Political Discussion - "on-topic & unmoderated"Rated PG13, unmoderated but threads must stay on topic - that means you can flame each other all you want as long as it's legal
US Health Care Reform Part V - SCOTUS Agrees to Hear Case
Universal healthcare in Western Europe and Canada will gradually begin to falter as 3rd world immigration increases and their poverty numbers bulge. Here in the US the amount of tax paying citizens is not increasing fast enough to cover the needs of the increasing urban underclass. Then you have to consider that many of these taxpayers will be retiring in the next few years. It's going to be disastrous.
Exactly. Once all the baby boomers retire the welfare state will be proven unsustainable. Then we'll see government programs cut which will lead to massive rioting from people who have been dependent on those "entitlements" for generations.
Exactly. Once all the baby boomers retire the welfare state will be proven unsustainable. Then we'll see government programs cut which will lead to massive rioting from people who have been dependent on those "entitlements" for generations.
But no, progressive statist policies always work!
Look at Social Security here in the United States... it's a program which is no longer sustainable, and is already insufficient in providing for future retirees.
In all honesty, I wish I could opt out of SS and put that money into mutual funds and other investments that will give me a greater return. But nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. Apparently we have no choice.
Of course it's not a right. It's a good. A good is something we want or need. So, food is a good, shelter is a good, clothing is a good, education is a good, and access to health care is a good.
We have right to our life, and to our bodies. These are natural rights that we are born with. Governments are there for us when our rights are violated. Governments are NOT there to take care of us all our lives.
And that's what wrong about it. Health care shouldn't be a good to be traded like a commodity.
Again, there are many, many ways food can be obtained without going to the store. Clothing as well.
And those rights are being violated when we cannot access affordable care to help us live.
What would you tell Hawkings? Go die on the side of the road because insurance companies can't pick up his health care?
Look at Social Security here in the United States... it's a program which is no longer sustainable, and is already insufficient in providing for future retirees.
In all honesty, I wish I could opt out of SS and put that money into mutual funds and other investments that will give me a greater return. But nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. Apparently we have no choice.
Social Security is the biggest Ponzi scheme in history... makes Bernie Madoff look like a petty criminal.
What ever happened to people having to be personally responsible that they could take care of themselves? It seem like the individual doesnt exist anymore.
Err, what exactly does the NIH (and its Canadian equivalent) have to do with public health care?
Oh please. It has been posted many many times by the anti universal health care brigade here that the USA's private health care system is a catalyst for advances and discoveries of new treatments, drugs and cures. And that having universal health care would kill this.
Oh please. It has been posted many many times by the anti universal health care brigade here that the USA's private health care system is a catalyst for advances and discoveries of new treatments, drugs and cures. And that having universal health care would kill this.
Basic medical research really has little to do with how health care is actually funded and administered to patients.
Even in the USA, the vast majority of medical research is publicly-funded by the federal government (mainly through NIH grants).
Basic medical research really has little to do with how health care is actually funded and administered to patients.
Even in the USA, the vast majority of medical research is publicly-funded by the federal government (mainly through NIH grants).
And I am not arguing that point. However the anti universal health care brigade most certainly does throw the idea out that taking the private sector out of the health care game will kill medical innovation. Not to mention also stopping bright minds from pursuing a career in the health care field. All of which is of course total poppycock.
We can compare the US to Sweden all we want... 2 different cultures, 2 different population sizes, 2 different racial distributions, and so on...
It does nothing to reinforce you point, nor does it help the cause of those against you.
You have barked up this tree and failed before.
The US already has CMS fully functional. The largest health care payor in the world. Extending it to cover all is very feasible. It already handles the most complex and costly cases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevFan-RU-
As for having a heart attack, you generally go to the ER, not a particular doctor.
Most ERs will have more than one doctor on duty. More importantly... those doctors are located in an ER... and you do not price shop for the best bargain doctor when dying.
Universal healthcare in Western Europe and Canada will gradually begin to falter as 3rd world immigration increases and their poverty numbers bulge. Here in the US the amount of tax paying citizens is not increasing fast enough to cover the needs of the increasing urban underclass. Then you have to consider that many of these taxpayers will be retiring in the next few years. It's going to be disastrous.
How? How was it proven wrong? He isn't talking about the status quo... he's talking about removing the restrictions that harm the "free-market" that is hogtying the healthcare industry.
ONCE AGAIN....
Please cite for us ONE SINGLE INSTANCE where abolishment of all regulations has resulted in an IMPROVEMENT in outcomes or quality.
You have beat this drum for education, now trying it on healthcare.
Put on your big boy pants and back up that assertation.
Look at Social Security here in the United States... it's a program which is no longer sustainable, and is already insufficient in providing for future retirees.
In all honesty, I wish I could opt out of SS and put that money into mutual funds and other investments that will give me a greater return. But nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. Apparently we have no choice.
What about SS is "no longer sustainable?" Please supply stats showing SS in danger of insolvency, not facts like "we're living longer and having fewer kids." SS is fine to provide full benefits until 2035, and 80% of benefits for 50 years after (and 100% of benefits if we raise the withholding above $102k).
If we didn't have SS we'd have a Dickensian society. I know that's what you'd like Dev, but the rest of us don't like to see widows eating catfood.
What about SS is "no longer sustainable?" Please supply stats showing SS in danger of insolvency, not facts like "we're living longer and having fewer kids." SS is fine to provide full benefits until 2035, and 80% of benefits for 50 years after (and 100% of benefits if we raise the withholding above $102k).
If we didn't have SS we'd have a Dickensian society. I know that's what you'd like Dev, but the rest of us don't like to see widows eating catfood.
You do realize that most of SS's trust fund is made up of Treasury IOU's that will have to be collected in taxes in order to be paid back to the fund...I don't see how the Federal Government is ever going to be able to do that. There's over $2.5 TRILLION in IOUs in the "fund", and not to mention the government will also have to find a way to service the debt, pay out Medicare and Medicaid...oh and finance the general budget too...
Slick internet rebuttal chief. Anyways, none that I've looked into, just common sense. Unless you think massive waves of unskilled workers are filing taxes every year and refraining from using welfare benefits, I don't know what you're disagreeing with. I always assumed liberals just accepted welfare deficits as a cost of uplifting the world.
Slick internet rebuttal chief. Anyways, none that I've looked into, just common sense. Unless you think massive waves of unskilled workers are filing taxes every year and refraining from using welfare benefits, I don't know what you're disagreeing with. I always assumed liberals just accepted welfare deficits as a cost of uplifting the world.
In which case, it's a purely ideological issue.
I am disagreeing with your notion that a healthcare apocalypse is just around the corner due to allowing poor people access to care. You made up an outlandish scenario based on nothing by creative writing.
Yes, people retire. Guess what? Typically, when somebody retires from a job, somebody else is hired/promoted into it. The void is replaced.
While I am in complete agreement that welfare reform is neccesary, it is an entirely separate issue.
More to a point, "the underclass" as you refer to them, already receive healthcare. Even here in the US. They represent some of the most expensive consumers of healthcare as they have limited access to preventative care. Rather than be given $400 in medication to control blood pressure, they come into the ERs with $40,000 heart attacks. Most, if not all, of which has to be eaten by the providers.
If you were concern about cost, then preventing "the underclass" from accessing regular healthcare should be the absolute last recommendation you would make.
Absolutely not. Many ethnic minorities, especially blacks, cannot bring themselves to consult with a doctor. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/215165.php Many poor people simply do not wish to help themselves. While you're correct, preventative care would reduce cost in the long run, the effect would not be as profound as you seem to believe. How many uninsured people are there, truly? 13 million or so once you ignore illegal immigrants, those eligible for coverage but unwilling to utilize it, and those making 75k or more who simply don't want it.
It's not an outlandish scenario and I did not imply it was "right around the corner." But it is imminent. I guess I was thinking more about the welfare state rather than the healthcare debate though. Simply put these old retirees are not be replaced at a fast enough rate, many of them are retiring and their positions are simply disappearing.
What about SS is "no longer sustainable?" Please supply stats showing SS in danger of insolvency, not facts like "we're living longer and having fewer kids." SS is fine to provide full benefits until 2035, and 80% of benefits for 50 years after (and 100% of benefits if we raise the withholding above $102k).
If we didn't have SS we'd have a Dickensian society. I know that's what you'd like Dev, but the rest of us don't like to see widows eating catfood.
Stop being so melodramatic. No one can live off Social Security. If one put that money into proper investment and retirement accounts, they would have far more money to live comfortably off of.
The other thing: I DON'T WANT SOCIAL SECURITY. So I shouldn't have to pay into it. I'd rather have that money go into my pocket and my investments where I can make it work for me.
I am disagreeing with your notion that a healthcare apocalypse is just around the corner due to allowing poor people access to care. You made up an outlandish scenario based on nothing by creative writing.
Yes, people retire. Guess what? Typically, when somebody retires from a job, somebody else is hired/promoted into it. The void is replaced.
While I am in complete agreement that welfare reform is neccesary, it is an entirely separate issue.
More to a point, "the underclass" as you refer to them, already receive healthcare. Even here in the US. They represent some of the most expensive consumers of healthcare as they have limited access to preventative care. Rather than be given $400 in medication to control blood pressure, they come into the ERs with $40,000 heart attacks. Most, if not all, of which has to be eaten by the providers.
If you were concern about cost, then preventing "the underclass" from accessing regular healthcare should be the absolute last recommendation you would make.
What's the big deal? Just give them some asprin and send them on their merry way.
