The Health Care Debate

Come here to talk about topics that are not related to development, or even Kansas City.
Post Reply
User avatar
Joemoney
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1006
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 4:47 pm
Location: Omaha, NE

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by Joemoney »

tat2kc wrote: well maybe we can have a morality screening prior to medical services. Smoker? Sorry, you caused your own diseases, we won't treat you. What about those who live with smokers? Since second hand smoke can cause disease, then does the decision to live with a smoker mean that you don't get medical care?
Who used the word "morality"?  That's your word.

I say "personal responsibility" should determine the quality of your healthcare.
Using "morality" to determine who has access to quality medical care has to be one of the most morally repugnant arguements ever made on this site. Would not be surprised to find out that those taking this stance probably define themselves as good Christians.  Its repulsive.
Puh-lease.  Are you going to give us the left winger "diversity" rant now?  I am in no way religious and I just think people should pay for their own mistakes and that all lives are NOT of equal value.
RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT IN 2008
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

User avatar
Highlander
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9174
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by Highlander »

bahua wrote: They do manage to lower costs in European nations with state-sponsored healthcare, but the result is doctors with a fraction of the competence of their American "for-profit" counterparts. I've observed that socialism turns all but the most devoted people into apathetic drones, regarding their work.
I would not say that is the case.  I have had some pretty good doctors in Europe and probably a bit more down to earth than some US doctors who tend to aggressively treat everything even when its not necassary.  What I will say is that the doctors here are under pressure to get you in and out quickly, keep cost down (so they won't always prescribe the optimal medicine due to costs) and you rarely get a chance to follow up with the same doctor.  The option is to go private, which I have because I am still enrolled in US insurance which covers me here.  The private doctors are really on the ball but they tend to be specialists but they still make quite a bit less than their US counterparts. 

User avatar
KCMax
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 24051
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
Contact:

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by KCMax »

KCMax wrote: Its interesting, Europeans think we have millions of people who don't get any kind of medical care, and Americans think Europeans have to wait 18 months for a medical procedure. Neither is true.

That being said, we do have a problem. Just a starting point for discussion, but I think a good start would include:

Government covering all catastrophic health care - major medical costs that go over a certain amount - the hundred of thousands of dollars. There's no reason why a medical malady should force you into bankruptcy.

Government covers preventative health care - everyone gets one doctor's visit a year for free.

The rest - you're on your own. Premiums would be lower since the catastrophic costs are out of the picture and preventative care would reduce other long term and emergency costs. Health Savings Accounts could be an option. Instead of Medicare and Medicaid, perhaps give govt subsidies to insurance companies that cover the poor and the elderly at drastically reduced premiums. By pooling those high-risk individuals with the general population, you can spread the risk better.

The key is reducing overall health care costs. I think this can be done by relying more on preventative care, pooling groups of insured to disperse risks, and by having more standardized procedures for testing, so that expensive testing equipment isn't used unnecessarily. Also, bringing hospitals and clinics to the 21st century when it comes to record keeping could save a lot of money. I'm still amazed KU Med hasn't been able to fully integrate electronic medical records.
Hey, Chris Lester endorses the KCMax Health Care Reform Plan!
SAVE THE PLAZA - FROM ZOMBIES! Find out how at:

http://twitter.com/TheKCRag

aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12257
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by aknowledgeableperson »

Interesting.  The people who control who gets transplants might change their protocols.  Like in the use of Kidney's.  Now they go to those most in need.  The proposal is that they go to those who will live the longest.  So, in other words, a person who is 65 and is in urgent need of a kidney will lose out to a 20 year old whose urgency is less since the younger one will live longer.

With national health care similiar decisions can be made in other conditions all in the name of saving money due to budget constrants.
I may be right.  I may be wrong.  But there is a lot of gray area in-between.

User avatar
Joemoney
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1006
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 4:47 pm
Location: Omaha, NE

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by Joemoney »

aknowledgeableperson wrote: Interesting.  The people who control who gets transplants might change their protocols.  Like in the use of Kidney's.  Now they go to those most in need.  The proposal is that they go to those who will live the longest.  So, in other words, a person who is 65 and is in urgent need of a kidney will lose out to a 20 year old whose urgency is less since the younger one will live longer.
In today's society, we have the government footing the bill for six figure operations for 90 year olds.  I don't see the problem with choosing by "time left."
RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT IN 2008
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

User avatar
phna
Colonnade
Colonnade
Posts: 820
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 3:33 pm

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by phna »

Its interesting, Europeans think we have millions of people who don't get any kind of medical care, and Americans think Europeans have to wait 18 months for a medical procedure. Neither is true.
The above statement is an over generalization and not conclusive or accurate.

44 million Americans have no health insurance. This is widely reported and there are many sources that substantiate this as fact. Without health insurance minor health problems become exacerbated when the uninsured forgo seeing a physician and then have to go to emergency to get care. Emergency is the most expensive care that can be provided. Adding insult to Injury, the study, To Err is Human, documents that 98,000 deaths occur in American hospitals due to medical errors. "That's more than die from motor vehicle accidents, breast cancer, or AIDS--three causes that receive far more public attention."

I was in Montreal a week ago, a member of the British commonwealth. And Canada has universal insurance and a single payor, the Government. I read several articles in the  papers that talked about the wait that Canadians have to see a specialist. On the other hand, one of the friends I was visiting had emergency surgery to remove here slpeen. No wait at all, and she had no out of pocket expense either. A debate has emerged in Canada--seems anathema to what is being debated in the US--on how stand alone pay for service clinics are threatening the Single payer medical services in Canada.

Health care is a societal oxymoron. It is both a right and a privilege. A right when it is needed and a privilege as it is consumed.
Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does.

Jean Paul Sartre

aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12257
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by aknowledgeableperson »

phna wrote: Without health insurance minor health problems become exacerbated when the uninsured forgo seeing a physician and then have to go to emergency to get care. Emergency is the most expensive care that can be provided. Adding insult to Injury, the study, To Err is Human, documents that 98,000 deaths occur in American hospitals due to medical errors. "That's more than die from motor vehicle accidents, breast cancer, or AIDS--three causes that receive far more public attention."

I was in Montreal a week ago, a member of the British commonwealth. And Canada has universal insurance and a single payor, the Government. I read several articles in the  papers that talked about the wait that Canadians have to see a specialist. On the other hand, one of the friends I was visiting had emergency surgery to remove here slpeen. No wait at all, and she had no out of pocket expense either. A debate has emerged in Canada--seems anathema to what is being debated in the US--on how stand alone pay for service clinics are threatening the Single payer medical services in Canada.

Health care is a societal oxymoron. It is both a right and a privilege. A right when it is needed and a privilege as it is consumed.
A few counter points.

Universal health care will not eliminate deaths due to medical errors.
Emergency surgery is very different than elective surgery (and elective surgery isn't just plastic but also many knee replacements and the like).
And there are many without health insurance but how many are without by choice, that is they can have it but don't want it for whatever reason (religious or wealthy)?
I may be right.  I may be wrong.  But there is a lot of gray area in-between.

User avatar
phna
Colonnade
Colonnade
Posts: 820
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 3:33 pm

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by phna »

Universal health care will not eliminate deaths due to medical errors.
This is logical but it was not argued that it did. The point being made was that when health care services are delayed and emergent care is used in place of primary care the "system" becomes very expensive. On top of that, adding insult to injury $17-29 billion dollars goes down the drain because of medical errors--see previous source. That's a huge chunk of change.
Emergency surgery is very different than elective surgery
This goes without saying and does not run counter to any argument stated above but rather, appears to support them. The types of Errors (Diagnostic, Treatment,Preventative) occur regardless if the surgery is elective or emergent. i.e. The wrong knee has been operated on--sorry come back tomorrow and we'll correct it.!
And there are many without health insurance but how many are without by choice, that is they can have it but don't want it for whatever reason (religious or wealthy)?
How many? I would say of the 46million uninsured (see source below), this number is negligent, if even counted. The assumption runs against those who want it. If you are wealthy--you can choose pay for service, so why pay a premium? And now, with High deductible "Health Saving Accounts" that are pretax dollars, this is a logical choice, if you have the money. Others may not have that choice,"the main reason that adults’ private insurance coverage has faded in recent years is that the costs of insurance premiums have climbed, making coverage less affordable for employers and employees alike."  http://www.cbpp.org/8-29-06health.htm

Don't forget, everyone in congress, along with getting to vote on their own pay raises, also gets "free" health insurance for life! Do a google search on "Health Care Expenditures as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product" and you can find a lot of literature estimating this number is between 14-16% of America's GDP.
Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does.

Jean Paul Sartre

User avatar
phna
Colonnade
Colonnade
Posts: 820
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 3:33 pm

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by phna »

Another dead socialist idea?

"We favor the union of all the existing agencies of the Federal Government dealing with the public health into a single national health service without discrimination against or for any one set of therapeutic methods, school of medicine, or school of healing with such additional powers as may be necessary to enable it to perform efficiently such duties in the protection of the public from preventable diseases as may be properly undertaken by the Federal authorities, including the executing of existing laws regarding pure food, quarantine and cognate subjects, the promotion of vital statistics and the extension of the registration area of such statistics, and co-operation with the health activities of the various States and cities of the Nation. "


Progressive Party Platform of 1912
November 5, 1912

The Candidate, Former Republican President-- Teddy Roosevelt.

n Healthcare Reform in America: A Reference Handbook (2004), Jennie Kronenfeld, a sociology professor at Arizona State University, writes that "this was the first inclusion of a health insurance plank in any national platform with a major candidate, although the Socialist Party had endorsed a compulsory system as early as 1904."

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29617
Last edited by phna on Fri Mar 13, 2009 1:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does.

Jean Paul Sartre

Maitre D
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 14070
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 5:57 pm
Location: Sunny Johnson County

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by Maitre D »

If you need to buy car insurance to drive, then you need to buy health insurance to visit the hospital.  There is no such thing as a "right", other than life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness.
[img width=472 height=40]http://media.kansascity.com/images/champions_blue.gif[/img]

"For 15 years...KU won every time. There was no rivalry" - Frank Martin

User avatar
phna
Colonnade
Colonnade
Posts: 820
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 3:33 pm

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by phna »

Maitre D wrote: If you need to buy car insurance to drive, then you need to buy health insurance to visit the hospital.   There is no such thing as a "right", other than life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness.
Whiff. I can feel the breeze. You missed the point entirely. Another conclusion with no argument, factual understanding or perceptible logic.
Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does.

Jean Paul Sartre

Maitre D
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 14070
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 5:57 pm
Location: Sunny Johnson County

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by Maitre D »

Well, it may not have as much relevance as your 1912 citation of Teddy Roosevelt, but I'm trying my best.
[img width=472 height=40]http://media.kansascity.com/images/champions_blue.gif[/img]

"For 15 years...KU won every time. There was no rivalry" - Frank Martin

User avatar
phna
Colonnade
Colonnade
Posts: 820
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 3:33 pm

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by phna »

Maitre D wrote: Well, it may not have as much relevance as your 1912 citation of Teddy Roosevelt, but I'm trying my best.
If you have never heard of precedence, didn't realize Teddy was a Republican (progressive party candidate then), and then understand why the current President would raise this as an issue for bipartisan--then I understand why you would see no relevance. 

Being argumentative, without substance, thought or objectivity is your trademark. 
Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does.

Jean Paul Sartre

lock+load
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 4205
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:25 am
Location: brookside

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by lock+load »

Maitre D wrote: There is no such thing as a "right", other than life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness.
Life is often dependent on health care.

kcdcchef
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 8804
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 10:48 pm
Location: pittsburgh, pennsylvania

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by kcdcchef »

lock+load wrote: Life is often dependent on health care.
and the really funny thing is, it works in other countries. strange, isnt it?
MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!! :D :D :D :D :D

Maitre D
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 14070
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 5:57 pm
Location: Sunny Johnson County

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by Maitre D »

lock+load wrote: Life is often dependent on health care.
That's why emergency care is available to all citizens. 


Besides, your argument could be applied to anything.  Should grocery stores offer free food & drink to anyone who walks in?  Gotta eat to live!    Should clothing stores give out free shirts - hey man, no shirts no service.    You'd freeze in the winter without a heavy coat anyway.
[img width=472 height=40]http://media.kansascity.com/images/champions_blue.gif[/img]

"For 15 years...KU won every time. There was no rivalry" - Frank Martin

drumatix
New York Life
New York Life
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 4:25 pm

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by drumatix »

kcdcchef wrote: and the really funny thing is, it works in other countries. strange, isnt it?
With 'works' being a relative term. There appears to be plenty of medical vacationing from the UK, for example.

My real problem with this is that healthcare is a positive right, and such rights should be held secondary to our more primary negative rights, such as the ones guaranteed in the bill of rights. "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" are all negative rights. I can't provide anyone with either of those three things by any means, but that's not the intent - the intent is that I may not deprive anyone of those things.

Positive, contractual, obligatory rights (like healthcare) shouldn't ever trump our negative rights, the rights to be free from the intervention of others. You don't have to do much thinking to come up with scenarios where folks will lose hard-earned personal property to ensure the rights of others to have healthcare. If my family 'loses the farm' because we can't cover the higher taxes caused by universal healthcare, it should not be because we're being forced to provide healthcare to the poor.

User avatar
KCMax
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 24051
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
Contact:

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by KCMax »

Maitre D wrote: That's why emergency care is available to all citizens.   
Emergencies aren't the only way people die.
SAVE THE PLAZA - FROM ZOMBIES! Find out how at:

http://twitter.com/TheKCRag

Maitre D
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 14070
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 5:57 pm
Location: Sunny Johnson County

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by Maitre D »

KCMax wrote: Emergencies aren't the only way people die.
People die by all sorts of means.  If you were in control (and thank god you're not), everything in America would be "free".  You know - in the name of protecting us all.
[img width=472 height=40]http://media.kansascity.com/images/champions_blue.gif[/img]

"For 15 years...KU won every time. There was no rivalry" - Frank Martin

phxcat
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3454
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:11 pm
Location: Phoenix

Re: The Health Care Debate

Post by phxcat »

drumatix wrote: With 'works' being a relative term. There appears to be plenty of medical vacationing from the UK, for example.

My real problem with this is that healthcare is a positive right, and such rights should be held secondary to our more primary negative rights, such as the ones guaranteed in the bill of rights. "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" are all negative rights. I can't provide anyone with either of those three things by any means, but that's not the intent - the intent is that I may not deprive anyone of those things.

Positive, contractual, obligatory rights (like healthcare) shouldn't ever trump our negative rights, the rights to be free from the intervention of others. You don't have to do much thinking to come up with scenarios where folks will lose hard-earned personal property to ensure the rights of others to have healthcare. If my family 'loses the farm' because we can't cover the higher taxes caused by universal healthcare, it should not be because we're being forced to provide healthcare to the poor.

That could be applies to just about anything, roads, police protection, fire, etc.

Post Reply