How about National Healt Care in the US?

Question

Before anyone jumps in and is opposed to National Health Care over the issue it is Socialism, yes it is. But a degree of Socialism is necessary to society, it is not the road to Communism as some people fear.
National Health Care already exists. Medicare covers Senior Citizens and the Disabled. Medicaid covers the poor, some of which have never had jobs (though most actually do have jobs) and many states have health care programs. So, it is the middle classes and much of the working poor paying in for the care of others. Where's your share?
I say the solution has been at hand since 1964. It' called Medicare. Like any other insurance, the system survives by healthy people contributing to the funds. And when needed the coverage is availably to them. I say make everyone eligible for Medicare. Half of the coverage is automatic, the other half voluntary. And our existing system of medical neglect might be costing us more.

A person that cannot afford a doctor or medication may end up with a stroke from high blood pressure. The result of that perpetual care in a nursing home. The difference of $100 a month for medicine versus $3000 or more a month for the nursing home. Take your choice. It's pay now or pay later.

Seems you are missing the real facts. I was once in the hospital with insurance. 4 of us in the room. Two of them, without insurance. My insurance was being billed for at least some of their expences, such as medications for which they were taking. Another time I was between jobs and no insurance. I have a prexisting condition exempt from coverage and naturally that was why I was hospitalized. Yes I paid my own way, To the tune of $280,000. Lost everything I had. It was a county hospital and they finally had a paying customer. They had a real field day. Have your own coverage, enjoy the experience when you have something major. You will definitely be paying for others. That is exactly why you see Hospital Emergency rooms with flu and cold patients. They can't afford doctors and hospitals can't turn them away. Yes indeed, it is pay now or pay later.

I should add that my $280,000 should have cost maybe $45,000 to $60,000. But they had 5 credit cards to work with, 2 with $25,000 limits. And 12 hour after admitted they had taken a lien on my house and everything else I owned. I did not have the full $280,000 in cash or assets. I paid $43,000 over the following years. Hed I not had the assets, guess who would have paid?? Taxpayers of Arizona, maybe US taxpayers. I guarantee the hospital wouldn't absorb the costs. They do pass it on to others though. Especially those that have cash, credit or assets.

I got called a liberal. Take a look at my profile. I was friends with Sen Barry Goldwater from 1969 to his death. I am known pretty well to Sen John McCain and support his candidicy. Yeah! If I'm a liberal. I sure am not associating with others. And I so have some measure of experience.

Answer 1

I agree with you in all the advantages that you are describing, personally live in a country where everyone of its citizens are covered and had to use it a few time in my life, always had the freedom and liberty to get a checkup when I wanted to make sure about things, really even my dad with multiple hearth strokes got it smoother then it would be in the US. But this type of system only succeed in a normal society. And, unfortunately, the United States are not one. I explain.

The United States have been constituted like a big business itself, and it run on credits on behalf of all other nations of the world, this is what you see in the census bureau as "Trade Deficit". It would be hard to implant such a democratic measure in a society that can only budget its spending poorly, through a petrol boosted economy. Besides USA, most advanced nations run what is called "Surplus".

Also, the United States are infested by lobbyist, a legalized way or corrupting the politician that was so despised at the era of the founding fathers. These includes giant pharmaceutic and insurance company bribing politics to make sure they keep milking money off US citizens.

Lack of education result in lot of US natives not knowing the difference between "Socialism" and "Communism". People think they are the same. Postal service, Fire department, parks, public roads, public transport are all socialistic, adding public health won't make the USA the next Russia ! The same lack of education make US-Americans think that lazy people will use all the services while not working. This is for the most part untrue : Lazy people that don't contribute to society are for the most part, lazy. They don't clean much, they don't fix their appearance, don't respect schedules and don't go often to the doctors, be it free or not.

Healthcare gives lots of power to the citizens and remove a lot to its government. Imagine people adding their health care satisfaction in the voting balance in the US ! The US politicians, used to deal only with big corporations, would not be able to support its citizens demanding them good health treatment. The political cost is tremendous if you don't have a vision of helping all people an equal way. The system of clases is too strong in the US.

The whole US society is already a welfare state, its been done through the Opec deal, in 1976 and since then the US society live like a parasite on the back of the global society, accumulating deficits on top of deficits for over 30 years, thing only possible for international necessity of US bills to pay for their oil imports. This insanity is about to end, and your government knows that when it happens, the us currency will lose between between 90 to 97% of its actual value. The cost of acquiring new equipments made outside will become tremendous with such a weak currency built on a financial castle made of decks.

Most people in the USA believe US made propaganda and reject new ideas.

Answer 2

Hi...

As you probably know, the UK has had a National Health System since just after WW2.

When it was founded, on the grounds that 'everyone' was entitled to 'free' care, everything back then seemed great!

However, with rising costs and lack of government input, our Great Health Service is now sadly in decline!

It 'can' take months, to get an operation and I'm sure you have heard about the British having bad teeth!? ... lol.

It would be a much more competitive and reliable service, if 'only' those that actually 'cannot' afford private care were treated!

The idea of 'everyone' having the right to 'free' care, in this day and age, in my opinion, is unrealistic and puts too much strain, on an already stretched system!!

If the U.S ever builds a similar service, it should take note of the many benefits such a system can give, but also take heed, to the ever increasing costs that grow year by year and also, perhaps making those that can afford to go elsewhere for treatment, do so!!

Answer 3

You, like all liberals, don't understand basic economics. No amount of socialism is ever necessary in any society.
Medicare is about to go bust. Workers pay into it now, to support the program, and they do not get any benefits. The people using Medicare pay far less than the costs of the program, just because they are old.
Medicare sets it's own rates, cheating hospitals, doctors, other health care providers in the process. The system is full of waste, fraud and abuse.
If you understood how Medicaid operated, you would be shocked. Example: a hospital bill is $12,000. Medicaid sets their own rates. The hospital is paid $1,500. The remainder has to be made up by other patients using the hospital.

Answer 4

It annoys me, and a few feedback make me particularly indignant. It's so sick-trained. My household and I have under no circumstances been dealt with with some thing rather than competence and admire via the NHS, and on many instances the extent in their care has been perfect. The NHS has many flaws however the truth stays that if you wish to have it, it's going to do the whole thing in its energy to preserve you alive and healthful. People grasp at the studies of individuals with breast melanoma being denied therapy. Do you understand what the exact tale is? The therapy in query used to be extremely experimental and not likely to paintings in any obvious approach. And it WAS ridiculously high-priced. Every wellbeing process on the earth has a confined funds, and whilst the NHS is confronted with funds choices, they seem at which resolution can be such a lot profitable to the general public. Do you select a therapy that MIGHT upload a few weeks to the lifestyles of 1 individual with breast melanoma? Or do you furnish the investment for cures that experience an excessively prime threat of saving or making improvements to the lives of many individuals? That's no longer an evil factor. The NHS isn't evil. It is intelligent, rational and peculiarly, reasonable. Neither I nor anybody I understand has ever been denied therapy for some thing. The NHS is essentially a well factor. It demands upgrades, however it isn't evil, it does no longer kill individuals. It saves lives. It improves lives. And it is to be had to all people. If you desire to criticise the NHS, no less than seem at matters which might be honestly real. Look at how so much taxation we pay and ask your self in the event you might deal with that. Look on the approach such a lot cash is going into leadership whilst a few of it will have to be going to care-staff. Look on the approach the personal dental enterprise has broken NHS dentistry. Look on the seriously beneath-staffed and beneath-funded intellectual wellbeing offerings. Look on the approach that the special degree of care has a tendency to differ relying on what aspect of the nation you are in. But lies and worry-mongering simply make the critics seem like idiots.

Answer 5

No it's not pay now or pay later -- it's a matter of making people take personal accountability.

That is where the problem lies in this country - people want other people to fix their problems, but they don't want it to be "too much effort" for them and they really don't want that to interfere with their "perks" in life (internet, cable, eating out, etc.).
There are free clinics, there are low cost prescription programs offered by many pharmacies AND drug companies, there are alternatives! I was speaking to a man in the ER one night who told me he couldn't afford the 5 dollars a month that his blood pressure medication cost him through the prescription assistance plan.....he then ask me if the hospital indigent care office had an email. I said "oh - do you use the computers at the library?" Oh nooooo -- he has internet at home. Now why can he afford internet, but no a generic BP med? Houston we have a problem here!

Sorry - I work hard and made damn sure to work hard enough to put me in a position to have private health insurance and there is no one that is every going to get me to willingly agree to be put on some lame, half-*** government health plan!

Answer 6

If the government provides for those in need, as a matter of necessity in Society, that is fine. But why does it need to also provide for those who aren't in need? I don't understand why anyone would want to use tax payer dollars to pay for a service for people who don't need it. Middle and upper class people who currently have health care do NOT need the government to collect excess taxes in order to pay for their health care. why would ANYONE want to put unnecessary control and power into the hands of the government, when we are fully capable of handling it ourselves.

We are begging for the Federal government to treat us like babies.

Answer 7

Ok, so then if we have those WONDERFUL programs, why do we need all of us to be at the mercy of the gubment for our health INSURANCE?