Comments on: Legislating Towards Universal Health Care?

National Review Online: Democrats Pushing Near-Universal Health Care Coverage Incrementally

[standlee5]

Health insurance is pretty affordable it''s not having it that''ll cause bankruptcy. My brother has a pretty decent policy for 650. a month for a family of four. Not too bad. Expensive but probably the most important insurance dollars we''ll ever spend.

[brianbwb-2009]

"Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men..."

To secure the right to a healthy life, Government should facilitate the means to affordable health care, whenever and wherever private companies reserve their services only for the rich. No one, including the well off, should have to go broke, or be reduced to poverty, because of high health care costs, so competition from the government, should be introduced to pressure the private firms to provide better quality care at lower prices.

[imnho]

At the rate health costs are rising some sort of universal healthcare is inevieable. The ritch will always be able to afford it, but the middle class will be eventually made poor by the cost of health insurance.

The problem I see is that at some point the system health may suffer collapse due to high costs. The results would be very bad for the middle class.

[andor3]

The conservatives, by definition, are not comfortable with change, even in a system as badly broken as the U.S. health care system--they prefer something broken to any risk of change. So their opinion isn''t worth much consideration on this issue. They will sling meaningless labels like "social" "socialized" "socializm," but really it is just fear.

However single-payer health care isn''t risky: it is working in many places.

The question comes down to: in a rich country, is there any reason that everyone shouldn''t be covered automatically cradle-to-grave for basic health care and prescriptions?

Everyone seems to agree it is not just a good idea, it is a moral imperative. (the only ones who disagree are those who would like to use employer-sponsored health care as a motivation to keep employees docile and in line).

[incog-nito]

Da*n right! Time to join the rank of civilized, developed nations.

[katg21]

Great country this Republican America, heh?
Posted by WogerWabbit at 09:40 PM : Aug 22, 2007

I am sorry for your experience and only wish you well. How much better do you think your specific situation would be if our healthcare goes universal though? I''ve got relatives in Canada and have spoken to people here on this site about their experience with it. All have said it''s great if you''re relatively healthy but for the elderly and people such as yourself, battling a serious illness, it doesn''t come so easy.(long lines, waiting months for treatment, etc..) I just feel that there has to be another solutiion. It angers me that people climb a wall into our country, go to the hospital and automatically receive treatment and people like you have such difficulties. I am a conservative, obviously, and I strongly believe in less government involvement in my life. I think most people feel that way. I would rather my tax dollars go to help people like you and others who really deserve it, not those who cheat our system.

[katg21]

How very Christian of you, telling me to "shove it".
Posted by rwassel at 07:28 PM : Aug 22, 2007

What the hell do you care, I thought you libs hated religeous types. Oh, I see, you use the argument as it suites you. If you and your kind really cared about my religion then you wouldn''t have fought so hard to have prayer removed from schools. Maybe there would be more kind hearted, generous people out there if you libs wouldn''t fight so hard to have the ten commandments removed from public display. Now as for the healthcare system going universal, it is not going to work for us. Why do you want to give so much more power and control to the government? Would you prefer socialism? You want to fix healthcare then tell our government to stop providing free medical treatment to illegal aliens, to end frivolous lawsuits and to do a better job distributing to those who really need it. No, as always, you would rather infringe on the rights of others.

[elz523]

"The answer is that Democrats in Congress do not just want the government to cover the needy and uninsured. They want to legislate incrementally until they have established universal or near-universal taxpayer-funded coverage, beginning with children."

Good! Way to go Democrats! That is exactly why we sent you to Washington! Keep up the good work!

[wogerwabbit]

oops... (sp) edict

[wogerwabbit]

I have enough experience with the medical system to have a good take on what the problems are. As an example, I had a 10 minute CT scan two weeks ago that the hospital charged $3,800+ for, and left me with $780 in out of pocket expense.

I''ve paid tens of thousands of dollars in out of pocket medical expenses over the years and ended up going bankrupt 8 months after cancer surgery because I was laid off (3 months after the surgery) and have been treated as a pariah ever since.

After paying exorbitant COBRA costs for a year to maintain my insurance, Humana had the balls to convert my coverage to a $777 per month policy with a $25,000 life time benefit (yes, $25 thousand). When I quit those ******, my policy lapsed two days, so I was not covered at all for pre-existing conditions with my BCBS policy for a year and now get raped every month for premiums.

This can happen to any of you... even you Hummer driving needle d i c k Republicans... all you need to do is get sick... once.

To put this in perspective, my wife and I made over $120,000 between us before my layoff and are now back to about $80,000 after our $11,000 year immedialy following the disaster.

Further, my cancer can probably be directly attributed to Agent Orange, but because I''ve made too much money and the Bush administration idict in 2003 imposing limits on VA care because of my income being too high, they won''t even talk to me.

Great country this Republican America, heh?

[burneb]

If any of these blog statements about the poor paying little or no taxes, the poor receiving free or cheap medical care, people who bother to work able to get affordable health care,
etc. were sufficiently true, our country would not be facing all the medical care problems that we obviously are (obvious to all but the oblivious).

My family has pretty good coverage, and we can pretty much afford whatever more we need %u2013 but I know all too many who work harder than my wife and I, and are in deep financial trouble from medical costs and lack of available coverage. Forty years ago I did not think we needed universal tax-supported coverage, and since then have digested a lifetime of arguments about socialized medicine, but now I reluctantly conclude things will only get worse without it. Nothing less will adequately pool the risks and contain the future national cost of medical care to less than 20% of the gross national income.

America pays enough already to have decent care for all, but we haven%u2019t been getting it.
We won%u2019t get it until we stop paying 20-30% of the money for insurance and paperwork overhead that contributes nothing to actual care. Medicare and Medicaid are hardly perfect, but if our whole national system were more like them, we would be paying far less overhead and getting more coverage for the money.

[rwassel]

"For the poor and disabled we have that covered pretty well with medicaid."

Posted by standlee5 at 08:10 PM : Aug 22, 2007

You sure about that, Mr. Black and White? Funds for Medicaid have been slashed in previous years, and will continue to be slashed over the coming years.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5195533

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/29/politics/29budget.html?ex=1272427200&en=84385168821c77a9&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

[standlee5]

It''s pretty simple if you want to have a long healthy life make health insurance a priority. Get a job that has it or pay for it yourself. For the poor and disabled we have that covered pretty well with medicaid.

[standlee5]

Since when do people earning $60-80K poor.

[rwassel]

So, the people here who blogging against universal healthcare seem to be doing so because the government would be spending too much of their hard-earned tax dollars helping the poor.

Just curious, are you guys ok with the government spending your hard earned tax dollars (approaching 1 trillion) occupying Iraq? Wouldn''t you at least rather it be spent on the people here????????

[standlee5]

Poor people actually DO have healthcare.It''s the self insured and middleclass who are struggling with the notion of paying for health insurance because it''s a rather new concept. Iv''e done it for twenty years. It''s a priority and I''d never go without it. Very good policies out there to choose from.

[Syndicate]

Their aren''t any poor in America. I use the African standard. IF you have a roof and some food your rich. Never mind your big screen TV and Licoln Navigator.

[standlee5]

whatever happened to self sufficiency and independence. I really believe that universal healthcare is the last stop before socialism. There''ll be know going back. It''ll be creadle to grave and govt. will know every intimate detail about every citizen. It''s shocking the Dems aren''t more concerned. Will they also determine our aptitude and career and education choicess.

[olgreyghost]

If the government paying for everyone''s medical care is fair then why does the government prosecute people who rob? It can''t stand the competition?

If you think it''s okay for the government to rob for you then don''t complain when the government robs from you...

[rwassel]

"You would assume correctly. How does not supporting universal healthcare translate to I don''''t care about the poor? You don''''t know what I give or what I do to help the poor and less fortunate, so shove it."

Posted by katg21 at 06:09 PM : Aug 22, 2007

How very Christian of you, telling me to "shove it".

And as far as healthcare is concerned, the current system in place does not serve the needs of the poor. 40 million without health insurance, the majority of which live below the poverty line, and unaffordable healthcare in comparison to minimum wage (as it stands now, if someone working received minimum wage, they would pay an an entire quarter of their monthly earnings to just go towards healthcare (not to mention rent, food, utlities, etc.)

The current system is not serving the needs of the poor, and Universal Healthcare is another alternative (one of many). So if you think they current health system is just fine, then no, you do not have the needs of the poor in mind.