Maybe we can solve the concerns of many about the lack of health care in the USA.
Suppose we provide free health care for everyone over 65 because they are too old to work? We could call it something like Medicare.
Then we could provide free health care for really poor people who can't afford health care. We could differentiate between this program and the previous one by calling this by a different name, maybe we could call it something like Medicaid?
Finally, as a stop gap measure, we can make it illegal for a hospital emergency room to turn away indigent patients?
Well, what do you think? Seems to me like we cover all the needy patients and leave the working ones to pay their own way.
2007-09-07 02:04:42 · 12 answers · asked by plezurgui 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
1. check out the VA hospitals -- these are the same people dat will take care of u -- government doctors,
2. goona be interesting when u have to call ur Congressman to get an appointment to see a doctor.
3. with da government running health care -- who's gooona want to be a doctor or nurse -- ??
4. what bout new procedures -- new drugs -- goona ask ur congressman to get then goin instead of a doctor..
5. where do I get my government cheese?
2007-09-07 02:28:57 · answer #1 · answered by de viking 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Unverisal Health care will only work if you keep up the population growth to support it.
Yet with the advent of abortion on demand and people have fewer children and latter in life means you don't have that board tax base to support it.
We look at other countries with unverisal health care and it is a major mess. People from Canada are coming here for treatment while we go there for drugs.
Don't you think a better idea is figure out what we are doing right about health care and what we are doing wrong about drugs.
Are we willing as country to give up law suits that make people like Edwards rich?
Are we willing to restrict abortion to help grow the population?
Too many people have their pets about unverisal health care that are not willing to give it up.
What have some fun to figure out what this unverisal health care will cost you?
OK the government takes a tax dollar about 10 cents gets to the patient lets say you.
Now the cost of private health care at work about 75% is pick up by your employer.
So take you pay stub and look at the amount taken out for health benifits.
times that by 1.333 because you know you company is no longer going to pick that up.
Divide that by 0.1 and that is what the taxes is going to be to get the health care you are getting now.
So are we to trust the government with our health care they way they handle everything else?
I don't think so.
2007-09-07 02:30:26 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The problem with this scenario is that treating needy patients in the Emergency room is the most expensive way possible to provide them with healthcare.
You aren't getting them until they are very sick, instead of catching them at earlier stages of illness before they develop complications and their care become extremely expensive.
This is also a problem with the healthcare provided to people who DO have insurance. A lot of people worry about making preventive care too inexpensive or not because too many people will come in who don't really need care. But those people are very inexpensive to treat. What does make it expensive is all the administrative work getting the insurance company to reimburse the primary care physician. With a single payer system, that cost disappears.
2007-09-07 02:23:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Sounds good. However, thanks to stagnant wages and the decline of unions, even with my three jobs, I am not able to afford to pay my mortgage and all of my family's bills. "Preexisting conditions" make health insurance prohibitively expensive.
It sounds to me like you're saying it's just too bad if my kids end up out in the street if I'm unlucky enough to suffer one illness or injury. Having a broken arm set can cost $12,000. I'd have to try to sell my house, which could take a while in the current real estate climate. Then we'd have nothing.
There's no justification for the fact that 30% of each dollar Americans spend on their health insurance goes to administrative costs (including the lawyers you hire to dispute the claims you file). 30% of two trilion is $600 billion a year. What could we accomplish for that kind of money?
2007-09-07 04:50:51 · answer #4 · answered by oimwoomwio 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
In your glee to be sarcastic you forgot something. All those "old" people were part of the "working ones' at one time. I would think that they helped care for the old ones that came before them as the people that come after you will pay for your health care. Give that some thought! As far as the 'indigent", it only takes one twist of faith for you to become one of them! Give that some thought! I do agree, what we have is partial "Universal Health Care", hodge-podge at its best. Since you feel that you are one of the ones that are paying your own way, why not make it Universal??? You are paying for the others anyhow!
2007-09-07 02:24:11 · answer #5 · answered by peepers98 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Sounds good to me too but I am Canadian, only issue with that would be with the growing number of aging people unfortunately premiums would probably skyrocket.
2007-09-07 02:14:42 · answer #6 · answered by Edge Caliber 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's called medicaid
2007-09-07 05:52:44 · answer #7 · answered by John 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Lots of good potential but our awesome politicians would screw it up royally.
2007-09-07 04:20:53 · answer #8 · answered by Bleh! 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sounds good to me~
2007-09-07 02:09:26 · answer #9 · answered by Classic96 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
That's what we have. The system is working now, why change it?
2007-09-07 02:16:49 · answer #10 · answered by mustagme 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋