• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

This is one of the things that is wrong with OUR health system as it stands now....

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

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,943
126
Originally posted by: Nebor
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01


It costs $1000 because they know they aren't going to pay. So 10x1000=10000 1 person pays you get $100 per person considering the people who dont pay. With uhc we won't have this problem and we should demand prices go down. Nobody wants to believe thaqt this is true or wants to believe that this would work but it will.
Yeah, and that'll work the same way price ceilings always do, and the way it went in Canada. You say, "UHC will only pay you $60 for lancing a boil." Doctors say, "Fine, I don't accept UHC at my office. Private insurance only." So you scratch your head, look in the socialist authoritarian playbook and go, "Aha! We're outlawing private insurance! What now, Doctor Smartypants?" But he doesn't say anything, because he's gone to another country where he can be paid his true market value. You're left with only the doctors who recieve enough utility from helping people to make up the difference in pay between your country and others. As a result, you now have long lines for procedures and a lower standard of care. You attempt to fix this by subsidizing the costs of medical schools and allowing more people to go to them. Most of these people take your education and flee the country. Then you start attaching strings to the education, like a requirement to remain in your country for 8 years practicing medicine after medical school. And now look, you've dehumanized doctors and have the emmigration policies of Cuba.
You need to do a search on my name I have written pages on this topic and fully believe the rights of the doctor to not take insurance and take cash only if they are that good. I'm not into some overlord telling people how much to make. try again. However when someone is dying how much is a procedure worth to them? We don't want to be in a situation where someone can dictate "if you don't want to die it will cost x" There are lots of "problems" with this topic but we really need to look at it seriously. I'm also not saying that the canadian system is the one we would want to adopt.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
101,693
6,018
126
Originally posted by: Atheus
So everyone is covered? That's universal then isn't it. I don't know enough about your system to argue in detail but I don't see how anyone can deny that 'healthcare for everyone' as a concept (rather than 'UHC' as an American political thing) is a good idea.
i don't consider discrimination by age group to be compatible with the 'universal' part of UMC/UMI.
 

Atheus

Diamond Member
Jun 7, 2005
7,313
2
0
Originally posted by: glenn1
Originally posted by: Atheus
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: Atheus
If a dying child came to my door I would help it without hesitation and without asking for money. If you would not then you yourself do not deserve to live.
That's all well and good to say in the abstract; I'm sure most of us would say we'd help a dying child on our doorstep. But how far are you willing to go to "help"? Have you gone to med school or otherwise received some sort of training to truly allow you to be of assistance to the dying? You can't cure cancer or some other serious medical problem just using good intentions alone.
I pay into the National Health Service with my taxes. That's the whole point.
The whole point is that the National Health Service rations care, either by denying some treatment types outright, or by delays in providing it. That's the only way that costs can be contained in a universal model, since when healthcare is "free" the demand becomes infinite.
As opposed to denying and delaying treatment based purely on wealth? Suits me. If someone has to wait a few weeks for liposuction so my dad can get his cancer treatment now that's absolutely fine.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,943
126
Originally posted by: Atheus
As opposed to denying and delaying treatment based purely on wealth? Suits me. If someone has to wait a few weeks for liposuction so my dad can get his cancer treatment now that's absolutely fine.
To be honest with you the only way uhc will work is with a model that increases service for all and reduces costs. liposuction would not be done by a doctor doing cancer treatment. Liposuction would fall under private anyways. No health insurance would cover vanity procedures anyhow.
 

Jschmuck2

Diamond Member
Jul 13, 2005
5,623
2
81
Originally posted by: winnar111
Just don't admit them....
NO ABORTION! ABORTION IS WRONG! ABORTION IS MURDER! DIE YOU LIBERAL BABY KILLERS!

FUCK THE HOMELESS! LET THEM DIE IN THE STREETS LIKE DOGS! THEY DON'T DESERVE HEALTHCARE IF THEY CAN'T PAY! IT'S NOT A RIGHT!
 

Jschmuck2

Diamond Member
Jul 13, 2005
5,623
2
81
Originally posted by: winnar111
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
Originally posted by: Majes
Good point Mike...
I would argue that its not really a valid comparison. Slavery, while it can certainly be broken down into different degrees, is not nearly as complex as providing health care to everyone. From a certain point of view you either provide it or you don't, but you don't have to be constantly freeing someone for the rest of their lives as opposed to constantly providing medication or treatment... This is particularly evident when you consider that some people have conditions with no cure. How would you even compare that?
voting rights
freedom of speech
property rights

your logic clearly fails, and besides, the right to continue to be alive is pretty obviously a right.


The argument that healthcare is not a right is really just covert eugenics. Some people don't 'deserve' to keep living because they are too sick, poor, etc.
They can continue to be alive, with their chest pain, for as long a time as the Creator has given them.
Seriously - seriously - I hope you don't have children.
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Originally posted by: Jschmuck2
Originally posted by: winnar111
Just don't admit them....
NO ABORTION! ABORTION IS WRONG! ABORTION IS MURDER! DIE YOU LIBERAL BABY KILLERS!

FUCK THE HOMELESS! LET THEM DIE IN THE STREETS LIKE DOGS! THEY DON'T DESERVE HEALTHCARE IF THEY CAN'T PAY! IT'S NOT A RIGHT!
Off your meds?
 

Jschmuck2

Diamond Member
Jul 13, 2005
5,623
2
81
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: Jschmuck2
Originally posted by: winnar111
Just don't admit them....
NO ABORTION! ABORTION IS WRONG! ABORTION IS MURDER! DIE YOU LIBERAL BABY KILLERS!

FUCK THE HOMELESS! LET THEM DIE IN THE STREETS LIKE DOGS! THEY DON'T DESERVE HEALTHCARE IF THEY CAN'T PAY! IT'S NOT A RIGHT!
Off your meds?
Not yet.

I just find it hilarious that a person can be so opposed to abortion but then march right over and talk about letting someone die without medical care.
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Originally posted by: Jschmuck2
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: Jschmuck2
Originally posted by: winnar111
Just don't admit them....
NO ABORTION! ABORTION IS WRONG! ABORTION IS MURDER! DIE YOU LIBERAL BABY KILLERS!

FUCK THE HOMELESS! LET THEM DIE IN THE STREETS LIKE DOGS! THEY DON'T DESERVE HEALTHCARE IF THEY CAN'T PAY! IT'S NOT A RIGHT!
Off your meds?
Not yet.

I just find it hilarious that a person can be so opposed to abortion but then march right over and talk about letting someone die without medical care.
How much medical have you yourself provided for the homeless?
 

Jschmuck2

Diamond Member
Jul 13, 2005
5,623
2
81
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: Jschmuck2
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: Jschmuck2
Originally posted by: winnar111
Just don't admit them....
NO ABORTION! ABORTION IS WRONG! ABORTION IS MURDER! DIE YOU LIBERAL BABY KILLERS!

FUCK THE HOMELESS! LET THEM DIE IN THE STREETS LIKE DOGS! THEY DON'T DESERVE HEALTHCARE IF THEY CAN'T PAY! IT'S NOT A RIGHT!
Off your meds?
Not yet.

I just find it hilarious that a person can be so opposed to abortion but then march right over and talk about letting someone die without medical care.
How much medical have you yourself provided for the homeless?
I fail to see how that applies here but I'll tell you anyway: I own a private clinic: Hobo's Teats. We treat any and all indigents that come through the door.

How is that relevant?
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Originally posted by: Jschmuck2
How is that relevant?
I just find it amusing that you fail to understand the difference between the right to life and the "right" to healthcare. If I want to respect everyone's right to life, all I have to do is NOT KILL ANYONE. That takes 0 effort on my part. But if someone has a "right" to healthcare, does that mean I have to treat that person, or pay for a doctor to treat that person? Isn't that slavery? You're saying everyone has a basic right to make others work for them? That's BS. The homeless, like everyone else, have a legal right to any service they choose to pay for - that's all.
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Originally posted by: Mursilis
How much medical have you yourself provided for the homeless?
If he is employed and pays taxes - a lot.
If there are people not getting treatment, I guess he's not paying nearly enough.
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Originally posted by: TheSlamma
Maybe they haven't been taking their United States daily vitamins! (Prozack and Prednosone)

The US is a horrid candidate for state provided health. This county has the worst eating habits in the world, the worst exercise habits and we suck down more red meat, pork, salt and lab made sugars and other chemicals then you can shake a stick at.
Basically, yes. Universal healthcare funded by the gov't would just result in an explosion of costs.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,943
126
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Originally posted by: Mursilis
How much medical have you yourself provided for the homeless?
If he is employed and pays taxes - a lot.
If there are people not getting treatment, I guess he's not paying nearly enough.
because the issue is just that simple...
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,943
126
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Basically, yes. Universal healthcare funded by the gov't would just result in an explosion of costs.
Where did you get your mystical powers to see into the future? To see every facet and aspect of UHC and able to make that decision? You are amazing.
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Basically, yes. Universal healthcare funded by the gov't would just result in an explosion of costs.
Where did you get your mystical powers to see into the future? To see every facet and aspect of UHC and able to make that decision? You are amazing.
One doesn't need to be "amazing" to merely look at the history of gov't spending to see an ocean of cost overruns and actual costs far out-pacing projected spending. Also, I've seen gov't-sponsored healthcare programs like the VA system continue to cost more while still having to restrict access.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,943
126
Originally posted by: Mursilis
One doesn't need to be "amazing" to merely look at the history of gov't spending to see an ocean of cost overruns and actual costs far out-pacing projected spending. Also, I've seen gov't-sponsored healthcare programs like the VA system continue to cost more while still having to restrict access.
So by doing nothing we have this incredibly wasteful system. ok. Lets do nothing!
 

Jschmuck2

Diamond Member
Jul 13, 2005
5,623
2
81
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: Jschmuck2
How is that relevant?
I just find it amusing that you fail to understand the difference between the right to life and the "right" to healthcare. If I want to respect everyone's right to life, all I have to do is NOT KILL ANYONE. That takes 0 effort on my part. But if someone has a "right" to healthcare, does that mean I have to treat that person, or pay for a doctor to treat that person? Isn't that slavery? You're saying everyone has a basic right to make others work for them? That's BS. The homeless, like everyone else, have a legal right to any service they choose to pay for - that's all.
Fair enough. So you argument is:

"If you can't afford healthcare, you're just going to die,"

Correct?
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,943
126
Originally posted by: Jschmuck2
Fair enough. So you argument is:

"If you can't afford healthcare, you're just going to die,"

Correct?
Some people don't think healthcare is a right,

Mursilis- what do you do for a living?
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: Jschmuck2
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: Jschmuck2
Originally posted by: winnar111
Just don't admit them....
NO ABORTION! ABORTION IS WRONG! ABORTION IS MURDER! DIE YOU LIBERAL BABY KILLERS!

FUCK THE HOMELESS! LET THEM DIE IN THE STREETS LIKE DOGS! THEY DON'T DESERVE HEALTHCARE IF THEY CAN'T PAY! IT'S NOT A RIGHT!
Off your meds?
Not yet.

I just find it hilarious that a person can be so opposed to abortion but then march right over and talk about letting someone die without medical care.
I recommend you familiarize yourself Medicaid, you post as thought you've never heard of it.

Homeless people have better HI than most of the rest of us. (It's called Medicaid).

Fern
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,943
126
Originally posted by: Fern
I recommend you familiarize yourself Medicaid, you post as thought you've never heard of it.

Homeless people have better HI than most of the rest of us. (It's called Medicaid).

Fern
I know thats why i picked "homeless bum" as a career :)
 

CycloWizard

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
12,348
1
81
Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Or at least get support from the military since a very large portion of those with mental issues that are homeless are vets.

I think the VA says if they don't won't to come in to bad. Its like telling a guy with no legs he better walk over to the other room or we will take that as he does not want any help.
The VA will also pick you up at your house and drive you to the nearest VA medical center, so you have pretty much zero excuse for not getting treatment.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Fern has this pretty much nailed down. If you are on Medicaid then you have about the best healthcare. Medicaid patients often go to the closest place regardless of cost and refuse to pay copays because they can. Often it's so they can get beer or cigs. No one will reform the system because the race card gets pulled out, so there is a lot of pandering to them. That's wonderful government run health care for you.
You guys are really going down the wrong path. These services are not ideal and most good doctors wont take them. Infact I know of one doctor who was fired for taking too many medicaid patients. The doctors have their schedulers punt the people down the field until they go somewhere else. UHC will lower costs because insurance companies are skimming 30% off the top of our health care, hospitals are padding their losses by increasing payments on little things like crutches and emergency room visits. Why does medicaid have a 2% overhead and insurance is 30%? If you guys work in the insurance industry then fine I understand why you would argue this but otherwise its a win for everyone including healthcare pros.

I know I am slightly contradicting myself by saying medicare isn't high quality and uhc will be good :D A lot of things will need to be worked out but it is the right path. I think we can increase what healthcare professionals and pharma make and still lower the bottom line.
You are conflating two things, medicaid and medicare. Medicare mostly sucks. Medicaid is the Golden path to health care. No copays, they can walk into any emergency room and they can't be refused. It's the very best there is. I'm a health care provider, and my benefits aren't any near as good. In fact I don't know any private health care that is. So they can't get brand names. Wrong. The doctor and pharmacist have to spend an hour between them getting it approved, but they get it. Why even have us waste our time? Because it doesn't cost them a thing. That is precisely what everyone is going to want. Everything now and for free. Medicaid recipients own the Democratic party in NY, and while virtually everything is getting cut, they're stealing from the education budgets now and paying providers LESS than the cost to provide services. That's so they can expand coverage and benefits.

I don't know about you, but I'm not fond of ass raping, but I feel it at work and when our taxes which are to provide education for our children are usurped.

There could be reasonable restrictions on benefits, but we were told buy our politicians that medicaid is untouchable. Everyone else suck it up.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY