  
Old 07-01-2011, 12:03 PM   #925
The Fly
 
DesiresFire27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 139
Local Time: 06:53 PM
That's really amazing Ryancoke, these accounts make the system seem like a really great thing
DesiresFire27 is offline  
Old 07-01-2011, 04:09 PM   #926
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 12:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post

You realise the system you described is in place in many countries around the world, some poorer than the US, and ALL of which, every single one, spend less than the US on health care costs as a % of GDP.
How viable are these systems without the direct and indirect subsidies provided by the American people? Could you spend the % of GDP you now spend on health care if not for the U.S. military providing the bulk of the defense for NATO countries?

Would you enjoy the quality of health care you now enjoy if not for the innovations and new drugs developed in the "for profit" American health care system?

American conservatives worry about the failure of American leadership in foreign policy and the looming Obamacare bill. So should you imo.
Quote:
You realise that most of these countries have higher life expectancy than the US, in spite of being, in many cases, no wealthier, and in some, significantly less so?

Have you ever considered the possibility that the reason US healthcare is dramatically more expensive than elsewhere precisely because of the ideologically based and non-rational bias against 'socialised' medical care that right wing politicians shill for and people like you vote for?
Life expectancy numbers are quite misleading as an indicator of health care quality. If reflects poorly on many things when a 19 year old gang member is shot dead in the street during a drive-by shooting--- but the healthcare system isn't one of them.
INDY500 is offline  
Old 07-01-2011, 04:39 PM   #927
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 02:53 PM
If the United States doesn't lead the league in foreign policy, you will all die.
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 07-01-2011, 05:02 PM   #928
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 01:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan
If the United States doesn't lead the league in foreign policy, you will all die.
And if they do only the poor will die(according to indy's thinking). Think about that as you chug your beer for July 4th, isn't that worth it?
BVS is offline  
Old 07-01-2011, 05:07 PM   #929
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 07:53 PM
since that line of Dalai Lama action figures didn't work out

__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 07-01-2011, 06:46 PM   #930
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 12:53 PM
Wouldn't it be fun to look up military spending per country and learn something?
INDY500 is offline  
Old 07-01-2011, 06:54 PM   #931
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,892
Local Time: 01:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
How viable are these systems without the direct and indirect subsidies provided by the American people? Could you spend the % of GDP you now spend on health care if not for the U.S. military providing the bulk of the defense for NATO countries?
I'm not following your logic here. They spend less on healthcare because we provide military defense? How does one follow the other? It would make sense if other countries spent MORE on healthcare because they didn't have to deal with military spending, but to argue that they spend less because of it doesn't make sense to me.
maycocksean is offline  
Old 07-01-2011, 07:37 PM   #932
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 02:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by maycocksean View Post
It would make sense if other countries spent MORE on healthcare because they didn't have to deal with military spending, but to argue that they spend less because of it doesn't make sense to me.
I think that's what INDY was actually saying.
anitram is offline  
Old 07-01-2011, 08:41 PM   #933
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:53 PM
^ Apparently, some European countries have this mad crazy Marxist commie system whereby a non-deserving poor person can walk in to some top class hi-faluting hospital with, like, facilities and stuff (built, no doubt, on the Yankee dollar) and actually get treatment for life-threatening diseases without even whipping out a credit card (the free skating socialist bastard!) and, simultaneously, they manage not to spent massive amounts of casheesh on, I dunno, reviving the Cold War, or bombing Russia, or invading Iran, or somesuch.

Devious conniving little commie bastards. How dare they!
financeguy is offline  
Old 07-01-2011, 09:32 PM   #934
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 12:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by maycocksean View Post
I'm not following your logic here. They spend less on healthcare because we provide military defense? How does one follow the other? It would make sense if other countries spent MORE on healthcare because they didn't have to deal with military spending, but to argue that they spend less because of it doesn't make sense to me.
They have the money to spend on health care because the U.S. shoulders the largest burden of defense spending. I'm not pounding my chest when I say that but it is true.
They enjoy the advances in medical care because the U.S, system has a profit incentive and therefore an incentive to take a chance on innovation and development.
That's a bit of a simplification but I'm not going to spend this weekend rehashing the fine details of this. The general point stands.

We're off to see U2 in Chicago. Happy 4th.
INDY500 is offline  
Old 07-01-2011, 10:29 PM   #935
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Canadiens1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,363
Local Time: 02:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
They have the money to spend on health care because the U.S. shoulders the largest burden of defense spending. I'm not pounding my chest when I say that but it is true.
They enjoy the advances in medical care because the U.S, system has a profit incentive and therefore an incentive to take a chance on innovation and development.
That's a bit of a simplification but I'm not going to spend this weekend rehashing the fine details of this. The general point stands.[/img]
What exactly is your argument here?

Because the U.S. has decided to continue shouldering the defense burden of the free world post USSR, it shouldn't bother trying to reform a healthcare system rife with inefficiencies? The U.S. is exceptional and a super beacon of freedom and filled with exceptional businesspeople and leaders...only until we get into the nitty-gritty of geopolitics for you to then cry foul that the game is rigged against you?

Sure, the free market allows for pharmaceutical innovation to flourish, but the care provider/patient relationship is not a rational, business-like situation whatsoever.

I'll trot the old tired argument that it's a lot easier to find money to care for your own poor brown people when you're not spending it flattening the brown folks from some impoverished nation overseas. Okay, trotting it back into the barn now. It's put away.
Canadiens1131 is offline  
Old 07-02-2011, 10:27 AM   #936
has a
 
kramwest1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Not a toliet wall
Posts: 6,939
Local Time: 12:53 PM
Can we cut back our U.S. military spending and see what happens?

If Canada and Europe's healthcare start to fail, tough. But, we'll have more money less debt here in the U.S.
I'm willing to risk the sick people of Europe to try it.


a sorta
__________________
Bread & Circuses
kramwest1 is offline  
Old 07-02-2011, 11:15 AM   #937
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 02:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1131 View Post
What exactly is your argument here?

Because the U.S. has decided to continue shouldering the defense burden of the free world post USSR, it shouldn't bother trying to reform a healthcare system rife with inefficiencies? The U.S. is exceptional and a super beacon of freedom and filled with exceptional businesspeople and leaders...only until we get into the nitty-gritty of geopolitics for you to then cry foul that the game is rigged against you?

Sure, the free market allows for pharmaceutical innovation to flourish, but the care provider/patient relationship is not a rational, business-like situation whatsoever.

I'll trot the old tired argument that it's a lot easier to find money to care for your own poor brown people when you're not spending it flattening the brown folks from some impoverished nation overseas. Okay, trotting it back into the barn now. It's put away.
We may not be good multi-taskers, but we are kicking your ass in foreign policy.
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 07-02-2011, 03:54 PM   #938
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
mobvok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: boom clap
Posts: 4,435
Local Time: 10:53 AM
Quote:
They have the money to spend on health care because the U.S. shoulders the largest burden of defense spending. I'm not pounding my chest when I say that but it is true.
Every. single. OECD country spends far less on health care as a % of GDP then we do. The OECD average in 2007 was 8.9%, while the US spent 16%-nearly twice as less! They spend less than we do and get better results.

Here's a fun site:



Note how it looks like the hours and money are ultimately a wash. Here's another:



Of course, national populations are different, and the US is ultimately richer than either country. But the fact is given how much extraordinarily more money the US spends on health care than everyone else, there's no excuse not to be among the best in every health care category. And keep an eye on the inequality between money and quality of health/life span- you'd think with a greater private benefit accruing to each individual in the US, they'd be able to efficiently feed that money into life prolonging treatment that raises overall standards, but we don't see that. It looks like the dread specter of socialism IS an efficient way of handling the health care market.

As Canadiens said, despite the rhetoric about ending corporate welfare, it seems inevitable that conservatives end up viewing the status quo as the best of all worlds. I certainly don't recall ever voting to prop up the rest of the world militarily or in health care, but as long as it makes big businesses happy I suppose its for the best.
mobvok is offline  
Old 07-19-2011, 04:10 PM   #939
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 28,170
Local Time: 02:53 PM
WASHINGTON -- A highly influential panel of medical experts recommended to the U.S. Department of Health on Tuesday that all health insurance plans be legally required to offer free birth control to patients.

The Obama Administration commissioned the non-partisan Institute of Medicine (IOM) panel to recommend which preventative health services all insurance plans should fully cover under the Affordable Care Act. In addition to covering birth control, the IOM suggested in its report that health insurers pay for HPV testing, contraceptive and lactation counseling, HIV screening and breast-feeding equipment.

"As someone who has worked on women's rights for nearly 30 years, I can say that today's news marks one of the biggest advances for women's health in a generation," said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America. "Currently, nearly one in three women finds it difficult to pay for birth control, and that's why the United States has a far higher unintended-pregnancy rate than other industrialized countries. Making family-planning services available at no cost will help millions of women prevent unintended pregnancy and thereby reduce the need for abortion."

Keenan added she was "confident that the Obama administration will adopt the IOM's science-based recommendation and thus make affordability of contraception a reality for all women."

If the Department of Health and Human Services does adopt the IOM's recommendations, contraceptives could become affordable for women like Lindsay Cox of Lincoln, Neb., who currently can't afford the co-pay on her birth control.

Cox, 23, is a medical student at Nebraska Wesleyan University, and she has no time for a job. Although her parents pay for her BlueCross/BlueShield insurance plan, her birth control costs $40 a month, which is just out of reach on her student budget.

"Luckily my doctor [at the local Planned Parenthood clinic] gives me free samples, otherwise I just wouldn't be able to get it," she told HuffPost in an interview.

Cox said she would have a lot less to worry about if her insurance plan covered birth control.

"Just being able to pick it up regularly and not have to count on samples would be absolutely amazing," she said. "Planned Parenthood is so busy these days that if they're a week off from being able to see you for an appointment, that throws off your cycle and puts you at risk of becoming pregnant," she added.

Access to free or reduced-cost birth control and women's health services has become increasingly difficult for women like Cox as states legislatures across the country have voted to defund Planned Parenthood.

The IOM report notes that almost half of pregnancies in 2001 were unintended. It also notes that women who become unexpectedly pregnant are more likely to receive delayed or no prenatal care and to smoke, consume alcohol, be depressed, and experience domestic violence during pregnancy. Moreover, a recent study by the Guttmacher Institute, a leading reproductive health research and advocacy group, estimates that unintended pregnancies cost U.S. taxpayers $11.1 billion dollars a year.

Anti-abortion rights and anti-contraception groups are calling for the Obama Administration to reject the IOM's recommendations because they believe that some emergency contraceptives function as "abortion pills."

"This is a question of whether the government should mandate every health plan to cover these drugs free of cost," said Jeanne Monahan, director of Family Research Council’s Center for Human Dignity. "Whatever one’s position is on the issues of contraceptives, abortifacients and such, it does not matter whether proponents of such drugs do not care about the effect on human embryos. The point is that many Americans do care, and many religious health plans would care, and that they should not be forced to violate their conscience."
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 07-19-2011, 08:58 PM   #940
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 12:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
WASHINGTON -- A highly influential panel of medical experts recommended to the U.S. Department of Health on Tuesday that all health insurance plans be legally required to offer free birth control to patients.
What a stroke of genius. Skyrocketing health care costs got you worried? Not to worry, just mandate that "all health insurance plans be legally required to offer free" __fill in the blank__. Problem fixed. Affordable health care for all.

That's why we so need a robust two party political system in this country. It simply would never occur to Republicans that the way to make a good or service more affordable is for the government to mandate that the item just be given away for free.

Why, Obamamotor's Chevy Volt might even sell at that price.
__________________

INDY500 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Dog Lovers.... Part 3 U2Fanatic4ever Lemonade Stand 1019 05-19-2012 03:35 AM
Hell-th Insurance WARNING: LONG POST! BluRmGrl Zoo Confessionals 7 10-26-2006 09:04 PM
On (not) having health insurance wolfeden Zoo Confessionals 14 03-24-2004 11:15 AM
White House seeks control on health, safety Scarletwine Free Your Mind Archive 1 01-13-2004 04:54 PM
Bono today at the conference in Africa U2Kitten Everything You Know Is Wrong Archive 9 01-15-2002 09:29 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×