Confused Briton seeks clarification from right -wing Americans

[sneakypenguin]

As far as you having choices go no ones forcing you to give up your private insurance...this simply provides another, (hopefully) cheaper option for people who can't afford private insurance or don't want it for whatever reason.

To continue this point those of us who wish for private care(as I have) instead of government run, do we get that tax money back? Taxes will HAVE to go up, you can't add a trillion+dollars to the deficit without them increasing (even on the middle class). SO why should those of us who go to college and get those 50-200k middle class jobs have to pay for insurance twice?

Kinda like having to pay for a PS3 and 360 when all you play(and want) is the 360. How is that fair? Granted there is a lot of things in government like this but healthcare would be a huge portion of the budget(and taxes) so hence more important to me than being robbed blind on say property taxes.

 

[sneakypenguin]

I am proud to consider myself conservative on economic and fiscal issues, and liberal on social ones, so i can see where each party is coming from. The concept of government-run healthcare sounds all well and good, but is now really the best time? We are in the middle of a global economic recession, just passed a $787 billion economic stimulus, which brought our national debt to a record low; can we afford to pay for a $1 trillion healthcare reform? I find the answer is a loud, resounding no. It is a noble idea, but a noble cause is not always the intelligent cause. America simply cannot afford it.

Exactly! Eventually you run out of someones(our) money. And when the deficit for one year alone is 1.5 TRILLION dollars how the hell can we afford it? I mean sorry come back later when we have a balanced budget and a surplus and the idea would sound a lot more rational.

 

[Agayek]

As an Englishman, it can be sometimes hard to wrap my head around the psyche of many Americans particularly the type who spends their days arguing on the internets about freedom and patriotism, also known as conservatives.

Now, in recent days there has been much talk of Obama introducing state healthcare, in a similar vein to that of the NHS (Britain's health service), now I can understand why some conservative might disagree with that seeing as it's (in their words) "socialism", but I do not understand the attacks on Britain's health service, calling it "evil" and "Orwellian". I just don't understand why.

True, the NHS isn't the best health service in the world, but if you do not want it, the option exists to to pay shitloads of money for private care. Surely such a system could work just fine in America, the rich/conservative just won't use it and the poor/people who don't want to pay for a service that does it's job just fine.

To me it just seems like an attempt to criticize Obama even more, by calling him socialist, after all (as someone on this very forum said), it's easier to make the other guy look like Hitler, than to make yourself look like Jesus.

So my question to you conservatives out there is.

Why do you not want a free health service when the option for private care will still exist?

Basically, they're trying to sling mud on Obama. It's really dumb and the ones doing it need to stfu already.

I'm against the health care plan though, and that's mostly because I hate the government and think it needs to be as small as humanly possible.

 

[Rigs83]

Spoiler: snip

As an Englishman, it can be sometimes hard to wrap my head around the psyche of many Americans particularly the type who spends their days arguing on the internets about freedom and patriotism, also known as conservatives.

Now, in recent days there has been much talk of Obama introducing state healthcare, in a similar vein to that of the NHS (Britain's health service), now I can understand why some conservative might disagree with that seeing as it's (in their words) "socialism", but I do not understand the attacks on Britain's health service, calling it "evil" and "Orwellian". I just don't understand why.

True, the NHS isn't the best health service in the world, but if you do not want it, the option exists to to pay shitloads of money for private care. Surely such a system could work just fine in America, the rich/conservative just won't use it and the poor/people who don't want to pay for a service that does it's job just fine.

To me it just seems like an attempt to criticize Obama even more, by calling him socialist, after all (as someone on this very forum said), it's easier to make the other guy look like Hitler, than to make yourself look like Jesus.

So my question to you conservatives out there is.

Why do you not want a free health service when the option for private care will still exist?

America was founded by religious fanatics, bigots, homicidal maniacs and the dregs of Europe. Honesty and sanity is not politically viable here because we have the worst education system coupled with the most expensive and simultaneously ineffective health care system of any developed nation and people are defending it like it's the best thing since slice bread. If I was you I would make some popcorn and watch as the whole thing collapses.

 

[Saskwach]

This whole debate bemuses me, living as I do in Australia. We are a living proof of concept that there is a public model that doesn't preclude private medical care and actually works better than a purely private system.
What shits me most about the debate is that those who oppose a public-ish system are using Britain and Canada to scare people. From what I hear, Obama isn't suggesting a wholly public system like those countries. Firstly, because he knows that it'd never pass, and secondly because those systems really do have fundamental failings. But since he's not suggesting such a system - I repeat, not suggesting such a system - then the whole point is moot. Whether Obama makes a system that works as well is a debate in and of itself, but it's a different debate - not "public versus private where we exclude any middle ground" but rather "private versus public with as many private options as before".

Now I'll just take a gander over some of the tired talking points in the "public vs private THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND" line.

Doctor-to-patient ratio is higher if you go public.
Funnily enough, Cuba has the best doctor-to-patient ratio. Motherfrakkin' Cuba! But here's a linky, with all the ratios: http://strangemaps.wordpress.com/2007/10/17/185-the-doctorspatients-map-of-the-world/

Notice that Australia is 400:1 where America is 390:1. Ten patients extra per doctor. That's breaking the bank, I tell you. But look at Europe: gee whiz, those guys are wiping the floor with you. Switzerland, with a system that is fundamentally similar to ours in Oz (but better) has 280:1.

I might return with more, but right now I'm in a rush.

One more thing: people should read The Undercover Economist [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Undercover_Economist]. It's a book written by a mainly free-market, privatisation-is-good economist who sides with a public-with-private-allowed system, because there's a strong economic argument why a wholly private or a wholly public system is fundamentally flawed. Again, I'll come back and explain it later.

 

[cleverlymadeup]

I would pay insurance costs for things that are likely to occur, such as breaking bones, or common diseases, or more serious ones if I was particularly at risk for them. To make me have to pay for some disease that I won't or (quite possibly) can't get is silly. I want to pay for services I would use. I would agree that some coverage is wise, but get only what you absolutely need.

it doesn't work like that at all

you can't really pick and choose what you may or may not have. you might not be at risk to get a torn acl but one day you might twist in an odd way and tear your acl. with insurance coverage you can get it paid off but if you have selective insurance, you couldn't add knee surgery to the list after you tore your acl.

however you would be out about 20k or more for the surgery. with healthcare or insurance the cost of that surgery is paid for

 

[sneakypenguin]

As far as you having choices go no ones forcing you to give up your private insurance...this simply provides another, (hopefully) cheaper option for people who can't afford private insurance or don't want it for whatever reason.

To continue this point those of us who wish for private care(as I have) instead of government run, do we get that tax money back? Taxes will HAVE to go up, you can't add a trillion+dollars to the deficit without them increasing (even on the middle class). SO why should those of us who go to college and get those 50-200k middle class jobs have to pay for insurance twice?

So you can go work at any company you want or freelance, instead of having to work at a company that offers a health care plan?

Healthcare is pretty decently affordable even if I had to go solo(200-240 a month for family of 4 in my quick shop arounds). Not to mention there is always paying cash for things. Which would actually end up cheaper for me(and something i'm considering) Car insurance covers medical expenses in the event of wreck, work covers accidents, so barring some sort of cancer or similar disease i'm good to go. And even in said event I can just sell assets and go bankrupt. No one else should have to pay for me. I don't feel I have a claim to someone elses work and money. (one reason why I didn't take my state scholarship cause its taxpayer funded)

 

[DownOnTheUpside]

Spoiler: Some specs on some of the changes coming from the new healthcare system

Folks, while going over some emails in the office, I came some interesting information on the Democrats big health care bill, H.R. 3200, America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009. While this is federal legislation and not state, the topic is of enough significance that I thought many of you would be interested in reading it. Please find below page references and direct quotes from the proposed bill.

Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time of the bill becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar plan. If that is not available, you will be required to take the gov option!
Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.
Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.
Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.
Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.
Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)
Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens
Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.
Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter.
Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No "judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed.
Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.
Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives.
Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND their families.
Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll BR ? Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
Page 167: Any individual who doesn?t' have acceptable healthcare (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.
Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay for them).
Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.
Page 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax." (Yes, it really says that.)
Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected."
Page 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same (thanks, AMA!)
Page 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their professional judgment, etc.
Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private healthcare industries.
Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.
Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!
Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems preventable re-admissions.
Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government.
Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in healthcare companies!
Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without government approval.
Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in other words, yet another payoff for ACORN.
Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: i.e., rationing.
Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc.
Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individual s.
Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by phone).
Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?
Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate taxes ahead of time.
Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.
Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends.
Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient's health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.
Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life.
Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for ACORN.
Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for ACORN.
Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage.
Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and rationing those services.

More stuff to be added too... I'm tired of the ignorance and hate against America on this board.

I post on another forum and this is what one members of the forum posted about a convo they had with someone from Great Britain.

Spoiler: Convo

I had a talk with a guy today from Great Britain and he really made some sense on this. Britain and Canada already have this national healthcare. To hear him tell it, it is awful. The doctors/nurses pay is drastically cut therefore most entering the field arent as trained and knowledgeable as the docs we have now. The healthcare industry is the only good paying job America has left. He said nothing is free. This is an added deduction on our payroll checks just like SSI, federal and state taxes. Now there will be an extra deduction for this "healthcare". He said he went to the doc for an ingrown toenail in Britain and was first put on an 8 week waiting list just to see the doc. anyway, the "doctors" botched it 5 times and he wasnt healed for 1 1/2 years. And we are talking ingrown toenails, something simple. He just got the word that Britain is taking all medicinal treatment from his mom. She has become a burden on society and is costing too much to keep her alive. She has lack of oxygen in her blood and for years they have been giving her medicine to help her cope. Recently, they said no more. They can do nothing more for her.

its going to be awful

 

[SimpleChimp]

As an Englishman, it can be sometimes hard to wrap my head around the psyche of many Americans particularly the type who spends their days arguing on the internets about freedom and patriotism, also known as conservatives.

Now, in recent days there has been much talk of Obama introducing state healthcare, in a similar vein to that of the NHS (Britain's health service), now I can understand why some conservative might disagree with that seeing as it's (in their words) "socialism", but I do not understand the attacks on Britain's health service, calling it "evil" and "Orwellian". I just don't understand why.

True, the NHS isn't the best health service in the world, but if you do not want it, the option exists to to pay shitloads of money for private care. Surely such a system could work just fine in America, the rich/conservative just won't use it and the poor/people who don't want to pay for a service that does it's job just fine.

To me it just seems like an attempt to criticize Obama even more, by calling him socialist, after all (as someone on this very forum said), it's easier to make the other guy look like Hitler, than to make yourself look like Jesus.

So my question to you conservatives out there is.

Why do you not want a free health service when the option for private care will still exist?

It's taxes my UK cousin. American's dont want to pay taxes so that illegals, or poorer citizens can clog up the hospitol systems. The truth is rich canadians come to america for their healthcare because the lists are packed in canada.

 

[Pyre00]

Cause I like Natural Selection.

 

[scotth266]

Snip.

Ok, thank you. Someone actually comes in and tells me how these things work, and I can form a better opinion! I have to admit the idea looks a little better to me now, though I'm still generally opposed to it because I fear it becoming a government morass.

The difference is, one side will probably become broadminded if you talk to them. The other side? That's where you'll find the vast majority of the people who are actively ignoring facts in favor of rhetoric in order to say narrowminded.

Aaaaand now you've lost me. Why, oh WHY, do you say stuff that's intelligent, well thought out, and explains shit on almost every other topic, but when it turns to Republicans you become a irrational hate machine?

 

[Bigeyez]

As far as you having choices go no ones forcing you to give up your private insurance...this simply provides another, (hopefully) cheaper option for people who can't afford private insurance or don't want it for whatever reason.

To continue this point those of us who wish for private care(as I have) instead of government run, do we get that tax money back? Taxes will HAVE to go up, you can't add a trillion+dollars to the deficit without them increasing (even on the middle class). SO why should those of us who go to college and get those 50-200k middle class jobs have to pay for insurance twice?

Kinda like having to pay for a PS3 and 360 when all you play(and want) is the 360. How is that fair? Granted there is a lot of things in government like this but healthcare would be a huge portion of the budget(and taxes) so hence more important to me than being robbed blind on say property taxes.

Of course taxes will go up. Anyone saying otherwise doesn't know what they are talking about. Then again taxes will be on the rise regardless but yes with a brand new gov't health care program taxes will HAVE to go up. Theres just no way of getting around that. Now your analogy isn't exactly right though. It's not like someones going to go to the hospital and the bills going to be mailed to you. But yes at the end of the day everyones taxes, eventually even those who earn less then 100k a year will end up being raised.

Now if things go the way they are trending now we'll see top heavy tax percentages. Which puts most of the tax burden on businesses and the rich. What those percentages end up being who knows. Is it "fair" to tax the rich more? Well thats a a huge can of worms in an of itself.

At the end of the day it comes down to whether your willing to be taxed more in order to help others. And it's definitely not that easy to part with your hard earned money, trust me I know.

 

[TyphoidMary]

Honestly, I haven't heard one good thing about the new health care system. I keep hearing you'll be fined for not having insurance, if you have it already you can keep what you have, but if you want to change you have to use the plans the government has available, and a healthy 20 year old would [ay the same monthly as a 70 year old cancer patient. None of which makes sense to me.
I'd rather just stick with insurance through my college or through a private company (assuming I can actually afford it) than have to deal with the shit they're pulling. Obama is still new, and I for one don't think he's ready to tackle some of the things he wants to because he lacks the experience necessary to foresee the problems he could cause with every little thing he does.
Like with the Cambridge police department and that whole debacle because he couldn't keep his opinion to himself when it was wildly inappropriate to call them stupid for doing their jobs.

 

[Jsnoopy]

I'm just as perplexed as you are, especially seeing how pissed of people are getting at the town hall meetings over cheap national healthcare and cheaper private healthcare.

Honestly, I haven't heard one good thing about the new health care system. I keep hearing you'll be fined for not having insurance, if you have it already you can keep what you have, but if you want to change you have to use the plans the government has available, and a healthy 20 year old would [ay the same monthly as a 70 year old cancer patient. None of which makes sense to me.

Thats funny not much of your rambling paragraph made sense to me. Try checking your facts and doing some research.

 

[internetzealot1]

Why the fuck do we need a healthcare system?! If you have the money, you see the doctor. If you don,t have it, then you don't see the doctor, and then maybe you get sick and maybe you die, just like you would eventually. Life's a brutal struggle, then it ends before you want it to. Grow a pair.

 

[Jsnoopy]

Why the fuck do we need a healthcare system?! If you have the money, you see the doctor. If you don,t have it, then you don't see the doctor, and then maybe you get sick and maybe you die, just like you would eventually. Life's a brutal struggle, then it ends before you want it to. Grow a pair.

Try saying that again when your broke and AIDS infected ass needs to see a doctor. Besides the whole point of society and government is supposed to try ease the "brutal struggle".

 

[asinann]

I didnt care, Then they pulled the NHS into the arguement.

How dare they! Stupid conservative nut-jobs, On WE are allowed to slag off our health service!

Get your own, THEN slag it off!

Because some people are too shallow-minded to see the truth. It happens with just about everybody... well, here at least.

Its a power grab, and Orwellian is just a descriptive of how they are presenting itself. Doing a little research you will easily find that the president is back and forth on exactly what is in the bill (of which there are several different versions, not just one) and honestly if you take a historical, or definitive standpoint it is socialism.

Problem is, "socialism" has been so overused in the last 20 years, both correctly and incorrectly, that it has now become empty rhetoric. Nazi, likewise, but the terms are in essence the same, because Nazi stands for National Socialist. Just look at what socialist governments did in 1915-30 Russia and 1930-36 Germany and make the comparison of what the president is saying.

Also, "free" is not as free as you would expect. I don't want my neighbor paying for my health care because I don't want to pay for his. A tax increase is mandatory to be able to pay for it, so it's not "free." There is also going to be rationing within the bill, as it stands in each version, which is due to the fact that they cannot simply afford it for everyone, and the poor will lose out there still.

Also, I want MY CHOICES not the government choosing what health care I will be able to get. Within each version of the bill there are stipulations saying that all major decisions will be made by a government bureaucrat, which takes time that could, and will cause unnecessary mortality and morbidity, due to the lack of immediate on site decision making. I would rather have a doctor, not a politician, make recommendations and keep myself in charge, rather than have a corrupt power hungry politician in charge of my health.

Maybe I'm too much on the "self responsibility" thing because I'm not some mentally deficient, pathetic simpleton who requires the government to hold my hand for every little thing in the world.

Fair point, Fairly rational at least. Y'see the thing is, i know an increase in tax is on the cards, But think of the number of lives it could save? With taxpayer money going into healthcare shouldn't that also bring up the standard of healthcare on the bottom line?

Also, just because something calls itself socialist or a republic doesn't mean it actually is. The USSR, China and North Korea all call themselves republics. In fact, almost every communist nation calls itself a republic somewhere in it's full name.

Republicans are hated in the US because they always try first to fear monger, then when that doesn't work they go search for some piece of dirt that really shouldn't be considered a high crime or misdemeanor, but since the republican party wants back in power, they go for an impeachment based on it. Ronald Regan (the patron saint of the current republican party) did nothing but cut taxes on the wealthy and kill as many public services as he could. Obama is proposing raising taxes to the rate they were at in 1985. Every republican administration from 1980 to present has cut the crap out of services while raising military spending and lowering taxes on the upper class and corporations.

Democrats aren't a whole lot better, but that's mostly because the party is schizophrenic due to constant attacks by republicans. What we need over here is some sort of viable third party, but every time one attempts to form at the state level, the parties group up and pass a law to make sure those new parties can't get on ballets. If you can't get on the ballet you can't get elected.

Both parties are crap, but you have to pick one or the other.