Nobody sees it coming, or actually that it has come

Nobody sees it coming, or actually that it has come (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Termyn8or -> Nobody sees it coming, or actually that it has come (9/7/2007 12:59:17 AM)
Get this, if you let them pay for your healthcare then they can make decisions regarding options for that healthcare, based on present or future costs. He who holds the pursestrings can pull whichever he likes. You could become a guinea pig as well as left out in the cold from new effective treatments, those for which the "company" does not yet have contracts. The first thing to do is to bring the entire medical industry to it's knees via a boycott, and a few of us dying. Then we find the doctors and pay them directly, and cut out the thousands of middlemen in the process. Then (heaven forbid) we actually pay for our own shit. Like four thousand or so for the bypass. No money ? Die. Be responsible for your own survival, then maybe you will think twice before eating that microwave popcorn. As long as someone else foots the bill, you abdicate responsibility to them, is it not right that then they get authority over those things that can affect theiir financial well being ? That is the crux of it, ALL insurance of any kind is against the USA way, against the Constitution, against freedom. Take that how you want it. Real freedom only comes with real responsibilities. If Ron Paul gets elected, will the People let him down ? Very possible. T

CuriousLord -> RE: Nobody sees it coming, or actually that it has come (9/7/2007 1:18:53 AM)
The socialization of healthcare has so many problems. Honestly, part of me just hopes it doesn't go through. The only thing that bothers me is children. One can easily make the argument that adults have had enough time. I especially can't feel pity for these college graduates who took worthless degrees just to have fun or those bastards with such a weak will that they give into alcohol, drugs, gambling, etc. But, a kid who needs care, born into a poor family? That, I have a harder time seeing. Then again, I'm one who would seriously consider a system in which children became wards of the state. I do feel that many are not fit to be parents. Such individuals are free to self-determination. They're even free to pass on their values, should their children opt to adopt them as part of their own self-determination. But people just aren't free to deny another basic rights, even if that other is a child who isn't able to speak up nor know any better. Anyhow, my child-abuse hate rant aside.. But, for the adults? Adults can openly chose to adopt behaviors that will predispose themselves towards certain conditions that are statistically likely to cause undue strain on others. (i.e., eatting too much to obesity to heart attacks; smoking to cancer; drinking to liver damage; etc.) Why should these people get a free ride on others' money if they work parttime at McDonalds, having screwed around all their life? Not to mention that socialization already puts aside the demand for one to be a productive member of society- unless, of course, the state forces them to be. Which, you know- isn't exactly the American ideal here. Edit: Cut a lot of my rant.

SusanofO -> RE: Nobody sees it coming, or actually that it has come (9/7/2007 2:57:14 AM)
Actually, I don't see how millions of people going bankrupt, paying for routine care for their helpless newborns, or middle-agers being bankrupted just for having heart surgery, for example, is a "better way". That "way" is the reason health insurance exists in the U.S. in the first place. But actually, I am not aginst the idea of a selective boycott amongt healthy people who are health insurance holders. I think it's not a half bad idea, and think the problem is actually that serious. 15% of Americans, that is millions of people (47 million, or something) are uninsured, and many of them are children. Mostly because their parents cannot afford coverage. I think the old "fee for service" method is fine, for those who can afford it. Problem is, when it comes to major surgery or a catastrpohic illness, most people can't afford it. I have a friend right now who is between jobs. She fell down accidentally and damaged a nerve in her left arm (a major nerve). Now she has to attend physical therapy for 4 months, or she risks losing permanently the use of her left arm and hand, from the elbow down. But she is not insured, and this physical therapy (which she cannot avoid) is going to end up costing her thousands of dollars she cannot afford right now to pay. The physical therapy outlet has promised to allow her to pay in increments, but that is one more thing for her to worry about - aside from not having a job now. My nephew is an asthmatic, and my sister could not find one for-profit company in the state that would insure him - so he is insured by the state, at a cost of $600 a month. That is more money than it costs to rent a one-bedroom apartment by the month, in this town where we all live. Fortunately, both my sister and her husband have very good jobs, and can afford it. But I have to question the price tag. Supposedly, the state is only "passing along" to my sister and her husband, what it is being charged for health insurance from whatever company they buy it from. But that is still a pretty hefty price tag, for health insurance for one person, IMO. And I should add that my nephew's asthma isn't all that serious - he has only had two full-blown asthma attacks in his entire life (he's 17), and neither of them were severely life-threatening; mostly, he handles it quite efficiently with his inhaler and meds. Sure it can be useful, but - I think it is a racket, health insurance, plain and simple - for the most part. My dad is in the hospital right now, and thank God he has decent health insurance (plus Medicare - he is 73). He has no insurance worries whatsoever, and could stay there another 3 months with no insurance worries, probably. But it all depends on how good one's health insurance is - he is still going to end up paying something (probably 10-20% of his bill) - but he can afford it. If he couldn't afford it, it would really bother him, I know it would. I know the current health insurance system sucks for many people, but can't think of a better way (except for what Mitt Romney has done in Massachusetts, which is essentially to socialize it completely for families under a certain income level) to change the system slowly to a more socialized alternative - for everyone. Of course that might well bring it's own set of problems, and I think anyone who really believes the government here will do it with near perfect efficiency is dreaming - but 15% of Americans without access to healthcare save bankrupting themselves, is a national disgrace, IMO. I am not voting for Romney, despite this. I am voting for Obama, and have no idea yet how he would handle this - but if he comes up with no plan at all re: National health insurance, he is losing my vote. As for what CuriousLord said, I've been all for licensing parents for a long time, but can't think of any ethical way to implement the process. - Susan

SusanofO -> RE: Nobody sees it coming, or actually that it has come (9/7/2007 3:59:34 AM)
Something has got to be done. I am simply going to refuse to listen to any Presidential candidate who has no serious proposal to tackle this problem. They just won't get my attention at all, much less my vote, in the upcoming national election, if they don't take this issue seriously - and have some realistic detailed plan to deal with it. - Susan

popeye1250 -> RE: Nobody sees it coming, or actually that it has come (9/7/2007 6:36:02 AM)
Susan, I totally agree. Something does need to be done about this whole situation. I worked in the insurance industry and I can tell you that it is obscenely profitable. I worked for that big one where you are. Some of the salespeople back in the 1980's when I worked there made $200-$300K. If they're charging someone $600 per month on a policy, $300 of that or more will be profit to the company. I think we need to get the profit motive out of health insurance. You buy insurance and then those companies deny coverage for tests, procedures,operations and other things. That's called "exclusions". Anyone buying a policy should read the exclusionary declaration pages very carefully. And, they consider many procedures "experimental" which naturally they don't cover. It's all about profit. And of course the Doctors and hospitals don't like this stuff either. Many medical practices have people on the payroll who's job it is to fight with the insurance companies to get their insurance claims paid. I think we do need to have a national healthcare program and politically I'm a fiscal conservative. I don't like my govt spending money in many areas. But, I do think that govt should be serving The People and not big corporations like now. If we gutted the State Dept and ended all the "foreign aid" programs just those two things alone would almost pay for a national healthcare program. All that "debt forgivness" for African countries is nothing but a scam anyway. Guess what? They couldn't pay their debt so we "forgive" it and the U.S. Taxpayers get to pay for that debt. But that's not the end of it! Now, they've started the "process" all over again! Yup, the banks are loaning those countries more money which they won't be able to pay back in 5 years or so and those very same banks will be looking to the Taxpayers to bail them out again! Shouldn't the stockholders of those banks be taking the hit if they make "bad loans?" So, you have to laugh when some people say that we "can't afford" a national healthcare plan. We just bailed out those big banks to the tune of $400 Billion Taxpayer Dollars for bad loans to African countries and they're doing it again! I should start a thread on the State Dept. Talk about wasting Taxpayer dollars! And, that "BONO" guy was up to his neck in this! He must be worth a half a billion dollars. No-one can tell me that he doesn't own a lot of stock in big banks with that kind of money. He basically helped ripped off the U.S. Taxpayers for $400B. If that isn't Corporate Welfare I don't know what is.

Sanity -> RE: Nobody sees it coming, or actually that it has come (9/7/2007 6:39:10 AM)
After reading your post, I can see how the Socialists among us will some day manage to outlaw microwave popcorn, as well as sky diving, bicycle riding, scuba diving, mountain climbing, and all other behavior that could be in any way risky. All that the Left needs is Socialized health care first, and then from that will spring all the excuses needed in order to control everything else. A perfect Orwellian world will conceivably be the end result, if Liberals ever get their way.

SusanofO -> RE: Nobody sees it coming, or actually that it has come (9/7/2007 7:58:06 AM)
popeye1250: Mutual of Omaha got out of the health insurance business a few years ago. The still sell other kinds of insurance. But the fact rhey got out of health insurance altogether said a lot to me. Sanity: I don't thnk making a few improvements to the current U.S. healthcare system necessarily has to lead to a "perfect Orwellian world" - anymore than capitalism has been a way to create millionaires of us all. I think even a few small steps to improve things for the totally uninsured at this point, would suit me just fine. - Susan

Zensee -> RE: Nobody sees it coming, or actually that it has come (9/7/2007 8:29:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or Get this, if you let them pay for your healthcare then they can make decisions regarding options for that healthcare, based on present or future costs. You mean like the HMOs do today? Here in Socialist Canuckistan, I get to choose my doctor and treatment, not have it dictated to me by an insurance company. Even better, I don't have to choose between bankruptcy and life saving surgery or kiss the arses of feudal over-lord adjusters to get treatment. I don't know about you, T8 but I live in a society and sharing liability and success is a defining quality of societies and part and parcel of what makes humans human. Z. PS: I DO pay for my healthcare, directly through premiums and through taxes. It's not free, it's just affordable, for everyone.

pahunkboy -> RE: Nobody sees it coming, or actually that it has come (9/7/2007 8:34:42 AM)
even before bankrupsty "reform" DRs can/have locally refused to take on patients who bankrupted out of a debt. cold but true. BTW- medicare isnt free. many assume it is. there IS a premium, and many drs "arent accepting new patients" ie- wont touch medicare.

farglebargle -> RE: Nobody sees it coming, or actually that it has come (9/7/2007 8:39:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity After reading your post, I can see how the Socialists among us will some day manage to outlaw microwave popcorn, as well as sky diving, bicycle riding, scuba diving, mountain climbing, and all other behavior that could be in any way risky. All that the Left needs is Socialized health care first, and then from that will spring all the excuses needed in order to control everything else. A perfect Orwellian world will conceivably be the end result, if Liberals ever get their way. Sounds like the arguments against Socialist Security and Medicare. We survived those. I would suggest that a minimum, catastrophic care health benefit is right in line with "Promote the General Welfare", and as such is ideologically in line with American Principles. Now, all that's left is to properly delegate the authority via Amendment.

Zensee -> RE: Nobody sees it coming, or actually that it has come (9/7/2007 8:57:09 AM)
T8 - your OP is a copy of your post to the "Edwards wants to force you to see a doctor" thread. Moving an argument to new ground and repeating it doesn't improve the quality of the ideas. Cross posting is just tacky. Z.

philosophy -> RE: Nobody sees it coming, or actually that it has come (9/7/2007 9:42:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity A perfect Orwellian world will conceivably be the end result, if Liberals ever get their way. ...unlike an Orwellian world where the government can read all your messages, where dissent is characterised as treason and where war is seen as good for the real voter base? Damn left wing pinko commie republicans.............oranges and lemons say the bells of saint clemens........

Sanity -> RE: Nobody sees it coming, or actually that it has come (9/7/2007 9:53:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Sounds like the arguments against Socialist Security and Medicare. We survived those. I would suggest that a minimum, catastrophic care health benefit is right in line with "Promote the General Welfare", and as such is ideologically in line with American Principles. Now, all that's left is to properly delegate the authority via Amendment. You mean the issuance of your papers with your unique number, that you cannot do anything without I thought that you, of all people, would see the key problem with the "social security" system

NorthernGent -> RE: Nobody sees it coming, or actually that it has come (9/7/2007 2:15:38 PM)
'Sounds great, providing you have money. Survival is more important than liberty; I'd estimate that most people will have their strings pulled if it means staying alive, so it's back to the usual issue: some people need support.

nyrisa -> RE: Nobody sees it coming, or actually that it has come (9/7/2007 3:24:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or Then (heaven forbid) we actually pay for our own shit. Like four thousand or so for the bypass. No money ? Die. Be responsible for your own survival, then maybe you will think twice before eating that microwave popcorn. T That is an interesting viewpoint, Term. Do you plan on dying young and healthy? Because most of the healthcare expenditures for the average person are spent in the last 10 years of their life, due to problems of aging. Maybe you will think twice about living past your fifties. Will you follow your own advice? Die.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875