Front Office Football Central  

Go Back   Front Office Football Central > Archives > FOFC Archive
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read Statistics

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-05-2005, 08:47 PM   #101
Greyroofoo
Pro Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Alabama
trout

Last edited by Greyroofoo : 10-05-2005 at 08:48 PM.
Greyroofoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2005, 09:09 PM   #102
Bubba Wheels
College Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhlloy
My two cents for what it is worth. Neither I or anybody in my family has found the NHS (UK) anything short of brilliant for what we effectively pay for it.

My mum has had breast cancer and is now battling a secondary and the staff at three different specialist centers (two in South Wales and one in Birmingham) have been absolutely first class. Her GP has saved her life twice now by reacting incredibly quickly to the warning symptoms and referring her on.

I can get a doctors appointment in two days for a non-emergency, and have made extensive use of accident and emergency for minor injuries which is more delayed, but I still get seen.

If I had the money or a better job, I could get better treatment going private, but I have absolutely no problems staying public.

Just my two cents... from my point of view I don't know what I would do without public health care. Actually, I would just have to pay a shitload to get (from what my fiancee tells me of American health care) a comparable/inferior service.

IMO it works over here. Whether it works with a country the size, the infrastructure and the huge wealth divide of the US I don't know. It almost certainly can't work if private health care is made illegal - that's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.

Oh and Bubba, you're a moron. You heard it on a talkshow so it's gospel? Give me a break.

Well, this is where I know its a losing battle for any sense of reason. This clown lives in the UK, yet blasts me calling me a 'moron' because I talked about a 1.Canadian guy 2. Living in Canada 3. Talking about the CANADIAN health care plan. But this guy in the UK knows more than the Canadian radio guy so I'm the moron for restating it. Fantastic!

Then I cite sources for my critics, from places like the HARVARD LIBRARY, hardly a conservative bastion of propaganda, and those get ignored for more personal attacks because I don't take for granted the indocrinated wisdom of Jon Stewart and Comedy Central that my critics apparently get their info from.

Hey, you want to be lefty? Be a lefty! Be a happy lefty! Just don't delude yourself that you got some kind of 'clarity' because you can call me a name in this forum and get yourself stroked for doing it. Then again, maybe you just live to get yourself 'stroked' in this forum. Explains alot of it.

Last edited by Bubba Wheels : 10-05-2005 at 09:12 PM.
Bubba Wheels is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2005, 09:42 PM   #103
John Galt
Pro Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The Internets
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba Wheels
I'm the moron...

Finally, we agree.
__________________
I do mind, the Dude minds. This will not stand, ya know, this aggression will not stand, man. - The Dude
John Galt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2005, 09:51 PM   #104
dawgfan
Grizzled Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle
Arguing with Bubba is about like arguing with concrete. If concrete were less flexible and less capable of rational, logical thinking that is...
dawgfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2005, 11:15 PM   #105
MrBigglesworth
College Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: PA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba Wheels
Well, this is where I know its a losing battle for any sense of reason. This clown lives in the UK, yet blasts me calling me a 'moron' because I talked about a 1.Canadian guy 2. Living in Canada 3. Talking about the CANADIAN health care plan. But this guy in the UK knows more than the Canadian radio guy so I'm the moron for restating it. Fantastic!
I just want to point out how BW conveniently ignored the guy from Canada who talked about how he never heard of anyone dying waiting for a surgery, and instead attacked the guy from the UK, who said that the UK national system works just fine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba Wheels
Then I cite sources for my critics, from places like the HARVARD LIBRARY, hardly a conservative bastion of propaganda, and those get ignored for more personal attacks because I don't take for granted the indocrinated wisdom of Jon Stewart and Comedy Central that my critics apparently get their info from.
First of all, your source was the "Harvard Square Library", not the Harvard Library. Harvard Square Library is actually a religious, utilitarian site. But most importantly your source didn't even bother to mention the point that you were trying to make with it. Which makes it not really a source at all, really.
MrBigglesworth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2005, 06:40 AM   #106
bhlloy
Coordinator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoya1
Being born and raised in Canada, I've never heard of anyone being refused surgery and dying because of it. Yes, sometimes you wait for it, but if life threatening it is dealt with right away. Don't scare people away from a healthcare system because you heard something on a talk radio station.

Would you like to reply to this guy now Bubba? He's Canadian you know.

Don't take this as a defense of the Canadian health care system, or call me a lefty either. You know jack shit about me. If you'd actually read my original post, I think public health care without a private option is a stupid idea. Hell, I might even agreed with you if you'd provided some sort of proof or a link to an article or something.

And no, I don't get off on arguing or calling people names on messageboards. But your continued practise of starting threads (I believe most call it trolling) based on conjecture and things you read on your kookie websites just astounds me. I'm not going to post again in this thread, so knock yourself out.
bhlloy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2005, 08:25 AM   #107
Bubba Wheels
College Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhlloy
Would you like to reply to this guy now Bubba? He's Canadian you know.

Don't take this as a defense of the Canadian health care system, or call me a lefty either. You know jack shit about me. If you'd actually read my original post, I think public health care without a private option is a stupid idea. Hell, I might even agreed with you if you'd provided some sort of proof or a link to an article or something.

And no, I don't get off on arguing or calling people names on messageboards. But your continued practise of starting threads (I believe most call it trolling) based on conjecture and things you read on your kookie websites just astounds me. I'm not going to post again in this thread, so knock yourself out.

Well, just because I didn't respond to the Canadian guy doesn't automatically mean that I didn't think he made a valid point. Yet another example of my critics quick to jump on me with false presumptions.

That aside, the difference between him and you is...HE ACTUALLY LIVES IN CANADA UNDER THE CANADIAN HEALTH CARE SYSTEM! You, on the other hand, live in the UK, know nothing about living under the Canadian health care system and yet still deem yourself informed enough to basically say the CANADIAN RADIO GUY talking about it was WRONG and that I am 'a moron' for restating what he said.

In fact, restating what he said...listen now...BECAUSE HE IS CANADIAN LIVING IN CANADA...made his remarks a VALID STARTING POINT for this thread! Get it? No, your beyond the pale. You want to see moron, look in the mirror Gov'ner.
Bubba Wheels is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2005, 08:35 AM   #108
ISiddiqui
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Decatur, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba Wheels
You want to see moron

Well, he sees it with every post you make.
__________________
"A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages"
-Tennessee Williams
ISiddiqui is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2005, 08:37 AM   #109
Blackadar
Retired
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Fantasyland
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui
Well, he sees it with every post you make.

Truer words were never spoken.
Blackadar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2005, 08:39 AM   #110
Bubba Wheels
College Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
BTW, my final say on this, the guy in question was on a Southern Ontario morning show...sounded conservative...so some already know who he is even though I didn't get the guy's name.

And the point of his rant was simply this: He wanted a private option included in the national health care plan and saw its exclusion as just another device for more control of government over the private citizen's lives. So maybe that is the answer right there, if national health care is inevitable make darn sure that a private option is open for those wanting to pay for it.
Bubba Wheels is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2005, 08:40 AM   #111
Bubba Wheels
College Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackadar
Truer words were never spoken.

Strok-a-delic!
Bubba Wheels is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2005, 09:47 AM   #112
Fidatelo
Pro Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Winnipeg, MB
As an average Canadian, here are my thoughts on this thread:

1) The Canadian system is far from perfect, but it is not as bad as some make it out to be. People are not dropping like flies waiting for surgery, and I like the idea that Joe Dirt can get the same priority as Daddy Warbucks. That said, the waits can be terribly long, and we do lose our best doctors to the states all the time. The system needs fixing, there is no doubt, but I don't feel we should look to the US system for our answers.

2) On the topic of drug prices, I am amazed that people are still brainwashed by the "Americans pay for the R&D so everyone can have drugs" hogwash that Big Pharma spits out. America pays higher prices because Big Pharma lobbyists are in the federal government's pockets. Pharmaceutical companies are still making profit selling to Canada and other countries, just not the obscene amounts of profit they make off of Americans. Until Americans stand up and demand that their government take action against Big Pharma the price gouging will continue.
__________________
"Breakfast? Breakfast schmekfast, look at the score for God's sake. It's only the second period and I'm winning 12-2. Breakfasts come and go, Rene, but Hartford, the Whale, they only beat Vancouver maybe once or twice in a lifetime."
Fidatelo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 03:32 PM   #113
Yossarian
High School Varsity
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Really quite good article / discussion by Adam Gopnik and Malcolm Gladwell on the very issue raised by the first post in this thread. Both make good points with Gopnick falling back often on the 'think of the kids / fairness' angle and Gladwell focusing on quality and innovation.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/fea...ellgopnik.html
Yossarian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 06:13 PM   #114
kcchief19
Pro Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Kansas City, MO
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fidatelo
2) On the topic of drug prices, I am amazed that people are still brainwashed by the "Americans pay for the R&D so everyone can have drugs" hogwash that Big Pharma spits out. America pays higher prices because Big Pharma lobbyists are in the federal government's pockets. Pharmaceutical companies are still making profit selling to Canada and other countries, just not the obscene amounts of profit they make off of Americans. Until Americans stand up and demand that their government take action against Big Pharma the price gouging will continue.
I don't know if that is the prevailing opinion in this country, but I wouldn't be surprised if the rest of the world saw it this way. That said, technically it's not true. Outside of countries with price controls like Canada, pharmaceutical companies largely follow the market -- they charge what they can charge to maximize profit. If that means the market can bear $3 a pill for Prilosec, that's that they will charge. I don't think American's are paying for R&D -- that's a finite amount. For many medications, the first pill may cost a company $100 million and it's the second pill that costs 3 cents. Once the pill is break even, the rest is pure profit regardless of the country of the sale.

Obviously where the market fails is that not everyone can afford the price set by the market. That's the wrap on providing AIDS drugs in Africa. Companies could provide them at a lower cost, but since so many are so poor they wouldn't make any more money. Thus, the price is set at a premium to extract as much money as they can from the few who can afford it.

Where lobbying and support for candidates comes in is preventing national health care and price controls from being implemented. Probably the biggest argument for national health care in this country is that the health care companies are so against it.

Interesting this should come up right now ... for sweeps a local station in town did a series of stories last week entitled "Death by Denial" that profiled a series of local cases where people died waiting for approval for payment on treatments and medications from insurers or were denied treatment due to cost. Our system has plenty of holes.
kcchief19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 06:56 PM   #115
Buccaneer
Head Coach
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Colorado
Quote:
we do lose our best doctors to the states all the time. The system needs fixing, there is no doubt, but I don't feel we should look to the US system for our answers.

Apparently your best doctors think otherwise.
Buccaneer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 07:04 PM   #116
ISiddiqui
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Decatur, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buccaneer
Apparently your best doctors think otherwise.
LOL! The 'best doctors' just want the money. Their leaving is no evidence of the quality of a health care system.
__________________
"A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages"
-Tennessee Williams
ISiddiqui is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 07:07 PM   #117
st.cronin
General Manager
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui
LOL! The 'best doctors' just want the money. Their leaving is no evidence of the quality of a health care system.

I would say that top doctors leaving (whether for higher pay or for any other reason) is a characteristic of a health care system that needs overhauling. I don't know how you can say otherwise - if you're losing your top talent, you need to change something.
__________________
co-commish: bb-bbcf.net

knives out
st.cronin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 07:11 PM   #118
ISiddiqui
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Decatur, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by st.cronin
I would say that top doctors leaving (whether for higher pay or for any other reason) is a characteristic of a health care system that needs overhauling. I don't know how you can say otherwise - if you're losing your top talent, you need to change something.
Oh please! If Canada started offering lawyers 100% more money, I'd be there in a heartbeat, but I'd still think the US legal system was the better one.

There is a great difference in supply and demand of labor (doctors, here) and how good an entire health care program is.
__________________
"A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages"
-Tennessee Williams
ISiddiqui is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 07:20 PM   #119
st.cronin
General Manager
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui
Oh please! If Canada started offering lawyers 100% more money, I'd be there in a heartbeat, but I'd still think the US legal system was the better one.

There is a great difference in supply and demand of labor (doctors, here) and how good an entire health care program is.

Well, if your argument is that Canada has more than enough good doctors to meet it's needs, that's different. I have no idea if that's true. If there were a shortage of good lawyers in this country, that would be a problem.
__________________
co-commish: bb-bbcf.net

knives out
st.cronin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 07:22 PM   #120
Warhammer
Pro Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Dayton, OH
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui
There is a great difference in supply and demand of labor (doctors, here) and how good an entire health care program is.

I disagree, in the short term, there probably isn't much of a problem, but over the long term this will hurt the quality of the health care program.
Warhammer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 07:22 PM   #121
dawgfan
Grizzled Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcchief19
I don't know if that is the prevailing opinion in this country, but I wouldn't be surprised if the rest of the world saw it this way. That said, technically it's not true. Outside of countries with price controls like Canada, pharmaceutical companies largely follow the market -- they charge what they can charge to maximize profit. If that means the market can bear $3 a pill for Prilosec, that's that they will charge. I don't think American's are paying for R&D -- that's a finite amount. For many medications, the first pill may cost a company $100 million and it's the second pill that costs 3 cents. Once the pill is break even, the rest is pure profit regardless of the country of the sale.

Obviously where the market fails is that not everyone can afford the price set by the market. That's the wrap on providing AIDS drugs in Africa. Companies could provide them at a lower cost, but since so many are so poor they wouldn't make any more money. Thus, the price is set at a premium to extract as much money as they can from the few who can afford it.

Where lobbying and support for candidates comes in is preventing national health care and price controls from being implemented. Probably the biggest argument for national health care in this country is that the health care companies are so against it.

Interesting this should come up right now ... for sweeps a local station in town did a series of stories last week entitled "Death by Denial" that profiled a series of local cases where people died waiting for approval for payment on treatments and medications from insurers or were denied treatment due to cost. Our system has plenty of holes.
I think the factor you're not accounting for is that pharmaceutical companies enjoy a long period of patent protection before "generic" versions of their drugs are allowed to be placed on the market (and thus drastically driving down the prices since there is now competition for that type of drug). Now, I don't know what the "sweet" spot is that would still allow pharm companies to make earn back their R&D and turn a reasonable profit before allowing the generics to come to market to drive down prices, but I think there's a definite argument to be made that the current period is too long.

This would be an area where fidatelo's point about pharm company lobbyists and Congress is spot-on.
dawgfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 07:29 PM   #122
ISiddiqui
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Decatur, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warhammer
I disagree, in the short term, there probably isn't much of a problem, but over the long term this will hurt the quality of the health care program.
No doubt, but even then, the structure of the health care program would be better than the structure of the US health care system, where you may have the best doctors, but a good portion of society isn't able to afford them.

I'd prefer a hybrid system, but if I had to choose between the US and Canadian systems, I'd take the Canadian one. I've heard too many horror stories in my line of work with how insurance carriers and employers have screwed over people, that in good conscience, I cannot support the current system.
__________________
"A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages"
-Tennessee Williams

Last edited by ISiddiqui : 02-21-2006 at 07:32 PM.
ISiddiqui is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 08:13 PM   #123
WVUFAN
College Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Huntington, WV
I'm not up on the health care plans that were proposed, so I apologize in advance if I'm wrong about something. Anyone have a link to the the proposals that Clinton and the Republicans submitted?

Oddly enough, since I'm Republican, I'm all for universal health care, as long as it does not limit the money paid to doctors. That creates a downward spiral -- less money made = less qualified people who go to medical school.

I'm also all for limiting lawsuits for malpractice, too. Universal health care isn't much use if it lowers the quality of healthcare for everyone involved.

I'm also not a fan of requiring employers to provide healthcare. This is a death-knell to many small businesses.
WVUFAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 08:15 PM   #124
GMO
Mascot
 
Join Date: May 2003
I'm a Canadian who lives in Canada.
Canada has a public-only (i.e. government-run) health system.
The waiting time for surgery is too long. There are shortages. Costs are rising at a high rate.
Do not copy the Canadian public health system. You will run into the same problems as we're having. People have waited so long for necessary treatment that they have gone to other countries for surgery and successfully sued the provincial governments (who actually run the health care system) for the cost.
In fact a case was taken up to the Supreme Court who decided that the person from Quebec had waited too long for his medical procedure and that he had the right to get medical treatment from a private system.
The provincial governments have made some very stupid decisions. About 10 years ago, in a bid to cut costs, they restricted the number of doctors who could go through medical school. The result now is, of course, we have a shortage of doctors.

Health care costs have risen so much that it will soon consume close to 50% of the budgets of some provinces. The extra costs will have to be paid from somewhere i.e. taxes. Public health-care is not free. Companies like it because the ordinary citizen has to pay the extra cost, not the company as much (which is one of the reasons Toyota decided to built a plant in Ontario). Toyota pays less but the worker pays more.

A government-only run system does not work.
If it did, the USSR would still be around and the USA would be a colony of the USSR. Wherever government-only systems have been tried, they have failed. This is in health care, industry, agriculture etc. China is another example of a failed government-run economic system.

Canada is slowly beginning to get more private health care. It will take a long time, though, because of the entrenched interest groups in this country. They don't care if people die because of their intransigence. Their socialist ideology is more important.

Possibly the best system is a public system competing with various health-care private companies. Competition is great. People have a choice. If they prefer public health care, they can go to it. Those who prefer private health care can use a private company.

If the Canadian health care system is so great, why doesn't the government allow people a choice? If it's so great then people will flock to the public health-care system and the private companies will go bankrupt. But the government is afraid to give their own citizens a choice.

For now, if I have to wait a long time for a medical procedure, I have no option. I must wait.
Unless a person is rich enough to go outside the country.

Anyways, that's my 2¢ worth.
GMO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 08:21 PM   #125
Galaxy
Coordinator
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMO
I'm a Canadian who lives in Canada.
Canada has a public-only (i.e. government-run) health system.
The waiting time for surgery is too long. There are shortages. Costs are rising at a high rate.
Do not copy the Canadian public health system. You will run into the same problems as we're having. People have waited so long for necessary treatment that they have gone to other countries for surgery and successfully sued the provincial governments (who actually run the health care system) for the cost.
In fact a case was taken up to the Supreme Court who decided that the person from Quebec had waited too long for his medical procedure and that he had the right to get medical treatment from a private system.
The provincial governments have made some very stupid decisions. About 10 years ago, in a bid to cut costs, they restricted the number of doctors who could go through medical school. The result now is, of course, we have a shortage of doctors.

Health care costs have risen so much that it will soon consume close to 50% of the budgets of some provinces. The extra costs will have to be paid from somewhere i.e. taxes. Public health-care is not free. Companies like it because the ordinary citizen has to pay the extra cost, not the company as much (which is one of the reasons Toyota decided to built a plant in Ontario). Toyota pays less but the worker pays more.

A government-only run system does not work.
If it did, the USSR would still be around and the USA would be a colony of the USSR. Wherever government-only systems have been tried, they have failed. This is in health care, industry, agriculture etc. China is another example of a failed government-run economic system.

Canada is slowly beginning to get more private health care. It will take a long time, though, because of the entrenched interest groups in this country. They don't care if people die because of their intransigence. Their socialist ideology is more important.

Possibly the best system is a public system competing with various health-care private companies. Competition is great. People have a choice. If they prefer public health care, they can go to it. Those who prefer private health care can use a private company.

If the Canadian health care system is so great, why doesn't the government allow people a choice? If it's so great then people will flock to the public health-care system and the private companies will go bankrupt. But the government is afraid to give their own citizens a choice.

For now, if I have to wait a long time for a medical procedure, I have no option. I must wait.
Unless a person is rich enough to go outside the country.

Anyways, that's my 2¢ worth.

How could you have a private and public system co-exist? Some type of voucher system to transfer to a private system? Why would doctors want to deal with the the government, who might pay less? Universal health care sounds like a great idea, but I don't think it's working to well for other countries, unless you want to tax the hell out of people to have a top-notch system like France, Sweden, ect.

Last edited by Galaxy : 02-21-2006 at 08:22 PM.
Galaxy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 08:31 PM   #126
SFL Cat
College Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Florida
The more government sticks its nose into healthcare, the more expensive it gets. Market forces have pretty much been eliminated from the medical profession. Also, I know a lot of doctors who are quitting their practices or retiring early because it just isn't worth continuing due to the high overhead involved, a lot of which is tied up in medical malpractice insurance.
SFL Cat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 09:07 PM   #127
Galaxy
Coordinator
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFL Cat
The more government sticks its nose into healthcare, the more expensive it gets. Market forces have pretty much been eliminated from the medical profession. Also, I know a lot of doctors who are quitting their practices or retiring early because it just isn't worth continuing due to the high overhead involved, a lot of which is tied up in medical malpractice insurance.

Yeap....Plus, you have patients who are stubborn, demanding that they know what's best, and think that the doctors owe them.
Galaxy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 09:17 PM   #128
flere-imsaho
Coordinator
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicagoland
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMO
Wherever government-only systems have been tried, they have failed.

That's a patently false statement. Single-payer health care systems exist, and work, in many countries, including most of Western Europe, Scandanavia & Australia and New Zealand. There's a fair amount of variety amongst these systems, and they work to different extents, but to say they've all failed is just simply wrong.

Also, as you note, the system in Canada isn't failing because of the system, per se, but because of the ridiculously bad decisions made by the provinces administering the system.

Using that logic, I could say that energy brokerage is a failed enterprise simply because Enron went belly-up.

Quote:
For now, if I have to wait a long time for a medical procedure, I have no option. I must wait.
Unless a person is rich enough to go outside the country.

If you can't afford health insurance in the United States, you're in exactly the same boat, except that you won't eventually get the procedure. That's a pretty big difference, if you ask me.
flere-imsaho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 09:27 PM   #129
MrBigglesworth
College Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: PA
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMO
A government-only run system does not work.
If it did, the USSR would still be around and the USA would be a colony of the USSR. Wherever government-only systems have been tried, they have failed. This is in health care, industry, agriculture etc. China is another example of a failed government-run economic system.
My government run national security is doing pretty well.
MrBigglesworth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 09:29 PM   #130
MrBigglesworth
College Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: PA
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFL Cat
The more government sticks its nose into healthcare, the more expensive it gets.
Why is it then that all of the western countries with national healthcare systems have lower costs and higher outputs?

Last edited by MrBigglesworth : 02-21-2006 at 09:29 PM.
MrBigglesworth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 10:08 PM   #131
ISiddiqui
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Decatur, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy
How could you have a private and public system co-exist?
Easy, have public for basic care and private for more advanced stuff. For enticing doctors, have the government pay off student loan debt for 5 years of work in the public health care system (or so).

Quote:
Originally Posted by SFL Cat
The more government sticks its nose into healthcare, the more expensive it gets.
Of course the US pays more per capita for healthcare than any of the 'socialized' health care states .
__________________
"A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages"
-Tennessee Williams
ISiddiqui is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 10:40 PM   #132
SFL Cat
College Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Florida
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui
Of course the US pays more per capita for healthcare than any of the 'socialized' health care states .

Exactly. Because there is no competition to drive down costs like there are in other professions and industries. If I'm a doctor and an insurance company or government healthcare program tells me they are going to pay $1,500 for a certain procedure, I am going to bill for that amount, even if the procedure only actually costs me $950.

It's the same as all those stories we hear about the military paying $200 for $5 bolt.

Last edited by SFL Cat : 02-21-2006 at 10:41 PM.
SFL Cat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 10:42 PM   #133
sterlingice
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Back in Houston!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFL Cat
Exactly. Because there is no competition to drive down costs like there are in other professions and industries. If I'm a doctor and an insurance company or government healthcare program tells me they are going to pay $1,500 for a certain procedure, I am going to bill for that amount, even if the procedure only actually costs me $950.
Yeah, because in the US, when a procedure costs $950, they're going to charge patients $950


SI
__________________
Houston Hippopotami, III.3: 20th Anniversary Thread - All former HT players are encouraged to check it out!

Janos: "Only America could produce an imbecile of your caliber!"
Freakazoid: "That's because we make lots of things better than other people!"


sterlingice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 10:44 PM   #134
MrBigglesworth
College Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: PA
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFL Cat
Exactly. Because there is no competition to drive down costs like there are in other professions and industries. If I'm a doctor and an insurance company or government healthcare program tells me they are going to pay $1,500 for a certain procedure, I am going to bill for that amount, even if the procedure only actually costs me $950.

It's the same as all those stories we hear about the military paying $200 for $5 bolt.
Then why do all western countries with government run health care have lower costs and better outputs?
MrBigglesworth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 10:44 PM   #135
ISiddiqui
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Decatur, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFL Cat
Exactly. Because there is no competition to drive down costs like there are in other professions and industries.


I'm not sure how that explains how foriegn health care systems, with LESS competition costs less per capita than the US's. Maybe you can say that US has more expensive procedures, but the other health care systems cover every person, and most of the health care cost in the US is overhead, which are reduced with economies of scale.
__________________
"A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages"
-Tennessee Williams
ISiddiqui is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 10:49 PM   #136
SFL Cat
College Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Florida
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui


I'm not sure how that explains how foriegn health care systems, with LESS competition costs less per capita than the US's. Maybe you can say that US has more expensive procedures, but the other health care systems cover every person, and most of the health care cost in the US is overhead, which are reduced with economies of scale.

When you set artificial limits or caps on prices, you eventually shoot yourself in the foot. That's why a lot of doctors will leave these countries in search of greener pastures elsewhere, or students will steer away from medical careers for something more lucrative and a lot less stressful.

Last edited by SFL Cat : 02-21-2006 at 10:50 PM.
SFL Cat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 10:53 PM   #137
ISiddiqui
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Decatur, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFL Cat
When you set artificial limits or caps on prices, you eventually shoot yourself in the foot. That's why a lot of doctors will leave these countries in search of greener pastures elsewhere, or students will steer away from medical careers for something more lucrative and a lot less stressful.
Maybe, but most Western countries are not hurting with their national health care systems. You just have to do it intelligently, maybe mix private and public, or add other incentives in the public sector.
__________________
"A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages"
-Tennessee Williams
ISiddiqui is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 10:57 PM   #138
st.cronin
General Manager
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
Health Care and Education in the US become the subjects of intense debate and noise, but what often gets overlooked is that they are, if not clearly superior to what the rest of the world does, at least among the best. Sure, there are aspects that can be improved, often by applying common sense where it has been abandoned, but I don't see that a radical new approach is needed.
__________________
co-commish: bb-bbcf.net

knives out
st.cronin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 10:59 PM   #139
SFL Cat
College Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Florida
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth
Then why do all western countries with government run health care have lower costs and better outputs?

They may have lower costs (see above post about artificial caps on prices), but whether they have better output is debatable. I know care is rationed in these countries, and that you often have to wait a lot longer for several medical procedures than you would in the US.

Last edited by SFL Cat : 02-21-2006 at 11:07 PM.
SFL Cat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 11:01 PM   #140
ISiddiqui
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Decatur, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by st.cronin
Health Care and Education in the US become the subjects of intense debate and noise, but what often gets overlooked is that they are, if not clearly superior to what the rest of the world does, at least among the best. Sure, there are aspects that can be improved, often by applying common sense where it has been abandoned, but I don't see that a radical new approach is needed.
Depends on what you consider 'radical'. I'd think any program that covers the 40+ million uninsured Americans would be fairly radical.
__________________
"A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages"
-Tennessee Williams
ISiddiqui is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 11:07 PM   #141
st.cronin
General Manager
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui
Depends on what you consider 'radical'. I'd think any program that covers the 40+ million uninsured Americans would be fairly radical.

Uninsured Americans still recieve health care. It's a problem, but not on the scale that reformers would have us believe.
__________________
co-commish: bb-bbcf.net

knives out
st.cronin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 11:22 PM   #142
sterlingice
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Back in Houston!
Quote:
Originally Posted by st.cronin
Health Care and Education in the US become the subjects of intense debate and noise, but what often gets overlooked is that they are, if not clearly superior to what the rest of the world does, at least among the best. Sure, there are aspects that can be improved, often by applying common sense where it has been abandoned, but I don't see that a radical new approach is needed.
Ever tried *paying* for health care in this country, particularly if your company doesn't offer it and even if they do now, it's getting to be horribly expensive.

SI
__________________
Houston Hippopotami, III.3: 20th Anniversary Thread - All former HT players are encouraged to check it out!

Janos: "Only America could produce an imbecile of your caliber!"
Freakazoid: "That's because we make lots of things better than other people!"


sterlingice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 11:26 PM   #143
st.cronin
General Manager
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
Quote:
Originally Posted by sterlingice
Ever tried *paying* for health care in this country, particularly if your company doesn't offer it and even if they do now, it's getting to be horribly expensive.

SI

I do pay for my own health care.
__________________
co-commish: bb-bbcf.net

knives out
st.cronin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 11:54 PM   #144
ISiddiqui
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Decatur, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by st.cronin
Uninsured Americans still recieve health care. It's a problem, but not on the scale that reformers would have us believe.
Not preventative health care. Yeah, if something bad happens, the emergency room has to treat them... but that isn't even close to optimal.
__________________
"A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages"
-Tennessee Williams
ISiddiqui is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 11:57 PM   #145
dawgfan
Grizzled Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui
Not preventative health care. Yeah, if something bad happens, the emergency room has to treat them... but that isn't even close to optimal.
And don't forget, we've revised our bankruptcy laws to really stick it to all those shiftless bastards that have suffered a major medical issue and gone broke because of it.
dawgfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2006, 11:59 PM   #146
ISiddiqui
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Decatur, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by sterlingice
Ever tried *paying* for health care in this country, particularly if your company doesn't offer it and even if they do now, it's getting to be horribly expensive.

SI
The worst is horror stories of individuals who have to go into bankrupcy because they can't afford the medical treatments that doctors say is necessary, but insurance REFUSES to pay for. And they don't have the money to sue the insurance company, so they have to try to pay for it themselves.

And yes, that situation happens WAAAYY more than most people realize. It's especially bad when the only thing you can tell them is that there is nothing they can do except to sue... and when they don't have enough money to hire a lawyer, frankly, they can only go into bankrupcy or die.
__________________
"A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages"
-Tennessee Williams
ISiddiqui is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 12:01 AM   #147
ISiddiqui
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Decatur, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgfan
And don't forget, we've revised our bankruptcy laws to really stick it to all those shiftless bastards that have suffered a major medical issue and gone broke because of it.


In my job, I've heard plenty of participants who have been screwed by their insurance companies, who, if they can't declare bankrupcy, they can't afford procedures or medications... and really have to simply prepare to die.
__________________
"A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages"
-Tennessee Williams
ISiddiqui is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 12:01 AM   #148
sterlingice
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Back in Houston!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui
And yes, that situation happens WAAAYY more than most people realize. It's especially bad when the only thing you can tell them is that there is nothing they can do except to sue... and when they don't have enough money to hire a lawyer, frankly, they can only go into bankrupcy or die.
Or you could go up against an army of high priced lawyers that still cost less to hire than pay for one of those procedures.

SI
__________________
Houston Hippopotami, III.3: 20th Anniversary Thread - All former HT players are encouraged to check it out!

Janos: "Only America could produce an imbecile of your caliber!"
Freakazoid: "That's because we make lots of things better than other people!"


sterlingice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 12:02 AM   #149
sabotai
General Manager
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The Satellite of Love
Quote:
Originally Posted by sterlingice
Ever tried *paying* for health care in this country
Yup.
sabotai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 12:05 AM   #150
dawgfan
Grizzled Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui


In my job, I've heard plenty of participants who have been screwed by their insurance companies, who, if they can't declare bankrupcy, they can't afford procedures or medications... and really have to simply prepare to die.
Yeah, it's a good thing that bankruptcy law revision was passed. Never mind that the heavy majority of the people filing for the type of bankruptcy that was made much more difficult were people who got to that point because of major medical events.

The politicians that allowed this to happen should be ashamed.
dawgfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:59 PM.



Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.