Clinton on health care

[Flying Dutchman]

While I believe in Capitalism.........one has to wonder how the world's richest, strongest, and best country can have citizens who cannot get health care? I do not believe in entitlements, and I do not believe in the government controlling health care, I do believe it is the government's job to ensure the safety and health of it's citizens. It is not the ones living beyond their means that suffer from lack of health care, it is the poorest that do. You should never be in a situation of paying your electric bill or paying for medication that you need. While it sounds good to say move or get a better job, go to school, or join the military....but what if those options are not available to you? What then? You just say tough shit? What do you say to the person who has worked their whole life and gets about a thousand dollars a month in Social Security? Then they have to pay 93 dollars of that for Medicare? Then have to pay 25 to 50 dollars a month for prescription insurance, and still have to pay 20% of the medical costs and prescription costs? No, I do not think Hillary has the right answer, but someone has got to come up with a better one than the one we have.

[JayhawkMom]

Originally Posted by Flying Dutchman

While I believe in Capitalism.........one has to wonder how the world's richest, strongest, and best country can have citizens who cannot get health care? I do not believe in entitlements, and I do not believe in the government controlling health care, I do believe it is the government's job to ensure the safety and health of it's citizens. It is not the ones living beyond their means that suffer from lack of health care, it is the poorest that do. You should never be in a situation of paying your electric bill or paying for medication that you need. While it sounds good to say move or get a better job, go to school, or join the military....but what if those options are not available to you? What then? You just say tough shit? What do you say to the person who has worked their whole life and gets about a thousand dollars a month in Social Security? Then they have to pay 93 dollars of that for Medicare? Then have to pay 25 to 50 dollars a month for prescription insurance, and still have to pay 20% of the medical costs and prescription costs? No, I do not think Hillary has the right answer, but someone has got to come up with a better one than the one we have.

Oh my god...............FD; you are the voice of REASON! You have summed up everthing I've ever wanted to say on this subject (with the exception of Canadian healthcare which Army speaks of in such distain)

I'm as far left as you can get, and I agree; I'm not entirely sure that Hillary has the right answer....but at least she's trying to do SOMETHING....We say we are the "greatest country in the world" and yet places like France, Canada and others cover their citizens with healthcare; and we refuse???? Capitalism? When does pure PROFIT stop and taking care of your biggest asset; CITIZENS begin to take priority? Wait Army...I'm a lefty and STILL believe in Capitalism.......to a POINT! When it becomes about the all mighty dollar, and people have to go to the ER for basic medical care..........something is wrong.

Oh and by the way.......people in America, who have no idea about the Canadian healthcare system........really should find out from people who HAVE family who've been cared for VERY WELL in Canada before they give their ideas on "wait lists for services"..........My Grandfather got a new hip at 90.......without waiting. He, along with most of my mother's family LIVE in Canada........... and are well taken care of by the CANADIAN healthcare system............

[Army_of_One]

Originally Posted by Flying Dutchman

While I believe in Capitalism.........one has to wonder how the world's richest, strongest, and best country can have citizens who cannot get health care? What citizen is refused health care? Health care is available to all. IN FACT poor people get it for free! I do not believe in entitlements, and I do not believe in the government controlling health care, I do believe it is the government's job to ensure the safety and health of it's citizens. So if the gov't is SUPPOSED to ensure the SAFETY and HEALTH of it's citizens then can they tell you to NOT smoke? How about not eating fatty foods? How about the gov't giving YOU the opportunity as a productive citizen to have the opportunity of insurance if you want it? It is not the ones living beyond their means that suffer from lack of health care, it is the poorest that do. Actually there are MORE people in higher incomes w/o health care because they cannot take advantage of social programs. They DO make the decision to not have health care insurance because of their lifestyle. You should never be in a situation of paying your electric bill or paying for medication that you need. While it sounds good to say move or get a better job, go to school, or join the military....but what if those options are not available to you? Who in this country cannot go to school? Is it harder for some? SURE IS, could it be inconvenient? Definitely but there opportunity IS there for ANYONE who wants it...actually it's easier for lower income people to go to school than someone making decent wages...What then? You just say tough shit? What do you say to the person who has worked their whole life and gets about a thousand dollars a month in Social Security? Then they have to pay 93 dollars of that for Medicare? Then have to pay 25 to 50 dollars a month for prescription insurance, and still have to pay 20% of the medical costs and prescription costs? No, I do not think Hillary has the right answer, but someone has got to come up with a better one than the one we have.

I agree out health care system is out of control because of COST. It's expensive because there is NO COMPETITION in the market. I KNOW this is a dumb capitalist idea but when there is competition the consumer wins with lower prices and better service. With our insurance industry and gov't handouts there is no competition so they can charge what they want.

[Army_of_One]

Originally Posted by JayhawkMom

Oh my god...............FD; you are the voice of REASON! You have summed up everthing I've ever wanted to say on this subject (with the exception of Canadian healthcare which Army speaks of in such distain)

I'm as far left as you can get, and I agree; I'm not entirely sure that Hillary has the right answer....but at least she's trying to do SOMETHING....We say we are the "greatest country in the world" and yet places like France, Canada and others cover their citizens with healthcare; and we refuse???? Capitalism? When does pure PROFIT stop and taking care of your biggest asset; CITIZENS begin to take priority? Wait Army...I'm a lefty and STILL believe in Capitalism.......to a POINT! When it becomes about the all mighty dollar, and people have to go to the ER for basic medical care..........something is wrong.

Oh and by the way.......people in America, who have no idea about the Canadian healthcare system........really should find out from people who HAVE family who've been cared for VERY WELL in Canada before they give their ideas on "wait lists for services"..........My Grandfather got a new hip at 90.......without waiting. He, along with most of my mother's family LIVE in Canada........... and are well taken care of by the CANADIAN healthcare system............

The thing is Mom...Look at the tax rate in Canada. I'm sure your grandparents love the system. Being 90 years old they are probably not paying 40+% of their income on taxes. Think about this. In the U.S. our ER's and Doctors are already busy....HOURS wait in the ER. If you add another 30 Million plus people to "gov't run health care" where anyone could go to the doctor for ANYTHING and not have to pay what do you think that would do to the wait time to see a doctor? If the gov't takes over Doctors will make less so there will probably be less doctors. See a trend here? At some point the care gets rationed. NOT to mention the illegals are probably covered in that 30 million people. Great idea!

[Flying Dutchman]

Thats just it Army THE COST. Because of the cost many people cannot get the proper care. If you do not need insurance, and can afford medical care, then there is no problem for that person. There is compitition but it is expensive, which again is the problem. Like I said, the system needs fixed and costs need to be capped. I do not have the answers but I can see the problems.

[Army_of_One]

But GIVING health care to everyone at the expense of you, me and joe taxpayer is NOT the answer Dutch.

[SGT T.]

Ok, so the Gov't offers a health care program to all companys that pay taxes. Then the Gov't is providing health care to employers, but if the average citizen is not employed, no health care for you. As to the 65 and older crowd... medicare? I just don't have an answer to that one. And as for who is going to pay for it... revamp the social security program. I have a better answer than that, but I am tired and I have another LONG mission in the morning, so It'll have to wait.

[Army_of_One]

Originally Posted by SGT T.

Ok, so the Gov't offers a health care program to all companys that pay taxes. Then the Gov't is providing health care to employers, but if the average citizen is not employed, no health care for you. As to the 65 and older crowd... medicare? I just don't have an answer to that one. And as for who is going to pay for it... revamp the social security program. I have a better answer than that, but I am tired and I have another LONG mission in the morning, so It'll have to wait.

Revamping the social security program is a start. Imagine if a percentage of all the money the gov't takes out of a workers check over his lifetime was invested into a fund w/ THAT persons name on it. Over 30 or 40 years say that fund earned 10 or 15 percent return...we would have a lot of Americans retiring in a very comfortable mode...something SOME people in the government do not want because when Americans don't have their hand out to NEED something from the gov't it takes the gov'ts power away...

[Outofdodge]

Originally Posted by Army_of_One

Sounds like a plan that will lead to a long healthy life...and if it doesn't, screw it, you will die a happy, happy man. The best thing about your health plan is that it isn't mandatory, there is no wait for service and it's not costing American's and arm and a leg.

It might be longer and healthier if you didn't keep raising my blood pressue with rhetoric. But otherwise great weather and some monster rainbows were caught. I've been away in more remote areas in the past few years but this little spot in MO might have well been on the moon because I was on the road over two hours before I even began to find out what had happened in the world for four days

Anyway, IMO, spending accounts are a good thing if you're younger and not prone to chronic illenesses. If you are getting to the age when things are starting to break and have not had the chance to build up a nice balance in a spending account you can lose it pretty quick and then be SOL.

The problem with the competition model and price transparency is that the average consumer does not really know what they're buying. I can see it now, your local orthopaedist advertising low cost joint replacement with "re-cycled" or "blemished" implants. My spouse just had her shoulder rebuilt and the "list price" for everyone who had a piece of the action is well over 50K and 20% of that is out of pocket to me. It's creating a hard ship for me and I have reserves and a spending plan, imagine what does to the average working stiff?

[Army_of_One]

Guest columnist
The truth about Canada's ailing health-care system

By Robert J. Cihak

All the major candidates in Canada's recent national election acknowledged that the country's health-care system is failing Canadians. The common prescription, however, was just to spread more taxpayer money on it — the usual nostrum of socialism. In the end, no major candidate had the political courage to tell the truth about the ailing Canadian system.
Indeed, on the other side of the border, Americans such as Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Seattle, fantasize about importing the Canadian health-care dream to the U.S. so that every citizen has comparable "equal access" to medical care.

But more and more Canadians are awakening — not from a dream, but from a nightmare. The results are coming in. After years of government control, the medical system is badly injured and bleeding citizens' hard-earned tax dollars.
A study recently released by the Fraser Institute in Vancouver, B.C., compared industrialized countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) that strive to provide universal health-care access. Among those countries, Canada spends most on its system while ranking among the lowest in such indicators as access to physicians, quality of medical equipment and key health outcomes.

One of the major reasons for this discrepancy is that, unlike other countries in the study that outperformed Canada — such as Sweden, Japan, Australia and France — Canada outlaws most private health care. If the government says it provides a medical service, it's illegal for a Canadian citizen to pay for and get the service privately.
At the same time, to try to keep spending down, the government chips away at the number and variety of covered services. According to another Fraser Institute survey, this means that on average a patient must wait in line 17.7 weeks for hospital treatment.

In 1999, Dr. Richard F. Davies described how delays affected Ontario heart patients scheduled for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. In a single year, just for this one operation, 71 Ontario patients died before surgery, "121 were removed from the list permanently because they had become medically unfit for surgery" and 44 left the province to have their CABG surgery elsewhere, often in the U.S.
In other words, 192 people either died or were too sick to have surgery before they worked their way to the front of the waiting line. Yet, the Ontario population of about 12 million is only 4 percent of the population of the United States.
In an article in the journal Health Affairs, Robert Blendon describes an international survey of hospital administrators in Australia, New Zealand, Great Britain, the U.S. and Canada. When asked for the average waiting time for biopsy of a possible breast cancer in a 50-year-old woman, 21 percent of administrators of Canadian hospitals said more than three weeks; only 1 percent of American hospital administrators gave the same answer.

Fifty percent of the Canadian hospital administrators said the average waiting time for a 65-year-old man who requires a routine hip replacement was more than six months; in contrast, not one American hospital administrator reported waiting periods that long. Eighty-six percent of American hospital administrators said the average waiting time was shorter than three weeks; only 3 percent of Canadian hospital administrators said their patients have this brief a wait.

Canadian physicians' frustration with their inability to provide quality and timely care is resulting in a brain drain. A doctor shortage looms as the nation falls 500 doctors a year short of the 2,500 new physicians it needs, according to Sally C. Pipes, president of the San Francisco-based Pacific Research Institute.

Another casualty of the lengthy waiting periods is Canada's much-vaunted equal access to medical treatment. Even though medical emergencies allow some people to jump ahead in the waiting line — making others wait longer — a survey published in the Annals of Internal Medicine medical journal found that more than 90 percent of heart specialists had "been involved in the care of a patient who received preferential access" to cardiac care because of non-medical reasons including the patient's social standing or personal connections with the treating physician.

The Canadian system works fine for minor problems, but danger lies ahead as baby boomers age and more serious illnesses afflict them. Call it "Canadazation," the myth of high-quality, "free" care. Its real costs in human suffering are ones that U.S. proponents don't want you to know about.