Sicko

[mr_genius]

So cut spending. Could the government afford it if we pulled out of Iraq?

 

While the Iraq war is very expensive, universal health care would dwarf the Iraq war costs. But yea, the trillion dollars spent in Iraq could have been spent better on a great number of things.

[mr_genius]

Here's an interesting little fact also...our government spends more on Medicare per person in the U.S. than quite a few European countries spend per person on their full national health care systems, and Medicare for us only covers the elderly.

 

I know, thats one of the reasons I cringe when thinking about the costs of a full nation health care system in the US. It's going to be massive and much bigger than medicare. I know countries like Germany have cost caps for health care, I think all doctors have a book which tells them how much they can charge for any given medical situation.

[kapkomet]

I know, thats one of the reasons I cringe when thinking about the costs of a full nation health care system in the US. It's going to be massive and much bigger than medicare. I know countries like Germany have cost caps for health care, I think all doctors have a book which tells them how much they can charge for any given medical situation.

Let's see, combine that with Tort law, and you have yourself a class of folks who will become extinct. But that's ok, because they're rich, and those bastards need to be poor. Distribution of wealth, the cap way.

 

[Balta1701]

Let's see, combine that with Tort law, and you have yourself a class of folks who will become extinct. But that's ok, because they're rich, and those bastards need to be poor. Distribution of wealth, the cap way.

You know, there was a time when I think "Oh look, bureaucracy, that's going to cost a lot of money and be scary!" might have worked. Like, any time we had a functioning health care system in this country.

 

But I for one think that when I can point to a slightly scarier video of a person dying while stuck waiting in line for the emergency room, the fear of the government running things might not win out in this match.

[mr_genius]

You know, there was a time when I think "Oh look, bureaucracy, that's going to cost a lot of money and be scary!" might have worked. Like, any time we had a functioning health care system in this country.

 

But I for one think that when I can point to a slightly scarier video of a person dying while stuck waiting in line for the emergency room, the fear of the government running things might not win out in this match.

 

First off, the video that the media is using as part of their narrative to elect Obama is not something that socialized health care would have prevented. The exact same thing would have happened, as emergency rooms are currently required to take patients like that. So that doesn't prove that the system is 'completely broken'.

 

Secondly, costs are out of control. What people are mocking is if the Dems attempt to cap costs, all the while the likes of John Edwards are galavanting across the country filing class action lawsuit after lawsuit, basically ruining doctors as they cannot charge a rate which makes up for their high insurance rates if costs are strictly capped.

Edited July 2, 2008 by mr_genius

[kapkomet]

First off, the video that the media is using as part of their narrative to elect Obama is not something that socialized health care would have prevented. The exact same thing would have happened, as emergency rooms are currently required to take patients like that. So that doesn't prove that the system is 'completely broken'.

 

Secondly, costs are out of control. What people are mocking is if the Dems attempt to cap costs, all the while the likes of John Edwards are galavanting across the country filing class action lawsuit after lawsuit, basically ruining doctors as they cannot charge a rate which makes up for their high insurance rates if costs are strictly capped.

Exactly.

 

 

[Cknolls]

This seems like a good place for this:

 

There was a great presentation recently at the National Press Club about the dangerous effects of medical socialism. From The Politico:

 

Shona Robertson-Holmes was a mess. She had crushing headaches, insomnia and adrenaline levels so high that she constantly felt as if she had just stepped in front of a speeding bus. And that’s not to mention her rapidly deteriorating eyesight.

 

She headed to her family doctor, who recommended that she see two specialists.

 

But Robertson-Holmes is Canadian, and her state-provided health care gave her a wait time of four months to see a neurologist and six months to see an endocrinologist. Unable to get an expedited appointment, and with her eyesight worsening, Robertson-Holmes called the Mayo Clinic in Arizona and went in for tests and a diagnosis within a week.

 

The doctors there told her she had a four-to-six-week window to have a marble-sized tumor on her pituitary gland removed before her vision loss would be irreversible.

 

Returning home with the diagnosis, the Ontario native was still unable to expedite the surgery. Three weeks later, she came back to Mayo for brain surgery. And she took out a second mortgage to pay for the $100,000 ordeal.

 

“Universal coverage” is not the same thing as timely access to high-quality care.

 

 

[kapkomet]

This seems like a good place for this:

 

There was a great presentation recently at the National Press Club about the dangerous effects of medical socialism. From The Politico:

 

Shona Robertson-Holmes was a mess. She had crushing headaches, insomnia and adrenaline levels so high that she constantly felt as if she had just stepped in front of a speeding bus. And that’s not to mention her rapidly deteriorating eyesight.

 

She headed to her family doctor, who recommended that she see two specialists.

 

But Robertson-Holmes is Canadian, and her state-provided health care gave her a wait time of four months to see a neurologist and six months to see an endocrinologist. Unable to get an expedited appointment, and with her eyesight worsening, Robertson-Holmes called the Mayo Clinic in Arizona and went in for tests and a diagnosis within a week.

 

The doctors there told her she had a four-to-six-week window to have a marble-sized tumor on her pituitary gland removed before her vision loss would be irreversible.

 

Returning home with the diagnosis, the Ontario native was still unable to expedite the surgery. Three weeks later, she came back to Mayo for brain surgery. And she took out a second mortgage to pay for the $100,000 ordeal.

 

“Universal coverage” is not the same thing as timely access to high-quality care.

 

And the "free healthcare for everyone" crowd will tell you that's an exception.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

And the "free healthcare for everyone" crowd will tell you that's an exception.

I certainly hope there isn't a "free healthcare for everyone crowd", because no such thing exists - anywhere.

 

One thing that I think is interesting about that story, though... its an indictment of the Canadian health care system, but that's not the same as saying its an indictment of socialized medicine. I can see lots of reasons for socialized medicine being problematic, but the long wait times for care in Canada aren't necessarily a result of the government running health care. If they have a shortage of doctors and nurses, then that's the problem. That can be addressed any number of ways. If the system itself artificially keeps the number of specialists down, to cut costs or discourage heavy use, then that's a problem too (and just plain stupid). But neither one of those problems is a definite issue with socialized medicine. It may or may not be, depending on how it is implemented.

 

[kapkomet]

I certainly hope there isn't a "free healthcare for everyone crowd", because no such thing exists - anywhere.

 

One thing that I think is interesting about that story, though... its an indictment of the Canadian health care system, but that's not the same as saying its an indictment of socialized medicine. I can see lots of reasons for socialized medicine being problematic, but the long wait times for care in Canada aren't necessarily a result of the government running health care. If they have a shortage of doctors and nurses, then that's the problem. That can be addressed any number of ways. If the system itself artificially keeps the number of specialists down, to cut costs or discourage heavy use, then that's a problem too (and just plain stupid). But neither one of those problems is a definite issue with socialized medicine. It may or may not be, depending on how it is implemented.

Why would anyone want to practice medicine in Canada if they choose to get a visa, get an American education, and make more money here?

 

Furthermore, why is it that everyone wants to come here to practice medicine?

 

That's why my "free healthcare for everyone" was in quotes, by the way, because it doesn't exist, you're right... but that's what people think (uneducated nonetheless) when they hear the Democrat plans for medical plans.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Why would anyone want to practice medicine in Canada if they choose to get a visa, get an American education, and make more money here?

 

Furthermore, why is it that everyone wants to come here to practice medicine?

 

That's why my "free healthcare for everyone" was in quotes, by the way, because it doesn't exist, you're right... but that's what people think (uneducated nonetheless) when they hear the Democrat plans for medical plans.

That's an endemic problem - low pay for Canadian medical professionals. But its not endemic per se to gov't healthcare. Or, put another way, it doesn't have to be.

 

Energy policy is the #1 issue in American politics, IMO. But Health Care is in the top few, and is actually much more complex. There are a lot of problems and a lot of potential paths to take, and a lot to unwind. I'm not saying gov't run healthcare is the solution - just that pointing at the Canadian model, and intimating that all social medicine is bad because Canada's is bad, is short-sighted and inaccurate.