Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News > On Healthcare in the U.S.
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Thread: On Healthcare in the U.S. Reply to Thread
Title:
Message
Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.


Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
Jun 19th, 2003 05:52 PM
KevinTheOmnivore Well, the state of NYC, post-Giuliani, is another topic in its entierty (sp?). Just read Newfield's book "the Full Rudy". Very interesting, although abstract.

Anyway, in corelation to the topic at hand, do you not justify your tax dollars going towards the health of those who work in such conditions? Did they too simply make bad choices? If that's so, how many "choices" do Americans have these days???
Jun 19th, 2003 05:48 PM
El Blanco I think he is just a disgruntled Red Sox fan who is doing everything he can to flush the City down the crapper.
Jun 19th, 2003 05:41 PM
KevinTheOmnivore
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Blanco
Seriously, my main issue with this is the timing. We are in the middle of a budget crisis. Bloomberg is cutting firehouses, police, sanitation, and the schools are floundering. Somehow, he is finding the funding to enforce this law which does nothing than tell grown adults how to behave.
Well, in Bloomberg's defense, he was left a city budget in 2001 that left him few options but to cut services AND raise fees. I oppose the fair hike, I can agree to a commuter tax, though.

I don't see his justification for this act, other than a moral crusade. However, since the state is already persuing it themselves as well, he may have been left with little choice. Maybe he wanted to install his own version, thus having more of a say over it. I dunno.

But I digress....
Jun 19th, 2003 05:34 PM
El Blanco For some odd reason, I thought that was the one that banned smoking in government buildings. Brain lock.

YA, I do oppose that. Mainly because I frequent NYC bars and flipping out the Zippo to light a girl's smoke was my main ice breaker. Fucking cock blocking lawmakers.

Seriously, my main issue with this is the timing. We are in the middle of a budget crisis. Bloomberg is cutting firehouses, police, sanitation, and the schools are floundering. Somehow, he is finding the funding to enforce this law which does nothing than tell grown adults how to behave.
Jun 19th, 2003 05:02 PM
KevinTheOmnivore
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Blanco
Do me a favor and remind me that act. I think there were a few specifics I was opposed to, but understood the spirit of the law.
I opposed it on libertarian grounds. Ya know, as of July 19th(?), no more smoking in bars, diners, various restaurants, etc...?

But my point is this: The bill was half assed in one way that it didn't extend to REALLY clean "indoor air" in NY. It still left plant workers and other labor types exposed to polluted air in the work place. On the other hand, before the bill was proposed, it allowed diners and bars to expose their workers to such conditions. People like waitresses at diners accept this, b/c they need to pay the bills and feed their kids.

So, do THOSE people not deserve the benefits of a single-payer system, or do they deserve to suffer for making poor "lifestyle choices"???
Jun 19th, 2003 02:09 PM
Preechr Major differences in opinion on how economics is supposed to function, I suppose. I think I see where you're coming from, but I guess I just view that as a less efficient path.

No matter who gets the job done, we are talking about the efforts of individuals. If every individual works as hard and effectively as possible, the job will get done well in either situation. The only difference between my way and your way is the motivation of those individuals to do the work well.

I agree that the goal should be Health, but I don't trust people to be motivated by unselfish goals. They should be, but they aren't ever in any reliable way. I would not set out to build a structure as important as Healthcare on a foundation of trust in something I don't believe exists.

Don't get me wrong... If you and I were to be solely responsible for Healthcare, and somehow were able to get the job done, we would have pure motivation and I'm sure everything would be just peachy. Most people aren't wonderful like us. They don't get out of bed every morning because they can't wait to lend a helping hand. They get up to get to work so they can sell their time yet another day, in hopes of one day being able to buy a jetski.

Profit motivates people. Lack of Profit is a clear indication your methods for attaining it are flawed. Bankruptcy is the last step for stubborn and prideful companies. There are no negative consequences for the Healthcare system in your Social plan. My Capitalist plan forces the companies that participate to constantly tailor their methods to fit consumer demand better than their competition.

I understand all the old reasons why we should be scared to death of cold, heartless Capitalism. Here's a link to an incomplete concept you might appreciate. http://www.4ranters.com/detail.php?id=20

The problems we associate with Capitalism do not stem from it's application. The problem is that we won't let it be fully applied. It's just too scary, I guess.

That's a whole nuther discussion, however... As I said above: I see your point, but I disagree that government control of anything that can be handled privately is in any way good or better. The closer the solution is to the problem, the more appropriate the solution is to that particular problem. The furthest thing from any of your problems within America is the Federal Government.

I'm going to go re-evaluate the beginnings of this thread. I'm starting to think that if I were to stop reading "Socialism" into everything I might be close to agreeing with whomever started this thing...
Jun 19th, 2003 02:00 PM
ranxer alrighty, yes i can agree that! too many do play the victim and blame others for thier problems.

i thought you had been referring to americans not taking care of corporate abuse.. now i get that you were referring to health.

/salute um, yes my anti-corporate views tend to jump out a bit fast. :/
Jun 19th, 2003 01:50 PM
El Blanco
Quote:
and blanco.. you think that might makes right? you think that if you are stronger than me you have the right to boss me around?
Never said anything like that. I just don't see how you ca demand that health care providers change when we are the main reason the system got to where it is.

People not taking care of themselves.

Doctors getting kick backs for sending people in for expensive procedures like MRIs and such when it is totally unnessacery.

People who want magic pills to fix all their problems instead of preventing them in the first place.

I do believe that the government should put a leash on companies, especially in the health care industry, but who the hell honestly believes that federalizing the industry would improve a damn thing?

Quote:
i'm sorry but America is nearly professional at blaming the victim
Bullshit. We are 100x better at playing the victim.

"What do you mean liting a stick on fire and inhaling its exhaust is bad for you. So what the box has a warning from the nation's #1 doctor that these things are dangerous. I'm suing"

"What do you mean a vehicle with an 18' wheelbase flips over on 20 degree turnat 80 mph? I'm suing!"

"what do you mean eating meat that been soaking in beef for eight hours for my lunch and dinner every day for the last 20 years is bad for me and my kids? I'm suing!"

Fuck. When did litigation take over for our common sense?

And one more thing: 60% of insurance costs go to lawyers. Hmmm, wonder how that happened.
Jun 19th, 2003 01:21 PM
ranxer preechr
Quote:
Where do you guys get your trust for politicians? How have government employees and beaurocrats earned your respect?
so you are responding to my statement that government should be able to fix all three? i didn't mean that i expected them to fix it and i should just wait for it to be fixed. I meant that in my view it is the ROLE of government to set the rules for business such that our rights are protected.. leveling the playing field so that profit is not the main focus of healthcare.. health should be the main focus of healthcare.

I am active in politics not passive so i mean nothing less than citizen lobbying, campaigning, and organizing to get these views out there.


and blanco.. you think that might makes right? you think that if you are stronger than me you have the right to boss me around?
you think that if you can get away with something you should go ahead and do it? like jeeze the guy didnt lock his car so he must not want to keep his stereo! i'm sorry but America is nearly professional at blaming the victim.. whether its a welfare mother or an Iraqi its the norm
Jun 18th, 2003 08:52 PM
El Blanco they just replaid it. It was pretty funny.
Jun 18th, 2003 08:26 PM
Miss Modular Did anyone see The Daily Show last night? Ed Helms was reporting on Senior Citizens getting their prescription drugs from Mexico.
Jun 18th, 2003 08:06 PM
Preechr
Quote:
Originally Posted by ranxer
preechr.. is the
1. litigious society problem the biggest drain on healthcare? sure that's one of them, but theres a long list.. if that's the biggest problem id say..
It's the trunk of the tree. My first comments addressed the root system: The government wants to control the significant chunk of our GDP that is Healthcare. It has allowed free-reign of lawyers on the system to that end, hoping to destabilize the structure until public perception shifts to how you guys are seeing it and government is called in to fix it all up real nice...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ranxer
2. corporate markups is the second largest, sheesh we pay tax dollars to help these drug companies develop drugs often in college labs then they turn around and markup 1000's of % and sell them back to the folks that helped them develop the damn drugs.
And all those folks buy boats, right? I'm not going to argue that drug prices are rediculous, but I will say that is a product of prices being so hidden from consumers, mostly. There are some truly amazing drugs out there, and we should expect to pay the price for the research that produces innovation imbedded into the cost of the drugs we need. I personally feel that we take much more drugs than necessary.

A Doctor that prescribes a drug instead of actually treating the patient is only ever passing the liability off on the drug maker. Chances are, in most cases, she was just not willing to tell the patient that they need to quit whining and straighten out their life. Doctors are truly making their living against all odds generally, and they have developed a very belligerent attitude about their business and customers. You can hardly blame them. You will not leave a Doctor's office without treatment of some kind. It's a business.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ranxer
3. then we have ad campaigns.. drug companies spend billions on marketing. capitalist competition for the most profits might rival the other two problems in total cost. the drug companies are the single largest return on investment business in the country.. is this health care or wealthcare?
*resists urge to capitalize, edit and puntuate for you*

Nobody is watching the back door, and all the horses are getting out. I agree that it's a racket. I'm pissed that the government is taking the stand that they will not help fix the problem at all until we reliquish all control of the entire industry to it completely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ranxer
so, government should be able to fix all three. and with the money saved we should be able to cover everybody with the basics especially if we work hard on prevention.
We could work on prevention now, but we aren't. The government could be making us more health conscious and doing what it can to stem rising Healthcare costs, but it isn't. I fail to see how removing competition will lower prices. I fail to see how rewarding government for destroying a perfectly good Healthcare system and endangering God knows how many people is appropriate.

Where do you guys get your trust for politicians? How have government employees and beaurocrats earned your respect?

When it comes right down to it, I want to live in a world where people get fired for doing a shitty job, especially when lives are at stake. Socializing Healthcare would eliminate that from the system, and we would suffer for it.

This board is constantly reminding me of that "Simpsons" where Homer ran for office under the premise of "Can't Somebody ELSE Do It?!"

I know the mess that is American Life seems awfully complex sometimes. That is no excuse to throw the baby out with the bath-water. Instead of throwing up your collective arms and calling what has been built over the last couple hundred years a complete waste of time and then heading back to the drawing board, why don't you look for the easy answers?

Sure, if you build the system from the ground up you will all of a sudden understand it... but just because you don't understand the system we have now doesn't mean you have the right to destroy it and replace it with something you patched together freestyle on a message board...

Sure, what we have now looks from the outside to be wholesale profiteering with no concern for patients. How would you feel, having devoted 8 years to a Doctorate and your entire financial future to a system that could ruin you at the random whim of some jerk looking to sue anybody he can to avoid working for a living, only to find out that it's a near certainty that in a matter of years you'll probably be out of a job, or, at best, you'll be a government employee.

Keep in mind... their ain't no Doctor's Union. It's illegal. I'd rather be an underwater welder, personally...
Jun 18th, 2003 08:04 PM
El Blanco Do me a favor and remind me that act. I think there were a few specifics I was opposed to, but understood the spirit of the law.
Jun 18th, 2003 07:19 PM
KevinTheOmnivore
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Blanco
And exactly how many people get cancer for no apperent reason?
Come on, man. You know that everything and nothing gives you cancer.

Quote:
Its one thing to go to work to feed your family and get sick from pollutants. Its completly different to choose to live a shitty lifestyle.
Do you eat a lot of red meat? If we had a universal coverage system, would I mind if my tax dollars went towards your heart disease...? No. Why? Because I'll be happy knowing that I get coverage through the system. For every one over-weight smoker I'm supporting, there'll be equally as many justified health problems that I will be aiding to prevent or cure.

Quote:
If people quit all the smoking etc.... healthcare would more affordable for everyone else.
Let me ask you this. Were you in favor or against the indoor clean air act passed in New York???
Jun 18th, 2003 05:03 PM
ranxer el blanco.. i thought you might get that i meant something along the lines of el corporate. you seem to be much more interested in blaming people for letting the corporate monster do whatever it wants than accepting that corporations Are doing whatever they want. I'm much more interested in blaming the perpetrators rather than the victims. i think we should revoke the corporate charters that give corporations more rights than human beings.

preechr.. is the
1. litigious society problem the biggest drain on healthcare? sure that's one of them, but theres a long list.. if that's the biggest problem id say..
2. corporate markups is the second largest, sheesh we pay tax dollars to help these drug companies develop drugs often in college labs then they turn around and markup 1000's of % and sell them back to the folks that helped them develop the damn drugs.
3. then we have ad campaigns.. drug companies spend billions on marketing. capitalist competition for the most profits might rival the other two problems in total cost. the drug companies are the single largest return on investment business in the country.. is this health care or wealthcare?

so, government should be able to fix all three. and with the money saved we should be able to cover everybody with the basics especially if we work hard on prevention.
Jun 18th, 2003 03:45 PM
AChimp
Quote:
Our ancestors didn't, so why the fuck should it be required for me?
Umm... I can show you many instances throughout history where our ancestors DIDN'T have life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness, Vinth, so don't get all worked up about what amounts to a pile of horseshit.

In fact, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness haven't been in practice for all that long when you look at the entire history of civilization. People had to start those ideas somewhere, so why not do the same with healthcare?

Oh wait, you shouldn't have to pay for all the other 300 million Americans that would partake of it, since all the burden would be placed on YOU, naturally.
Jun 18th, 2003 03:11 PM
Preechr AWWW!!! See, now you've hurt my feelings... I really thought we had a breakthrough there for a minute, too....

I'll rephrase myself then, since you seem to be taking what I said as offensive: I don't remember exactly what went on between you and Erik, but please don't let one guy get under your skin so much that you hate the whole community he rarely posts in. I don't know what it is exactly people see as the great challenge in pissing him off, but years upon years of dealing with that has taken its toll on his tolerance.

You seemed to have fun with your time on Anti, and I think you'd enjoy the Filter these days just as much. I actually won't be trying to complete your conversion over to Raging, Libertarian Capitalist here, but if you're interested in why I see that as possible, if not inevitable, or in how I plan to do so, please feel free to register over there and find your answers.

HAVE A NICE DAY.
Jun 18th, 2003 02:36 PM
Zosimus
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preechr
For example: You, Zosimus. I think I called you a closet Capitalist once. Maybe I've yet to prove that to you, but I'm not done trying.
Knock yourself out trying to prove that point! In fact forget about the point...just knock yourself out period!
Jun 18th, 2003 01:52 PM
Preechr I'm gonna try to limit myself to the topic here. I REALLY want to address that whole Socialism IS Democracy thing-a-ma-bob, though...

*breathes in deeply*

*counts to ten*

Ok... Trying to keep this thing to actually arguable topics, I guess I shouldn't talk about things that may or may not happen in the future, as that is subjective. Let's nail down what we can as Fact by looking only at the present and the past...

Before, I said that it was a Fact that as government has gotten more and more involved in Healthcare, Heathcare has suffered. Somebody said that was my opinion about the future or something, but I meant that as an observation of where we are right now as compared to how things were before our American Socialist Revolution began.

These are always subjective comparisons, because we live in a totally different world now than America was in the 50s and 60s. I'll treat it as fairly as I can, though...

My statement is partially wrong on it's face. It's not just government interference that has screwed the Healthcare system up. It's also the things that the government HASN'T done that's making things worse. DC is so excited about getting their hands in the pie that they are ignoring the stuff they're actually required to do like making sure doctors can treat patients without getting their asses sued off.

Somebody mentioned the rediculous costs of Medical Malpractice Insurance. Did you guys know that doctors are the only private segment of workers in America that are not allowed to speak with a group voice? This is ostensibly because we don't want to experience the Healthcare strikes that plauge other countries (incidentally, doctors are striking primarily in countries with Socialized Healthcare...) The problem is, that's a trust contract, and the government has continually broken their end of the deal.

Anybody can sue anyone for anything, and most cases settle regardless of merit due to the exhorbitant costs of defending against even the most unsubstantiated claim. This is the primary factor behind what we see as price gouging for medical services. Basically the same thing happens to Pharmaceutical companies, driving up the prices of medication.

Here's an example: Any of you have pets? Chances are, at some point your Vet has given you some Benedryl for your pet to take, for whatever reason. Dogs and Cats can't sue, so the same damn Benedryl you would buy at the pharmacy for YOU is WAY cheaper when you buy it for your pet.

Hopefully, I'm not over-simplifying this. I can be more detailed if you wish... Basically the secondary point I'm making here is that it is the government's molly-coddling of lawyers and the law-trade that's helping to screw up Healthcare, NOT the system itself. The mandatory guarantee that no one can be turned away from a Hospital only encourages folks to go to the Emergency Room every time they get a freakin COLD, get treated for free, and sue the Hospital on a bogus charge of negligence... bah... This gets way too complicated way too fast....

Ok... Back to the future... Let's say you get your dream of Socialized Medicine to become a reality. The very first thing that is going to change will be your ability to sue for Malpractice. There's no way the government will even attempt to Manage Healthcare under the current rules that are savaging medical service and supplies providers. My question is: Why can't we just do this now?

I'll answer that! Government wants to control Healthcare. It is doing what it needs to do to make that happen.
Jun 18th, 2003 01:09 PM
The One and Only...
Quote:
Originally Posted by VinceZeb
Do you think taxes comes out of thin air? It comes from my pocket, your pocket, EVERYONES pocket who pays taxes. And the people who are most likely to take advantage of "free" medicine are people who a) can afford to pay for it themselves but choose not to and b) people WHO DON'T PAY IN TAXES!
a) It depends on how well off they are. If they are a multi-billionare, then that minor tax increase to cover healthcare would cost them way more than it would otherwise. So it's really a losing situation.

b) If they don't pay taxes, they are most likely breaking the law. That carries problems in and of itself. The few people in the U.S. that don't have to pay taxes are just that: few. It not break the system.

One could also argue that people who don't pay taxes abuse the system with free education, etc. in which case the entire concept of taxes is unfair. I certainly hope you don't suggest we stop all governmental services.
Jun 18th, 2003 12:17 PM
FS
Quote:
Originally Posted by VinceZeb
For the people that think the government could do health care well: Wow. If you do not realize that government will fuck up a 2 car funeral, then there is something wrong with you.
Or, if the government will hypothetically fuck up a two car funeral, maybe there's something wrong with the government. Apparently, this is the same government you turn to to "protect the rights of the citzens, to protect our borders, and to help the country in dire situations." Do you trust them not to fuck up in these matters?

Quote:
Originally Posted by VinceZeb
If the government starts dolling out free medicine, medicine prices will rise becuase people will start demanding whatever they want, becuase they do not "pay" for it.
Now, I'm not a US resident, but you folks worth with doctor's prescriptions just as we do, right? Or can you just waltz into any pharmacist's and demand 400 doses of the most powerful painkiller they've got in stock? Free healthcare would not mean medicine is a free-for-all. You'd get your money back for the drugs that a doctor says, in writing, you need. Something against the common cold would be yours to pay for. If you'd want medicine usage down to put the prospective costs of free healthcare down, maybe it would be sensible to tell doctors not to throw around descriptions for painkillers and antidepressants like it's confetti. It's really not a healthy situation anymore when any kid before the age of 12 can name at least a dozen kinds of legal brain drugs. I am of course sketching a caricature of the situation here, but I do believe leashing doctors a little would do a lot to bring down overal medical costs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VinceZeb
Healthcare is not a right. Sorry, folks, but you have the "right" of life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness and property. Those are the rights you are born with. Healthcare, no matter how much the Hildabeast sits there and screams about it, is not something you should have for being human. Our ancestors didn't, so why the fuck should it be required for me?
You also have the right to safety. To a certain degree, protection from physical harm, and the right to clean living conditions. Yes, to a certain extent, you have the right to good health. I'm not saying that the government needs to hold your hand and guide you through life as a bubble-boy. But healthcare in the hands of the government could make for a much more stable service than having it based on individuals. It's not rocket science. It's not a two car funeral. It's setting up a system that pays people back their legal prescriptions, or subsidizing pharmacists and hospitals (more). Your comment about ancestors is, as always, very amusing. Be sure to take down a bear for me this weekend, or there'll be no eatin'.
Jun 18th, 2003 11:33 AM
kellychaos Before evolving into a wholesale socialism and make our government a larger bureaucracy than it already is, let's consider what a government supposed to be. Governments are supposed to regulate private enterprise, not take over their jobs. A little help is one thing, especially as a number of citizens have already paid into their right to this help, but total healthcare is a completely differenct issue. Why not consider changes to regulations that would limit the ridiculous price gouging in pharmacology and other forms of medical treatment? Implement more stringent laws for insurance fraud. Then maybe the insurance companies wouldn't be so fearful of their payouts and legitimate coverage may increase ... maybe even at a cheaper rate. Put a cap on the amount one can make from medical malpractice lawsuits or, at the very least, limit some of the frivilous lawsuits that are being heard. Then, perhaps, malpractice insurance may come down to a reasonable level so that medical profession wouldn't be so apprehensive in their treatment and may actually be able to stay in business charging customers reasonable rates for their services rendered. Although I'm not a big fan of private insurance, they ARE a business and I can see why they charge the way they do with the shape our healthcare system is in.
Jun 18th, 2003 11:21 AM
Carnivore
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Blanco
Based on what? I may be tough, but I don't want paramedics making sure little old ladies are insured before they start prepping them after a heart attack.
It has nothing to do with whether they are insured or not. It has to do with whether or not there is a genuine need for them to be transported by ambulance. Probably 40% of the people we transport do not need an ambulance and would be better off making an appointment with their PCP instead of going to the ER.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhukov
Sorry to butt in....... Socilaism IS Democracy.
I believe it was Max who pointed out at an earlier date that dictatorship and socialism are not mutually exclusive just as democracy and laissez faire capitalism are not mutually exclusive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clambake
For the people that think the government could do health care well: Wow. If you do not realize that government will fuck up a 2 car funeral, then there is something wrong with you.
You're a moronic asshole. If the government was actually accountable for its actions, this would change. Too bad they're more worried about pissing off campaign contributors and corporations than voters.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinth
It is not the government's job to be "fair", "compassionate", or "kind". Our US government is supposed to protect the rights of the citizens, to protect our borders, and to help the country in dire situations.
Thank you for your opinion on the function of government. Duhhh... let me just check my pocket PC and see if I care about your ignorant opinion. Oh, look! I don't! Hehehehe

Some of us are willing to take it upon ourselves to ensure the well-being of our fellow human beings. Some of us are selfish, arrogant, ignorant pricks who, while claiming to be followers of the Christian faith, care nothing about the neighbors they are supposed to love as they love themselves.
Jun 18th, 2003 10:36 AM
VinceZeb Do you think taxes comes out of thin air? It comes from my pocket, your pocket, EVERYONES pocket who pays taxes. And the people who are most likely to take advantage of "free" medicine are people who a) can afford to pay for it themselves but choose not to and b) people WHO DON'T PAY IN TAXES!
Jun 18th, 2003 10:05 AM
The One and Only...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preechr
And to the other one that interrupted to mention a flat tax... What's the appeal over a consumption tax?
It was a reply to your comment on taking money from the rich. With a consumption tax, an argument could be made that it would not be entirely fair. That is something I did not wish to delve into with this thread.
This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may 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 Off

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:14 PM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.