If you believe healthcare to be a right ...

[JennC]

and millions are suffering as a result.

I would love to know what MILLIONS you keep referring to. Even the exagerated 40 million uninsured includes about 30 million who are illegal immigrants, or who are voluntarily uninsured and a group who currently qualifies for federal aid but doesn't apply. So 10 million are bona fide un- underinsured. Not all of these people are suffering. Certainly not all or even a large percentage are dying or living on the street just waiting to die.

that millions of Americans are falling through the current cracks and dying from lack of proper care or no care at all.

 

I find it more disturbing that families are forced to give up everything they ever worked for in order to try to save the life of their loved one. It is a shame, I agree when a family loses everything - say fire, flood, unexpected health costs, etc. No one cheers when that happens. But just because it is sad, bad, etc., doesn't make it anyone else's responsiblity. Yes, as individuals, we do what we can to help, but that IS NOT the government's role in this country.

 

FAR outweighs someones guarantee that they will be able to keep all of their income. How did that "for the greater good" work out in the Soviet Union?

 

There are millions of Americans suffering as a result of these things

There is that millions again

 

and that is much more "shameful" than requireing fellow Americans to "share the wealth"

There are plenty of countries in the world with this socialistic foundation. I'm sure their borders are open, but I'm betting they don't have a problem with too many immigrants. The US is not and has never been one of them. Even the pilgrims learned to survive after seeing their very lives at stake because of the people who didn't want to work, just feed off the colony. How they survived is by going back to the principle of "those who work, eat"

 

Sure I think that others should be able to keep what they earn but not at the expense of anothers life.

Our family keeping my husband's pay costs NOONE their life, or their livelihood, or their shelter, or food. That is just a grasp at fear. It is either let these people die from starvation, sickness, or exposure or "require" other Americans to step up and do their part. Since I'm having to choose I would choose the latter anyday.

 

.

[ma23peas]

We have private charities now. We have for the past 8 years under the Bush administration and health care costs have doubled.

 

Sure, private charities help, but they can not solve what our government has created...let me share..

 

The Emergency Medical Treatment Act of 1986 passed by Congress. The government requires medical treatment facilities to treat each and every patient regardless of ability to pay..however, the government offers nothing in the way of funding, but will penalize any facility that does not. That's why when I go to the ER with a legitimate need, I see sick kids that belong in a pediatrician's office not the ER..it's become the "walk-in" clinic for non-emergency events. We're paying for it through higher costs to us.

 

Our community has thousands upon thousands of illegal immigrants...every time I have been in the ER...half the patients can not speak English..they don't even know how to say what is wrong with their child without an interpreter or a cousin who will come to the doctor with them. And I am not in a state that borders Mexico. The US has done little to nothing to stop this dike leak, I mean flood.

 

Yes, we need reform, but half of it is needed to curb what the government has already inflicted.

 

When you're the richest country with 9 trillion debt, are we not talking oxymoron? We can't afford healthcare...it's time to get lean on spending and get serious about saving the future of our children and grandchildren...through responsible governing..not new programs that will cripple us.

 

Tara

[JennC]

ERs do not provide chemotherapy and radiation treatments nor do they fill needed prescriptions which can be astronomical in price. So if you do not have the money then tough luck I guess:001_huh:. Ers do not provide speech therapy, occupational therapy, nor physical therapy.

 

ERs do not provide these services because they are not Emergeny Medicine. People keep saying that you CAN be turned away from the ER and prove it by saying "so and so had a broken knee and couldn't be treated, so and so saw someone not get treated." Now maybe so and so did get turned away, but if it was for an EMEMRGENCY and it was at a hospital that receives federal funds, that was illegal. New legislation is not needed to fix problems that are already addressed. If the person who was turned away had an actual claim, there is an actual lawyer who would take on a hospital.

Are those in favor of univeral free health care actually advocating that every single thing that could go wrong with every single person be covered by the new universal health insurance?? Can anyone say "Sky rocket?"

[texascamps]

I love hearing how wealthy people can just "right off" all their expenses.

 

 

Try this. Get your Taxcut program out and pretend that you are rich. Put in those numbers. Pretend you have 5 kids, medical expenses, and charitable deductions.

 

I think a lot of folks don't know what a "write off" is.

 

A business owner who buys a "thing" to use in the business for $100 can take that $100 off their earnings. It doesn't mean they get that $100 back, it only means they don't pay taxes on it... So what! If they had to purchase a drill press to do their business, they don't pay $15-35 in employment and business taxes on it. To me that's okay, they shouldn't have to pay $135 for a drill press that cost $100 just because they have a business. For honest business owners, taxes are a big, big drain.

 

It's fun to bash businesses because they can "write off" stuff. Sounds bad, sounds like they are taking from the poor, but based on these posts, I'm thinking most folks don't know what a "write off" is.

 

A write-off is not free money. Its not even money earned. Its not even money that can be reimbursed. That $100 for the drill press is gone, now the business owner is praying he can make some money with it.

 

 

Our biggest problem isn't that businesses aren't paying taxes....its our politicians...

[Kari C in SC]

While of course any unnecessary death is tragic, I think that article is extremely biased. It sounds as though *many* things unfortunately went badly in that situation-- I think it's unreasonable to say that lack of dental insurance is what caused this boy's death. If this mother was unable to obtain $80 from friends, family, etc. to have this tooth extracted, most dentists will treat uninsured patients and bill them, especially for such a small amount.

 

I don't know where you have found a dentist that will treat you without payment. My dh just had a crown and root canal. Total cost was $2300. He HAS dental insurance. The insurance was to pay roughly $1300 of this bill and we were to be left with $1000. You know what? We had to pay $1900 up front and wait to be reimbursed when the insurance company paid them. The dentist office said they needed to make sure they had payment ahead of time. So, not only did we have to come up with what was our responsibility - we had to come up with nearly 100% more and wait 2 months to finally get a refund. I have NEVER been to a dentist that doesn't expect payment up front.

[theresatwist]

Sure, private charities help, but they can not solve what our government has created...let me share..

 

The Emergency Medical Treatment Act of 1986 passed by Congress. The government requires medical treatment facilities to treat each and every patient regardless of ability to pay..however, the government offers nothing in the way of funding, but will penalize any facility that does not. That's why when I go to the ER with a legitimate need, I see sick kids that belong in a pediatrician's office not the ER..it's become the "walk-in" clinic for non-emergency events. We're paying for it through higher costs to us.

 

Our community has thousands upon thousands of illegal immigrants...every time I have been in the ER...half the patients can not speak English..they don't even know how to say what is wrong with their child without an interpreter or a cousin who will come to the doctor with them. And I am not in a state that borders Mexico. The US has done little to nothing to stop this dike leak, I mean flood.

 

Yes, we need reform, but half of it is needed to curb what the government has already inflicted.

 

When you're the richest country with 9 trillion debt, are we not talking oxymoron? We can't afford healthcare...it's time to get lean on spending and get serious about saving the future of our children and grandchildren...through responsible governing..not new programs that will cripple us.

 

Tara

 

I agree with some of what you've said. Yes, there are many illegal immigrant who are treated in the ER and cannot afford to pay. However, there are also millions of Americans in that same boat. If we created a system that focused on preventative care (which, yes, would cost money up front) I think we could save a lot in the long run. Healthcare becomes far more expense when people wait too long to be treated (often for financial reasons).

 

I believe we need immigration reform. But, our healthcare crisis is hardly the fault of illegal immigrants alone. They are one small piece of the puzzle. I think we should require ID. However, regardless of whether they are legal or illegal I believe we should treat them on humanitarian grounds. After we treat them we should put the on the road either to becoming citizens and paying back taxes or going back to their native land.

[theresatwist]

I love hearing how wealthy people can just "right off" all their expenses.

 

 

Try this. Get your Taxcut program out and pretend that you are rich. Put in those numbers. Pretend you have 5 kids, medical expenses, and charitable deductions.

 

I think a lot of folks don't know what a "write off" is.

 

A business owner who buys a "thing" to use in the business for $100 can take that $100 off their earnings. It doesn't mean they get that $100 back, it only means they don't pay taxes on it... So what! If they had to purchase a drill press to do their business, they don't pay $15-35 in employment and business taxes on it. To me that's okay, they shouldn't have to pay $135 for a drill press that cost $100 just because they have a business. For honest business owners, taxes are a big, big drain.

 

It's fun to bash businesses because they can "write off" stuff. Sounds bad, sounds like they are taking from the poor, but based on these posts, I'm thinking most folks don't know what a "write off" is.

 

A write-off is not free money. Its not even money earned. Its not even money that can be reimbursed. That $100 for the drill press is gone, now the business owner is praying he can make some money with it.

 

 

Our biggest problem isn't that businesses aren't paying taxes....its our politicians...

 

The corrupt folks are not all rich, they're not all poor, they're not all business people, they're not all politicians, they come from every walk of life.

[Impish]

I don't get this to be honest.

 

America DOES supply food, clothing, housing to some of its citizens. With Welfare programs, WIC, food stamps, subsidized housing, I find it incomprehensible to argue otherwise. So, it would seem that America DOES consider these things a 'right' by its own example.

 

Health care is a right in my eyes. Perhaps because I'm Canadian. And in Alberta, we no longer have any health care premiums either.

 

It makes good fiscal sense when you think about it. Too often people (that I know) wait until they can't wait any longer to see the Dr. By that point, it means time off work, potential hospital stays, etc, all because they really have a hard time with meeting the copays required. In fact, a good friend not only has to pay her copay, but also more on top of that because she had a hysterectomy, and has to pay part of that bill on top of her monthly agreement with her copay. In Canada, we see the Dr when we need to, at the start (yes, there are exceptions, my dh is one of them :glare:) and catch bronchitis for example before it becomes bronchial pneumonia. I honestly think that for many folks, the cost to see a Dr with copays is a deterrent, so they wait...and that drives up the medical care costs, and the work loss costs. It makes more sense from an industrial pov to have preventative medical care, so as to not have employees taking a sick week as opposed to a day, or not missing work at all.

 

And all of this will cost each tax payer LESS than their current insurance premiums.

 

Its kinda like, "I'll save $1000 a month without insurance premiums. How DARE the government take $200 of THAT to help sustain a health care program for ALL? I'd rather keep paying $1000 just for ME and MINE than have to take care of everyone else too!"

 

I don't get it.

 

Of course, I'm basing my opinion totally on my Canadian perspective.

[lgm]

I don't see health care as an entitlement. I see life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as an entitlement. I am happy to provide for those who can't..but those who won't need some tough love. One cannot stay a child all one's life and of course being a free loader is not an admirable adult goal although many are.

 

I think the bigger problem is the manipulation of the free market and the desire to maintain a class society. Living where I do, I have yet to see a free market response to housing prices..don't beleive I ever will because of the artificially induced scarcity in supply due to the laws made by those in power to favor those in power. Same way for medical care...artificial restriction in supply due to deliberately inadequate educational prep and not enough med schools. We can solve hunger, housing and education..if we can get the right people in power and right laws abolished.

[mommyrooch]

I don't get this to be honest.

 

America DOES supply food, clothing, housing to some of its citizens. With Welfare programs, WIC, food stamps, subsidized housing, I find it incomprehensible to argue otherwise. So, it would seem that America DOES consider these things a 'right' by its own example.

 

Health care is a right in my eyes. Perhaps because I'm Canadian. And in Alberta, we no longer have any health care premiums either.

 

It makes good fiscal sense when you think about it. Too often people (that I know) wait until they can't wait any longer to see the Dr. By that point, it means time off work, potential hospital stays, etc, all because they really have a hard time with meeting the copays required. In fact, a good friend not only has to pay her copay, but also more on top of that because she had a hysterectomy, and has to pay part of that bill on top of her monthly agreement with her copay. In Canada, we see the Dr when we need to, at the start (yes, there are exceptions, my dh is one of them :glare:) and catch bronchitis for example before it becomes bronchial pneumonia. I honestly think that for many folks, the cost to see a Dr with copays is a deterrent, so they wait...and that drives up the medical care costs, and the work loss costs. It makes more sense from an industrial pov to have preventative medical care, so as to not have employees taking a sick week as opposed to a day, or not missing work at all.

 

And all of this will cost each tax payer LESS than their current insurance premiums.

 

Its kinda like, "I'll save $1000 a month without insurance premiums. How DARE the government take $200 of THAT to help sustain a health care program for ALL? I'd rather keep paying $1000 just for ME and MINE than have to take care of everyone else too!"

 

I don't get it.

 

Of course, I'm basing my opinion totally on my Canadian perspective.

 

 

Well, I agree with you 100%. It doesn't make any sense to me either and I'm basing my opinion on my American perspective. ;)

[PineFarmMom]

Well, I agree with you 100%. It doesn't make any sense to me either and I'm basing my opinion on my American perspective. ;)

 

I think both of you are also coming from the perspectives of people who trust the govt. that it would actually be that cheap. I believe they'd say one thing and we'd pay quite a bit more. I'm basing my opinion on the perspective of someone who has seen the govt. promise things repeatedly while delivering something quite a bit different than promised.

[lgm]

We have private charities now. We have for the past 8 years under the Bush administration and health care costs have doubled. I understand why some people oppose a government plan/ government mandates, although I disagree. However, private charities alone have not met the need. We've tried that!

 

Also, I believe most healthcare related organizations and charities are focused on a certain disease. That's great and they do wonderful work. But, one of the reasons we have such high medical costs in this country is because people cannot afford preventative care and I do not know of any charities that are helping people to receive preventative care on a large scale. (Scattered individual doctors/clinics being generous is wonderful, but it's just not enough.)

 

It's also because people are making choices to buy wants before needs. In my area, you will see people with SUVs and obvious hundreds of dollars in hair care that will claim they cannot afford a dentist for their children. The poor things come to kindy with bottle rot. The state pays for all low income children to have medical care through childhealthplus. These kids don't qualify (obviously the parents had the $$ at one point in the month).The problem is not that we taxpayers are not giving enough. We have too many that won't do basics first. Work before play, needs before wants, basics before luxury. And don't throw beer in the cart if the children need toothpaste.

Edited September 15, 2009 by lgm

[silvermine]

The government does not require all americans to sign up for a food insurance program, where you have to go shopping where the insurance tells you to (sorry, you may only go to Safeway or Albertsons, but not Lucky), you may or may not even know what you are buying costs, and you must submit all recipts to the insurance agent to find out *if* you will get reimbursed and how much. For a fee. Eventually. So your $100 of food now costs more than $100, because you can't be trusted to choose your own groceries. But hey, you had no idea how much any of it cost, anyway.

 

Then, if you want to go to a butcher shop or a Whole Foods, or a specialty shop, many food insurance companies require that your main grocery store tells you it's okay. And the government likes this -- their plan requires that everyone have a "home" grocery store to help them figure out what groceries they need and where they can shop.

 

You absolutely cannot go to a grocery store in another state. Even if you live near the border.

 

Oh! And most people get food insurance plans through work -- it would be horrible if a place of work didn't make sure your food needs were met! But that means that you get worried that if you leave your job, you may not get food, or grocery stores may give you different rules to deal with.

 

Your food plan must include 57 different things, as required by the government. It must cover meat, even if you are a vegetarian. It must cover expensive foods, even if you prefer to eat frugally. It must cover cheese, even if you are allergic to cheese. You can't pick a plan that actually matches you or your life.

 

Is health insurance done well now? No. But the bill intensifies everything wrong with it, without fixing anything.

 

Give me the power. Not them.

[theresatwist]

I don't get this to be honest.

 

America DOES supply food, clothing, housing to some of its citizens. With Welfare programs, WIC, food stamps, subsidized housing, I find it incomprehensible to argue otherwise. So, it would seem that America DOES consider these things a 'right' by its own example.

 

Health care is a right in my eyes. Perhaps because I'm Canadian. And in Alberta, we no longer have any health care premiums either.

 

It makes good fiscal sense when you think about it. Too often people (that I know) wait until they can't wait any longer to see the Dr. By that point, it means time off work, potential hospital stays, etc, all because they really have a hard time with meeting the copays required. In fact, a good friend not only has to pay her copay, but also more on top of that because she had a hysterectomy, and has to pay part of that bill on top of her monthly agreement with her copay. In Canada, we see the Dr when we need to, at the start (yes, there are exceptions, my dh is one of them :glare:) and catch bronchitis for example before it becomes bronchial pneumonia. I honestly think that for many folks, the cost to see a Dr with copays is a deterrent, so they wait...and that drives up the medical care costs, and the work loss costs. It makes more sense from an industrial pov to have preventative medical care, so as to not have employees taking a sick week as opposed to a day, or not missing work at all.

 

And all of this will cost each tax payer LESS than their current insurance premiums.

 

Its kinda like, "I'll save $1000 a month without insurance premiums. How DARE the government take $200 of THAT to help sustain a health care program for ALL? I'd rather keep paying $1000 just for ME and MINE than have to take care of everyone else too!"

 

I don't get it.

 

Of course, I'm basing my opinion totally on my Canadian perspective.

 

Thank you! Do you think you'd have time to appear on CNN, FOX, CBS, etc. tonight with that message?

 

What the heck are they putting in the water on our on this side of the border?

[lmrich]

I don't think it is a right as I stated before.

 

However, I have no problem helping all American attain healthcare. I don't want the government involved. I am in favor of a smaller government. I do not think that the government will provide adequate healthcare for all. This is not a debate if the "rich" should pay for the "poor"; I mean come on, who among us would allow a child to suffer no matter our income level. I honestly think this problem has to do with trusting the government with healthcare!

[Lovedtodeath]

While of course any unnecessary death is tragic, I think that article is extremely biased. It sounds as though *many* things unfortunately went badly in that situation-- I think it's unreasonable to say that lack of dental insurance is what caused this boy's death. If this mother was unable to obtain $80 from friends, family, etc. to have this tooth extracted, most dentists will treat uninsured patients and bill them, especially for such a small amount.

This is exactly the type of situation that gets me. We don't have insurance, so we "wait and see" instead of going, and then what? We find out it was pertussis or menengitis and it is too late? But if no one waits to see then appts are unavailable and insurance money is wasted? It seems to be quite a quandry.