It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Sorry to list this stuff...but I was challenged.
I don't think there is another country out there that encourages the excesses that America does.
Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
Where I believe we differ, and the point I am trying to get across to you, is that for a charity to have any meaning, it must be voluntary. A nationalized healthcare system is not voluntary, and therefore is not charity.
I want to see some definite guarantees that people will be able to use the system in an emergency, without obtaining some government or insurer approval or waiting an inordinate length of time. I want to see a system that discourages abuse while encouraging use. I want to see a system that addresses out-of-control costs. I want to see a system that makes being a doctor an attractive option for those who have the aptitude for it, but an unattractive option for others. I want to see good doctors rewarded and poor doctors ushered out of the system.
Can we agree that the USA has problems in the medical profession, but that these problems run far deeper than just needing a law that everyone has to buy insurance at whatever rate the insurance companies want to charge?
Or would that make us both creeps? TheRedneck
We don't consider it as such...we consider it a right, plain and simple. You guys don't. That's your call.
My comments in this thread have been to address the issues of the OP, who is being left behind by the system. My thought is that it is abysmal.
I've argued the strengths (with inherent weaknesses as well) of our system in other places. I agree with your assessment that the problems you face are deep, but I don't see them as insurmountable.
Problem is that it has become an issue of fighting the last election. If it were regarded as a right...then it wouldn't be the hill to take Obama on.
Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
We don't consider it as such...we consider it a right, plain and simple. You guys don't. That's your call.
You keep saying "That's your call", but you keep arguing for this "right" in the USA.
It is indeed a tragedy when someone is left behind by the system. ...The bill you are so in favor of does little more than make it illegal to not pay these same insurance companies.
I don't debate the Canadian health care system because I don't know enough about it. Apparently you love it; if that is the case, then I am glad for you.
No one in this country is trying to pass anything like your system, based on the precious little I know of it.
Problem is that it has become an issue of fighting the last election. If it were regarded as a right...then it wouldn't be the hill to take Obama on.
Ummm... ... you are aware I voted for Obama in the last election, right? So I am against anything done by the man, but I voted for him? Is it even possible that he might just have a bad idea?
Methinks you just jammed your foot into your mouth up to the hip socket.
TheRedneck
Ultimately, once again, it's your call...just don't ask me to understand your choice. Fair?
Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by llpoolej
You just may live in a fortunate area.
Here? I wait 3 weeks just for my GP. 3 months to see my orthopod.
I had a friend who was nearly killed waiting for critical heart surgery because he waited SIX months because it was postponed three times.
When he finally went to surgery, and if it had been 2 more weeks he would of died. (defect)
Our ER waits are usualy 4-7 hours.
Originally posted by MrDesolate
Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that the major problem with health care in the US today is the insurance companies? They're the tail that wags the dog. Almost every medical decision boils down to, "do you have insurance?" And "What kind of coverage? Will it pay for abc or xyz?"
Originally posted by pavil
It is kinda weird that the insurance would only cover a normal immunization shot at only 25%, you'd think it would be to their advantage to make sure everyone was immunized from that illness, as the cost of actually treating the illness would cost the insurance company far more. Go figure.
Originally posted by Blue Alice
If you had to go on a waiting list to get chemo, then you could spend six months feeding him hempseed or injecting him with ozone and see if that works.
Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Kinda like my supplemental health care not paying for smoking cessation therapies...but they'd be on the hook for cancer drugs.
Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Well, the same thought could be applied for health care in general. In a society where people decide to ride out an illness because of cost, instead of seeking treatment at an early stage...your final costs are going to greatly outweigh your initial ones if you bet wrong.