• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Now who was for subsidized health care again?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: Specop 007

It should be hard to become a doctor! Have you ever actually witnessed first hand a medical procedure?
This isnt sticking your arm up a cows ass to get it pregnent, or getting Mr. Cuddles your 6 foot Boa to eat. This is dealing with the lives of our loved ones.

Seeing how all the Democrats always want to "make things better for the children" I just dont see why they want to make medical care worse! 😕

Since, it easier to become a doctor in other countries, one would assume, their doctors would be more incompetent and more people would die. This however, is not the case. As a matter of fact, the US is importing some of these doctors. Obviously, the AMA is trying to limit this. Another example is xrays.. a lot of xrays are being sent abroad for medical personal to look at because of the quality of the foreign personal and because it is cheaper.

If you artificially limit the number of doctors, you get doctors charging $$$$$$$$$ for the most basic routines. Getting someone to look at a sprained ankle should not cost $$$$$$$$, but yet it does.. at least in the United States.. Why is this?

For the most complicated surgeries, a "better" surgeon maybe required. However, even for these cases, foreign doctors have been able to perform these operations cheaper (yes, other doctors in other countries have been able to perform complicated procedures like open heart surgury, etc.. its not that only American surgeons are able to do this; as a matter of fact, some of the best medical facilities are not located in the US).

Remember the US pays the most in health care, but yet their health and longevity are eclipsed by other countries that have "lower barriers to entry" for doctors.... obviously, I'm not saying the US health care is bad, I'm just saying their are better options.

 
Originally posted by: GroundedSailor
Read this response to the boston article. Basically the numbers they are using are incorrect. Suggest you read the other links contained in that blog.
http://blog.hcfama.org/?p=1421
01 Feb 2008
Correction to the Media: $400 Million Isn?t The Number. It?s $156 Million.

How much more is health reform going to cost the state next year?

The answer is $156 million, not $400 million (details below). If you follow MA health reform, there are a lot of reasons you might think $400 million is the bad news number.

A glance at the Globe?s top story last Thursday might make you think it?s $400 million. The lead: ?Spending on the state?s landmark health initiative would rise by more than $400 million next year, representing one of the largest increases in the $28.2 billion state budget??

In Bob Kuttner?s Globe column Monday, the $400 million gets worse: ?the Globe recently disclosed [that] the program?s costs are outstripping its projections by ? $400 million next year.? Similarly, yesterday?s Wall Street Journal op-ed by Shikha Dalmia (no link), states that ?The state health-care bill for fiscal 2008-2009 is expected to touch $400 million ? 85% more than originally projected.? Today, CNN?s respected Dr. Sanjay Gupta reported that ?While more people than ever are covered in Massachusetts, the cost overruns have been more than $400 million.?

So now, $400 million isn?t just the amount of spending growth, it?s being called all unanticipated growth and cost overruns. The story has falsely morphed to mean that health reform spending will be $400 million above projections ? that state officials had predicted no growth next year. This in a program that is still ramping up enrollment and subject to medical inflation like everything else. Substantial spending growth has always been anticipated. It?s not all cost overruns.

$400 million isn?t even the relevant number.

Yes, health reform spending in the governor?s budget is projected to increase by $402 million next year. But Medicaid is a matching program ? more spending means more federal help. The revenue expected for next year should go up by $246 million.

This leaves a much more manageable $156 million increase that must be filled from state resources.

So the ?$400 million? isn?t all unanticipated and isn?t all coming from state taxpayers.

Once bad data gets out, it?s almost impossible to recall. The enemies of chapter 58 are all over this. A $400 million cost overrun has been reported in papers all over (like Utah), in Republican blogs, in influential California health news digests, press releases and more.

How do you get back all the feathers, once the pillow has been burst?
Interesting. The "relevant number" is $156 million because the rest of the increase isn't paid for by Mass residents. It must be free money that falls from the sky. There's no dispute that the spending will actually rise by $400 million, but they only care about what Mass residents have to pay. Mass has 2.1% of the population. I can easily imagine a federally-run program will have a proportional overrun because they always understate the costs to get a program approved. So that $400 million would proportionally be $20 billion on a national level. And there would be no ohe else to pay, unlike Mass who can blithely ignore any increase covered by magic, free money from Medicare matching funds.

Who can reasonably conclude that a government-run health care system would be "better" in any way, shape of form? There's not one single major government program which isn't riddled by scammers, waste and giant contracts being shoveled to favored companies. It's quite simplistic to say it is automatically "better" to provide health care for everyone and discount the cost. I don't believe I have a right to all the health care tools, medicines and practitioners which are available. Like anything else, wealthy people can afford better health care. Good for them. It should make people want to work to be one of them. Put in a program where health care is rationed to everyone and we'll be on the way to mediocre health care. Skoorb's examples are very relevant.

I have relatives who work in health care. They see what happens when people can demand services without worrying about who is paying for it. People with colds go to the ER because it doesn't cost them anything. People who want a ride to the doctor call an ambulance because they will take them to the hospital. The password is "chest pains".

You have a cold and buy a 80 cent box of tissues. They go to the ER and cost taxpayers $500.

We already spend over 50% of the entire federal budget on taking money from some people and giving it to others. I guess we won't be satisfied until it's even higher. No, I don't think anyone has a right to an all-you-can-eat health care buffet.
 
Originally posted by: Moonbeam


Right, to hell with the 47 million, if you believe such numbers, who don't have health care. Nero got the best health care in Rome too.

something like half of those are people in their mid 20s who would rather buy a big tv than medical insurance.


don't confuse refusing to purchase medical insurance with not having health care.


lets soak the young and healthy, to pay for the old and sick in yet another regressive tax scheme for the sake of 'progress.' (retirees are the wealthiest segment of society when grouping by age, by that measure, SS is super regressive)




medical care is scarce and must be rationed in one form or another. until society at large recognizes that fact we will not accomplish anything.






oh, and freegeeks, not only are we subsidizing your medical care pretty directly by providing the profit motive that advances the practice of medicine, we're also subsidizing your defense so you have to devote very little to that as well, and can spend a larger % on fending off death by nature rather than by invaders.

and perhaps you could get a bigger discount on medicine if you ship pharma execs a few more cases of :beer:
 
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Originally posted by: Specop 007

Seeing how all the Democrats always want to "make things better for the children" I just dont see why they want to make medical care worse! 😕

What is worse for children.....

Not being able to see any doctor at all or having to live in shelters after your family loses their home to pay for medical treatment...

Or

Seeing a doctor that you are required to wait a couple of hours for?

Also, can you provide evidence re:your assumption that the care will get worse?

Already did in the thread i started a bit ago.
Can you provide proof children are homeless because they had to get medical care? I mean gee, it sure brings a tear to my eye with all these made up bullshit emotional arguments but lets see some hard data.

Frankly, I'm more concerned about crack babies, babies cut out and abused children then I am kids going homeless because of medical care.
 
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: palehorse74

Belgium has 1/30th the total population of the U.S., and then there's THIS...

Belgium's extensive welfare state is supported by exceptionally high government spending and income tax rates. Overall tax revenue is an uncommonly high percent of GDP, and Belgium's government size score is 50 percentage points worse than the world average...Belgium's income tax rate is one of the world's highest, and its corporate tax rate is also high. The top income tax rate is 50 percent, and the top corporate tax rate is 34 percent (a 33 percent tax rate and 3 percent surcharge). Other taxes include a value-added tax (VAT), a transport tax, and a property tax. In the most recent year, overall tax revenue as a percentage of GDP was 44.9 percent.
you think that might have something to do with it? nahh... 😕

So? In the end their standard of living is higher... isn't that the whole point?

And who determines the standards?
 
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: Specop 007
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: Specop 007


Are you familiar with the saying "You get what you pay for"?

If someonee else is paying, rest assured it will NOT be as good as if you pay.
It just may cost you more money. Of course thats why you shouldnt be a slackass and maybe try to better yourself so that you can afford the best treatment the world has ever known. 🙂

Are you familiar with "Charge as much as the market will bear ?"

You honestly think that hospitals and doctors only charge what they have to , to provide good service ?

Do you work for the AMA ?

Except the .gov sets prices below what the market can bear. Hence long lines, denied care and people coming to.....you guessed it, the good ole US of A to have healthcare treatments done.

Whens the last time you heard of someone going to Canada to have treatment?

strange, in Belgium we have socialized healthcare and there are ZERO waiting lists here

can you explain why our evil system can manage this?

Belgium has no poor blacks, illegal mexicans, trailer white trash, nor poor asian immigrants. Of course in a country consisting mostly of upper middle class white elitest europeans UHC will work.
 
Originally posted by: JS80
Belgium has no poor blacks, illegal mexicans, trailer white trash, nor poor asian immigrants. Of course in a country consisting mostly of upper middle class white elitest europeans UHC will work.

Makes me wonder if people from other countries can sneak into Belgium and get free emergency medical care.
 
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: Moonbeam


Right, to hell with the 47 million, if you believe such numbers, who don't have health care. Nero got the best health care in Rome too.

something like half of those are people in their mid 20s who would rather buy a big tv than medical insurance.


don't confuse refusing to purchase medical insurance with not having health care.


lets soak the young and healthy, to pay for the old and sick in yet another regressive tax scheme for the sake of 'progress.' (retirees are the wealthiest segment of society when grouping by age, by that measure, SS is super regressive)




medical care is scarce and must be rationed in one form or another. until society at large recognizes that fact we will not accomplish anything.






oh, and freegeeks, not only are we subsidizing your medical care pretty directly by providing the profit motive that advances the practice of medicine, we're also subsidizing your defense so you have to devote very little to that as well, and can spend a larger % on fending off death by nature rather than by invaders.

and perhaps you could get a bigger discount on medicine if you ship pharma execs a few more cases of :beer:

all bla bla bla, nothing more, nothing less

you guys are always repeating the same old story, I can guess what's next "we stormed the beaches of Normandy or else everyone would be speaking German"
 
Originally posted by: JS80

Belgium has no poor blacks, illegal mexicans, trailer white trash, nor poor asian immigrants. Of course in a country consisting mostly of upper middle class white elitest europeans UHC will work.

GDP per capita in the US is much higher then it is in Belgium. About $10,000 per year higher. ($36,000 vs. $46,000) So, how is it again they are all "upper middle class"?
 
Originally posted by: kranky
Originally posted by: JS80
Belgium has no poor blacks, illegal mexicans, trailer white trash, nor poor asian immigrants. Of course in a country consisting mostly of upper middle class white elitest europeans UHC will work.

Makes me wonder if people from other countries can sneak into Belgium and get free emergency medical care.

nothing is free, in the end it's the tax payer who pays the bill but to answer your question, nobody is refused medical care and this includes illegals
 
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: Specop 007
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: Specop 007


Are you familiar with the saying "You get what you pay for"?

If someonee else is paying, rest assured it will NOT be as good as if you pay.
It just may cost you more money. Of course thats why you shouldnt be a slackass and maybe try to better yourself so that you can afford the best treatment the world has ever known. 🙂

Are you familiar with "Charge as much as the market will bear ?"

You honestly think that hospitals and doctors only charge what they have to , to provide good service ?

Do you work for the AMA ?

Except the .gov sets prices below what the market can bear. Hence long lines, denied care and people coming to.....you guessed it, the good ole US of A to have healthcare treatments done.

Whens the last time you heard of someone going to Canada to have treatment?

strange, in Belgium we have socialized healthcare and there are ZERO waiting lists here

can you explain why our evil system can manage this?

Belgium has no poor blacks, illegal mexicans, trailer white trash, nor poor asian immigrants. Of course in a country consisting mostly of upper middle class white elitest europeans UHC will work.

we have a big north-african immigrant population that faces the same problems like the Mexicans and poor blacks so your point is mood
 
Originally posted by: Nebor
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: Specop 007
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: Specop 007


Are you familiar with the saying "You get what you pay for"?

If someonee else is paying, rest assured it will NOT be as good as if you pay.
It just may cost you more money. Of course thats why you shouldnt be a slackass and maybe try to better yourself so that you can afford the best treatment the world has ever known. 🙂

Are you familiar with "Charge as much as the market will bear ?"

You honestly think that hospitals and doctors only charge what they have to , to provide good service ?

Do you work for the AMA ?

Except the .gov sets prices below what the market can bear. Hence long lines, denied care and people coming to.....you guessed it, the good ole US of A to have healthcare treatments done.

Whens the last time you heard of someone going to Canada to have treatment?

strange, in Belgium we have socialized healthcare and there are ZERO waiting lists here

can you explain why our evil system can manage this?

It's simple: your socialized government health care prioritizes people into classes deserving of treatment and those not deserving. So those who know they can't be treated never even bother going to the hospital, because if they do and they're, for example, elderly, they'll be euthenized on the spot to save the state some money.

I hope you are joking or else you are just retarded and should be euthenized on the spot
 
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: Specop 007
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: Specop 007


Are you familiar with the saying "You get what you pay for"?

If someonee else is paying, rest assured it will NOT be as good as if you pay.
It just may cost you more money. Of course thats why you shouldnt be a slackass and maybe try to better yourself so that you can afford the best treatment the world has ever known. 🙂

Are you familiar with "Charge as much as the market will bear ?"

You honestly think that hospitals and doctors only charge what they have to , to provide good service ?

Do you work for the AMA ?

Except the .gov sets prices below what the market can bear. Hence long lines, denied care and people coming to.....you guessed it, the good ole US of A to have healthcare treatments done.

Whens the last time you heard of someone going to Canada to have treatment?

strange, in Belgium we have socialized healthcare and there are ZERO waiting lists here

can you explain why our evil system can manage this?

Belgium has 1/30th the total population of the U.S., and then there's THIS...

Belgium's extensive welfare state is supported by exceptionally high government spending and income tax rates. Overall tax revenue is an uncommonly high percent of GDP, and Belgium's government size score is 50 percentage points worse than the world average...Belgium's income tax rate is one of the world's highest, and its corporate tax rate is also high. The top income tax rate is 50 percent, and the top corporate tax rate is 34 percent (a 33 percent tax rate and 3 percent surcharge). Other taxes include a value-added tax (VAT), a transport tax, and a property tax. In the most recent year, overall tax revenue as a percentage of GDP was 44.9 percent.
you think that might have something to do with it? nahh... 😕

what's your point, I never said it was free. Believe me I know how our whole system is financed when I look at my pay slip and I also want to add that the we had a balanced federal budget here for probably the last 10 years
 
Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Originally posted by: eskimospy
My guess would be the same way in which every single other industrialized democracy on earth has implemented a universal health care plan.

By taxing the crap out of the citizens?

Of course they would tax us, but you would still probably pay less in taxes then what you currently pay for health insurance. So i dont see the big deal. Tax away.
 
Originally posted by: freegeeks
all bla bla bla, nothing more, nothing less

you guys are always repeating the same old story, I can guess what's next "we stormed the beaches of Normandy or else everyone would be speaking German"
Well, that is true...

😀
 
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: freegeeks
all bla bla bla, nothing more, nothing less

you guys are always repeating the same old story, I can guess what's next "we stormed the beaches of Normandy or else everyone would be speaking German"
Well, that is true...

😀

Not really, if we didn't storm the beaches of Normandy all of Europe would be speaking Russian.
 
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: freegeeks
all bla bla bla, nothing more, nothing less

you guys are always repeating the same old story, I can guess what's next "we stormed the beaches of Normandy or else everyone would be speaking German"
Well, that is true...

😀

and if it's wasn't because of the French you would still have a king / queen


see how easy it is
 
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: freegeeks
all bla bla bla, nothing more, nothing less

you guys are always repeating the same old story, I can guess what's next "we stormed the beaches of Normandy or else everyone would be speaking German"
Well, that is true...

😀

and if it's wasn't because of the French you would still have a king / queen


see how easy it is

Shhhh.....

He's a "patriot" and that means that America does everything for the rest of the world but has never asked for or needed the help of another nation.
 
Originally posted by: kranky
Originally posted by: JS80
Belgium has no poor blacks, illegal mexicans, trailer white trash, nor poor asian immigrants. Of course in a country consisting mostly of upper middle class white elitest europeans UHC will work.

Makes me wonder if people from other countries can sneak into Belgium and get free emergency medical care.

Agreed. I also wonder what their average BMI (google if unknown) is also compared to "Porky" America. IT's easy to provide UHC is the population is wealthier (Our per capita earning may be higher, but you need to look at the whole population, I'm sure we have alot more millionaires/billionaires screwing with the average), healthier, and homogenous. To the posters complaining about lack of doctors: no one wants to do it anymore. Many of the ones who do, can't pass the test/training. Most who go into medical school now all want to be Beverly Hills 90210/nip 'n tuck type of docs. No one wants to do primary care which barely earns enough to pay off your student loans. Ask yourself this: Why would I blow 11+ years minimum of the best years of my life so I can make less than a school teacher after subtracting $200K+ for student loans. (This is true for primary care docs here in the US, it takes 10+ Years to catch up financially to a HS school teacher, who starts working/saving immediately after college, after you factor in benefits and retirement)
 
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: freegeeks
all bla bla bla, nothing more, nothing less

you guys are always repeating the same old story, I can guess what's next "we stormed the beaches of Normandy or else everyone would be speaking German"
Well, that is true...

😀
and if it's wasn't because of the French you would still have a king / queen

see how easy it is

Shhhh.....

He's a "patriot" and that means that America does everything for the rest of the world but has never asked for or needed the help of another nation.
Actually, I'm not denying, or running from, his counter-claim... I happen to remember our allies, and all of the things they have done for us in the past, very well. I'm very grateful for their efforts and their sacrifices. However, unlike many of them, I'm not ASHAMED to admit it, and also that our country owes them a lot.

/OT tangent off

back on topic...

Many, such as myself, are simply unwilling to pay 50% of our wages in federal income taxes. They had better come up with a cheaper Plan B, or those Americans without insurance will continue to go without. It's pretty much that simple.
 
Originally posted by: Pneumothorax
Originally posted by: kranky
Originally posted by: JS80
Belgium has no poor blacks, illegal mexicans, trailer white trash, nor poor asian immigrants. Of course in a country consisting mostly of upper middle class white elitest europeans UHC will work.

Makes me wonder if people from other countries can sneak into Belgium and get free emergency medical care.

Agreed. I also wonder what their average BMI (google if unknown) is also compared to "Porky" America. IT's easy to provide UHC is the population is wealthier (Our per capita earning may be higher, but you need to look at the whole population, I'm sure we have alot more millionaires/billionaires screwing with the average), healthier, and homogenous. To the posters complaining about lack of doctors: no one wants to do it anymore. Many of the ones who do, can't pass the test/training. Most who go into medical school now all want to be Beverly Hills 90210/nip 'n tuck type of docs. No one wants to do primary care which barely earns enough to pay off your student loans. Ask yourself this: Why would I blow 11+ years minimum of the best years of my life so I can make less than a school teacher after subtracting $200K+ for student loans. (This is true for primary care docs here in the US, it takes 10+ Years to catch up financially to a HS school teacher, who starts working/saving immediately after college, after you factor in benefits and retirement)

The median income is in fact closer, but Belgium still has several thousand dollars lower median income then the US. So.. the population is not wealthier. In addition, while the US' BMI is the highest in the world, Belgium is not that far behind. (28 vs. 25) So, Belgium's population is not disproportionately fit. And while Belgium is not in fact homogenous I don't think it matters anyway. Why would a homogenous population make for cheaper health care? Are you trying to say that having different ethnicities in your country drives up the cost/lowers the quality simply by the virtue of there being different ethnicities?

Face it people, UHC works in countries poorer then ours per capita.
 
Originally posted by: soulcougher73
Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Originally posted by: eskimospy
My guess would be the same way in which every single other industrialized democracy on earth has implemented a universal health care plan.

By taxing the crap out of the citizens?

Of course they would tax us, but you would still probably pay less in taxes then what you currently pay for health insurance. So i dont see the big deal. Tax away.

What if I don't want medical coverage? I thought this was a free society?
 
Originally posted by: kranky

Interesting. The "relevant number" is $156 million because the rest of the increase isn't paid for by Mass residents. It must be free money that falls from the sky. There's no dispute that the spending will actually rise by $400 million, but they only care about what Mass residents have to pay. Mass has 2.1% of the population. I can easily imagine a federally-run program will have a proportional overrun because they always understate the costs to get a program approved. So that $400 million would proportionally be $20 billion on a national level. And there would be no ohe else to pay, unlike Mass who can blithely ignore any increase covered by magic, free money from Medicare matching funds.

Who can reasonably conclude that a government-run health care system would be "better" in any way, shape of form? There's not one single major government program which isn't riddled by scammers, waste and giant contracts being shoveled to favored companies. It's quite simplistic to say it is automatically "better" to provide health care for everyone and discount the cost. I don't believe I have a right to all the health care tools, medicines and practitioners which are available. Like anything else, wealthy people can afford better health care. Good for them. It should make people want to work to be one of them. Put in a program where health care is rationed to everyone and we'll be on the way to mediocre health care. Skoorb's examples are very relevant.

I have relatives who work in health care. They see what happens when people can demand services without worrying about who is paying for it. People with colds go to the ER because it doesn't cost them anything. People who want a ride to the doctor call an ambulance because they will take them to the hospital. The password is "chest pains".

You have a cold and buy a 80 cent box of tissues. They go to the ER and cost taxpayers $500.

We already spend over 50% of the entire federal budget on taking money from some people and giving it to others. I guess we won't be satisfied until it's even higher. No, I don't think anyone has a right to an all-you-can-eat health care buffet.

I also believe the article I linked touched on this in that it is uncertain if the federal matching funds/assistance will come through given the economic crunch going on now...Tax and spend Mass is counting on it but who knows what the Bush admin will do...so far it seems they have largely subsidized this experiment.

Another factor is the businesses, they state that the companies aren't being charged as much due to a Romney ammendment to the plan, but I have heard many many local business owners say that this is really hurting their bottom line...guess it helps the conglomerates who can negotiate better coverage for their employees and helps kill off more little guy competition...now thats the american spirit!
 
Originally posted by: freegeeks

all bla bla bla, nothing more, nothing less

you guys are always repeating the same old story, I can guess what's next "we stormed the beaches of Normandy or else everyone would be speaking German"

are you going to my statement using logic?
 
If you do not have an "insurance card" the state will grab part of your tax refund.
 
Back
Top