I would agree that competency and distribution plays a major role in whether programs like universal health care would work–which is why competent officials who want universal health care to work should be elected–but some public education systems in southern California aren’t a problem because the government doesn’t want to help or has screwed up in helping, it’s a problem because of money.

Nonfactor on August 27, 2007 at 3:01 PM

I’m a SoCal resident and my wife has been an educator her entire adult life. Can you site some specifics regarding your statement about the money issue? I know sometimes the money doesn’t get down to the classroom for basics because it is being sucked up by admin costs, so is this what you are talking about?

If I could give up some of my money to insure that all Americans are covered by some type of health insurance, I’d do it.

One question Nonfactor.
Please quote me in the U.S. Constitution where you find the right to health coverage?

Was it as good as done when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

Hey, I know it’s trendy to always make the Germans the bad guys, but we can’t blame them for bombing Pearl Harbor. It was the Chinese.

If I could give up some of my money to insure that all Americans are covered by some type of health insurance, I’d do it.

The problem is, you get the coverage, but not the service. I’m in Canada, we have “universal health coverage”. I know the system. The problem is, with the exception of basic things like a doctor’s check up or some stitches to close a wound, health care up here is primitive. Case in point, my brother got a herniated disk in his back. Could not walk. Was in constant pain. He needed an MRI. He makes good money. Lives in a nice house with a big swimming pool. Has everything he needs. But no MRI for his back.

Why? Because those machines, as expensive as they are, are not available up here in enough numbers to get an MRI. The health care system is a huge money pit and we still can’t afford those machines, machines you Americans take for granted. My brother had to be driven to Buffalo, across the border, in a $50,000 car, into your country, to get an MRI. Talk about irony. He got the MRI that same day. He paid for it and received it. In our univeral health care socialized system, such basic medical care was not available to him, no matter his funds.

To make matters worse, he was told an appointment with a back doctor in Canada would take months. And then, several more months to get the actual surgery. Fortunately, my brother had some connections, and he was able to see a doctor in two weeks. But only because he had connections. Just like in a Stalinist system, where party members enjoy the privleges of a bit more vodka, and bread not so stale.

This is what “universal health care” is all about. It is about extending the “right to coverage” to everybody by removing the quality of care for those who already have it. In the process, you must now ration the health care. So really, what universal health care does is benefit the working poor who are uninsured now, but screws everybody else. And most people in America are already covered through work. This is why it is a socialist scheme. It brings down the majority to share one low common level with the working poor. Classic Marxist theory once again disguised as a humanitarian gesture.

Univeral health care is a great idea. Just like a two-day work week. It sounds great on paper. But, just like communism, it doesn’t work. It lowers the level of health care for the majority to elevate the level of health care for the few.

Hey this is a free country ( or supposed to be )
You can get any damn thing you want just work and save your money.
But don’t come crying to my hard earned money or me when you get aids because you like it in the tooter. Or get cancer because you smoke and abuse your body with processed foods and trans-fats.
Hey face reality some times people get sick and die that is life ( or the end of I should say )
TheSitRep on August 27, 2007 at 6:23 PM

Dying is part of life? No kidding. I would hvae never guessed that. Just because dying is part of the life cycle doen’t mean we roll over and die if we get sick.

Did you even read what you wrote initally? You stated a person should just accept the inevitable and die. My question to you is where would you draw the line re: treatment(s)? A small cut? A broken leg? Knee replacement? Chemo?Where would YOU draw the line?

I suppose if we got rid of the medical profession altogether than we would all save money but it wouldn’t make our society any better. I personally like knowing that if I get injured my doctor/Urgent Care will be there and I won’t have to take a 2nd mortgage out on my home to pay for it. That is why I have health insurance.

Like I stated in my previous post if the politicians really cared about healthcare than my health insurance premiums would be pretax and my health savings account would be pretax dollars with an annual carryover. Demo’s are so worried about the small % of people without “healthcare insurance” they don’t want to help the people that do have healthcare insurance so things would be just a tad easier on the working stiffs.

Was it as good as done when Carter had a filibuster-proof Democratic Congress?

Was it as good as done when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

Hell no! It’s as good as done when WE say it’s as good as done!

Is it true that private medical practice is outlawed in Canada?
sonnyspats1 on August 27, 2007 at 7:46 PM

I believe they used to be, but rules have been relaxed recently.

So why stop there? Let stop cancer & AIDS treatment. Since those are expensive treatments then those people should “let go.” How about we stop treatment for everything. That would be more cost effective right? Where would you draw the line? Personally I draw the line at doing whatever is humanly possible to help a person.

Hey this is a free country ( or supposed to be )
You can get any damn thing you want just work and save your money.

But don’t come crying to my hard earned money or me when you get aids because you like it in the tooter. Or get cancer because you smoke and abuse your body with processed foods and trans-fats.

Hey face reality some times people get sick and die that is life ( or the end of I should say )

What is laughable are the folks that are worried about the population explosion while at the same time want to find a cure for aids.

They quote these polls stating 62% of people want free health care but not one of those fat lazy slobs will get off his ass and exercise. Hey people take charge of your own health don’t let the government or doctors do it for you.

Doctors and hospitals kill more people every year than guns do.

More people die every year fro mis-prescribed medicine than died in Chernobyl.

Hey, doctors are necessary and when ya need one, ya need one. But if we focused on health maintenance instead of cure we’d be in much better shape.

We spend way more on taking our pets to the freakin’ vet and getting boob jobs in America than entire continents spend on health care. Hell I bet just California spends more on that crap than most countries.

If anything, we have too much medicine and drugs.

What a fantastic line! Government Healthcare Slogan: “Let us do for you, what we were incapable of doing for our Troops.”

Socialized medicine is not a solution. If one example of a country with socialized medicine works and is superior to US healthcare can be provided, then I might entertain the thought.

Anyone know of any?

I find it deeply troubling that you support a system which would take fistfuls of money from my family so that I can be told by the government that I can only get medical treatment with their permission, with the doctors they choose, on their schedule.

If that isn’t a symptom of insanity, I don’t know what is.

As Loder says, “Access to a waiting list is not access to health care”.

If I could give up some of my money to insure that all Americans are covered by some type of health insurance, I’d do it.

I imagine it feels good to say that, knowing the whole time you’re not obligated in any way to do it or to suggest exactly how it would happen.

Taxes are not an “if I could…to ensure that…” proposition. Paying them is not your choice, and where they go is a decision — often a very poor one — made by someone else. Remember that tobacco settlement money that was going to go to people with lung disease?

Around $12,000 a year in tax money goes to each student in my district, which just moved up out of Academic Watch status. And who’ll vote for another tax hike? People who “would happily pay more in taxes to ensure our kids are well educated.”

I’m insured, and I’ll still end up paying $6,000 out of pocket for my wife’s medical expenses. I’m used to footing the bill myself, but go ahead and send that extra money my way.

Whenever liberals “fix” something they always make it worse

A huge amount of money is spent on the last ditch efforts to keep an old enfeebled person alive. We need to be more courageous and pragmatic about dyeing. Some times ya just have to let go.

TheSitRep on August 27, 2007 at 2:42 PM

So why stop there? Let stop cancer & AIDS treatment. Since those are expensive treatments then those people should “let go.” How about we stop treatment for everything. That would be more cost effective right? Where would you draw the line? Personally I draw the line at doing whatever is humanly possible to help a person.

Guess what? Sometimes taxes need to get raised to improve life for Americans. The conservative meme of ‘low to no taxes’ leaves us high and dry when, say our bridges collapse or a natural disaster hits one of our major cities.

Nonfactor on August 27, 2007 at 2:49 PM

Leave it to Gov’t? No way. My families health is too important to leave to some idiot bureaucrat. Too bad my health insurance premiums are post tax vs pretax. Too bad I can’t set up a health savings account with pretax dollars with an annual carryover. Demo’s are so worried about the small % of people without “healthcare insurance” they don’t want to help the people that do have healthcare insurance so things would be just a tad easier on the working stiffs.

One last thing, just because someone doesn’t have health insurance doesn’t mean they can’t get medical attention. Just ask an illegal.

If I could give up some of my money to insure that all Americans are covered by some type of health insurance, I’d do it.

Nonfactor on August 27, 2007 at 2:49 PM

Dude! it would not be SOME money it would be ALL money.
People need to eat healthier and exercise. There is no substitute for personal responsibility!
Read this

If I could give up some of my money to insure that all Americans are covered by some type of health insurance, I’d do it.
Nonfactor on August 27, 2007 at 2:49 PM

Would you also give up some more so every American had a job? Oh, and shouldn’t we cover their transportation as well? We damn well better make sure they’re fed well also.

If I could give up some of my money to insure that all Americans are covered by some type of health insurance, I’d do it.

Nonfactor on August 27, 2007 at 2:49 PM

Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve NEITHER!!!

As I understand it, they charge the uninsured MORE than they charge the insurance companies for the same thing. They figure the uninsured will just pay it without question.

What ever happened to MTV playing Music Videos? And what the hell is a Kurt Loder?

Masscon on August 27, 2007 at 3:02 PM

You understand it in the reverse.
You can get way cheaper health care if you pay cash. In America Cash Talks and BS walks.
When you pay cash they don’t have to worry about collections and even possibly getting stiffed by Insurance Co. or Medicare. When a doctor submits a bill his staff has to file the procedure code perfectly or it gets kicked back, and they don’t even tell him why.
it is typical that doctors wait 120 days for payment from third party payers.

Just imagine if you had insurance for groceries.
Would you make more cost effective choices?
Would the grocer run specials and try to stay competitive?
Would you buy rib eye steaks or ground beef?
Would you drive a little further to get a better deal?

The answer to all those questions is obviously, NO!

People would throw stuff in their cart that they don’t even need.
Nobody’s gonna by hamburger helper when they could have Alaskan king crab.

The problem with government ran or any third party payment plan is that it takes the individuals ability to make smart choices.

If you think our insurance program is bad just take a look at socialize medicine, it is even worse.

As for New Orleans, quite a bit of federal assistance has been given. Money is not the problem there.

Slublog on August 27, 2007 at 3:23 PM

$150 billion, which adjusted for inflation, was way more than we spent on the Marshall plan after WWII. It’s not the money that’s the problem, it’s the degenerates in New Orleans receiving it.

Of course, we COULD go to the Stalin method of taking from everyone and giving to the guys up top. That’s the modern dem party method, isn’t it? Or we could just shoot those who “cost the system too much money” like Mao. And Castro. But hey, what the heck? They probably weren’t part of the proletariat anyway, right?

You may care about those things, but looking at the policies conservatives are supporting it doesn’t seem like it. I remember watching clips from Fox News about universal health care (aside from this one) where the pundits and guests are perfectly happy to state that they don’t support health care for everyone because it would cost people more money. I just saw a segment last night where they were talking about whether or not the government should help the people in Ohio after the flooding and it devolved into a discussion about New Orleans where some of the guests were all to happy to state that the only thing the government should do to help these people is provide a FEMA trailer.

Motives are irrelevant. Attitudes are irrelevant.

Socialized medicine is one of the worst ways to distribute health care. It is overpriced, perpetually entangled by red tape and inefficient.

Perhaps you should work for a government agency. I am personally familiar with departments in my organization that consist of two Directors in charge of 2 lower level employees. This is commonplace.

Government never has to concern itself with making money…only spending it. It’s a fact that the tax cuts in the 1980’s increased revenues to the treasury. This was repeated with the Bush tax cuts. But it’s never enough.