• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

free medical care

Joby said:
How about if a company gives their employees and their families healthcare, or dental, they can use that as a tax write-off?

They already do and healthcare cost is still becoming so much more expensive that even tax breaks aren't enough to help employers offset the cost. As more and more Americans are priced out of health care coverage, the demand for some type of universal health care will increase and we will soon have a system that will serve ALL Americans.
 
We will?

Oh yeah, Hillary's running in 2008.
 
Joby said:
We will?

Oh yeah, Hillary's running in 2008.

Democrats aren't the only ones with sick kids. ;)
 
BWG said:
They already do and healthcare cost is still becoming so much more expensive that even tax breaks aren't enough to help employers offset the cost. As more and more Americans are priced out of health care coverage, the demand for some type of universal health care will increase and we will soon have a system that will serve ALL Americans.


And will be at large cost to ALL americans.
 
taxedout said:
And will be at large cost to ALL americans.

Oh yes screw that then. Since money is more important than health, on behalf of the GOP, I propose the new lowcost healthcare plan. Have you heard of Advil? :roll:
 
Therev can be no such thing as "Free" medical care,
Nothing is free, not even the air we breath.
Medical care could be provided by the Government, it could be provided by Employers, it could be provided by individual insurance.
However it is provided, it is not, never can be free.
So having established that fact can we start talking about something that can be discussed with some degree of common sense?
 
I never claimed health care should be free. I do however believe it can be delivered in a much more efficient manner. The current hodge podge system depends largely on who your employer is. Why does it matter who you work for?

Wouldn't it be more cost effective for the medical provider to bill one source, rather than trying to figure out if one plan will pay 80% and another will pay 85%, or what Joe's co-pay is and what Bill's co-pay is and etc., etc. It could be done electronically, the nurses (or someone) could make entries during the day, such as, patients 12345, 53468, 94562 all had routine office visits, patient 76432 had a knee x-ray, then at the end of the day just send it in, instead of mountains of paper. I also believe in preventive medicine and if everyone had access to affordable health care and checkups, more expensive treatments could be avoided later on.

As it is now some people do not pay for health care, if they get sick they go to the emergency room and then everyone pays when that cost is passed on to the consumer. Under a national health care, everyone that has an income would have 'something' deducted from their paycheck. Insurance is based on risk assessment that is spread over hundreds and thousands of insured. Wouldn't that assessment be lower if it was spread over 300 million?


The above are just some simple thoughts that I think would help lower health care costs and make care available to ALL AMERICANS. I'm not saying that is the only way and I know there are always the 'what ifs'. I'm just confident that something can be and must be done, because what we have now isn't working for everyone. I think medical care is too important to be available only to the wealthy or who you happen to work for.
 
taxedout said:
And will be at large cost to ALL americans.

You're the richest nation in the world.
You're the largest consumers in the world.
You have the means, you just don't have the collective will.
One less Big Mac for your 200 pound kid. Forget that liposuction. Dump your car if you live in a city with public transport. One less TV set in the house. One visit less to the Tacky Obese Bell. One less DVD this month.
You have the means to do it if you wish.
Oh, but you see higher taxes as "socialist" and therefore bad. How sad.
Keep them poor and sick, without health coverage - I'm all right Jack. But to ease my conscience I'll put the odd cent in the church poor box. That'll guarantee my place in heaven - if I can squeeze my McButt through the gates that is.
 
Right i want my medicare run like the education dept. so then ill get poor health care, provided by bad doctors and nurses, in terrible buildings.

Our education system is in shambles, and you want our HEALTHCARE to run like that? Id rather do a self amputation.

Also, my experiance with general UHC has been relativley poor, in Canada, UK, and Austria, i have had reasons to go to the hospital, and it generally took longer for everyone, the hospitals were kinda dingy, and i was a bad experiance. The doctors seemed almost bored, like they didnt care if you lived or died.
 
Bullets said:
Right i want my medicare run like the education dept. so then ill get poor health care, provided by bad doctors and nurses, in terrible buildings.

Medicare patients use the same Doctors, nurses and buildings that you and I use. Where did you get the idea that these patients have to go to a seedy rundown side of town where clinics are staffed with medical school 'D' students, Do you even know what medicare is?

Bullets said:
Our education system is in shambles, and you want our HEALTHCARE to run like that? Id rather do a self amputation.

How do you carry over our education system to health care? Good luck with that amputation, maybe you could get one of those 'medicare' Doctors to assist you, I'm sure he at least learned how to apply a tourniquet in med school...LOL

Bullets said:
Also, my experiance with general UHC has been relativley poor, in Canada, UK, and Austria, i have had reasons to go to the hospital, and it generally took longer for everyone, the hospitals were kinda dingy, and i was a bad experiance. The doctors seemed almost bored, like they didnt care if you lived or died.

I've never had to use foriegn medical facilities, but the people from other countries I talk to, don't seem to have any more complaints about their system than Americans do about our system. As a matter of fact it seems as though Americans complain a little more, but I discount that due to the fact that I talk to more of them and Americans are notorious for complaining about every and anything.

Are you sure your name isn't Joe Bfstplk? :lol:

bp240b7nm.jpg
 
Urethra Franklin said:
You're the richest nation in the world.
You're the largest consumers in the world.
You have the means, you just don't have the collective will.
One less Big Mac for your 200 pound kid. Forget that liposuction. Dump your car if you live in a city with public transport. One less TV set in the house. One visit less to the Tacky Obese Bell. One less DVD this month.
You have the means to do it if you wish.
Oh, but you see higher taxes as "socialist" and therefore bad. How sad.
Keep them poor and sick, without health coverage - I'm all right Jack. But to ease my conscience I'll put the odd cent in the church poor box. That'll guarantee my place in heaven - if I can squeeze my McButt through the gates that is.

What I have is of no concern to you. Ill decide how I spend my income this month. Socialism is bad, why is that sad?

Raising taxes to subsidize a nationalized industry will only make healthcare cost us more and give us less. How about a real plan to fix healthcare other than throwing my money at it. Raising taxes is bull****.
 
Lachean said:
What I have is of no concern to you. Ill decide how I spend my income this month. Socialism is bad, why is that sad?

Raising taxes to subsidize a nationalized industry will only make healthcare cost us more and give us less. How about a real plan to fix healthcare other than throwing my money at it. Raising taxes is bull****.

Your point of view is rather common in the US. It's called selfishness.
 
Urethra Franklin said:
Your point of view is rather common in the US. It's called selfishness.

I prefer the term objectivism.
 
zymurgy said:
I prefer the term objectivism.

Dress it up in any sheeps clothing you like, the greed and selfishness of the right will always be greed and selfishness.
 
Urethra Franklin said:
Dress it up in any sheeps clothing you like, the greed and selfishness of the right will always be greed and selfishness.

Greed and selfishness is a cornerstone of my country. A cornerstone I won't apologize for as it has achieved unprecedented wealth and prosperity.

In short, my country is better then yours (wherever that hell hole might be).
 
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/will1.asp

In a section on private versus communal farming, Bradford wrote that in 1623, because of a corn shortage, the colonists "began to think how they might raise" more. After much debate, they abandoned their doctrine, which they brought with them on the Mayflower, that all agriculture should be a collective, community undertaking. It was decided, Bradford wrote, that "they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves." That is, they "assigned to every family a parcel of land," ending communal cultivation of that crop.


"This," Bradford reported, "had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been by any means." Indeed, "the women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn; which before would allege weakness and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression." So began the American recoil from collectivism. Just three years after the settlers came ashore (not at Plymouth Rock, and far from their intended destination, the mouth of the Hudson), they began their ascent to individualism.


So began the harnessing, for the general good, of the fact that human beings are moved, usually and powerfully, by self-interest. So began the unleashing of American energies through freedom — voluntarism rather than coercion. So began America.
 
Lachean said:
Raising taxes to subsidize a nationalized industry will only make healthcare cost us more and give us less. How about a real plan to fix healthcare other than throwing my money at it. Raising taxes is bull****.

Exactly. In addition, subsidized healthcare minimizes personal responsibility, which is a key component of ones health.
 
Urethra Franklin said:
Your point of view is rather common in the US. It's called selfishness.

You may call it greed, I call anyone trying to take from me what is mine a theif.

There is nothing wrong with rational self-interest, there is everything wrong with agree-ing to a bad idea that makes a problem worse.

You think calling me selfish is going to offend me? Its in my damn avatar lady.
 
zymurgy said:
Greed and selfishness is a cornerstone of my country. A cornerstone I won't apologize for as it has achieved unprecedented wealth and prosperity.).

In Harlem, South Central, Mississippi, New Orleans, yeah.

Just how many uninsured United Statesians are there again?

zymurgy said:
In short, my country is better then yours (wherever that hell hole might be).

You're obviously very pleased with yourself: ignorance is bliss.
 
Urethra Franklin said:
In Harlem, South Central, Mississippi, New Orleans, yeah.

Just how many uninsured United Statesians are there again?

Whos responsibility is it to be insured? His. Who is insured? He is. What is your point?

Urethra Franklin said:
You're obviously very pleased with yourself: ignorance is bliss.

If he was ignorant in thinking his country is better than yours, please go on and explain by what standard is it not?
 
zymurgy said:
Exactly. In addition, subsidized healthcare minimizes personal responsibility, which is a key component of ones health.


That ends up with a very nasty phenomenon known as victim blaming.

Have you read the work of Lesley Doyle? In particular "The Political Economy Of Health"? Or Ann Wall's excellent comparative analysis "Health Care Systems in Liberal Democracies"? Or any Margaret Stacey? Or the famous Black Report on Inequalities in Health that came out of the UK?
Can I ask you which sources from the worlds of Health Economics and Medical Sociology on which you base your opinion? (Fox News doesn't count sweetpea).
 
Urethra Franklin said:
That ends up with a very nasty phenomenon known as victim blaming.

Can I ask you which sources from the worlds of Health Economics and Medical Sociology on which you base your opinion? (Fox News doesn't count sweetpea).

Instead of giving him a reading list, how about explaining where he made an error in logic? Was he wrong when he said that personal responsibility was a key component of ones health?

Or was it that subsidies/nationalization minimizes personal responsibility? Are the "worlds of Health Economics" that far off from actual economics?
 
Lachean said:
Whos responsibility is it to be insured? His. Who is insured? He is. What is your point?



If he was ignorant in thinking his country is better than yours, please go on and explain by what standard is it not?


How do you get insurance in the US if you're unemployed with no hope of a job? And no employer wants to touch you because you're black and live South Central, and were failed by an educational system that wrote you off at a very age as one of those ghetto kids who's just destined for drug dealing? Don't come out with the everybody can get a job ***t because for some, paid emplyment is just a dream, and the capitalist system likes to keep it that way.

I believe my country offers a better social model to the sick, the poor, the elderly, the unemployed, the more vulnerable in society. The paradox of United Statesian society is that you have churches packed with people saying they want to help the needy, then they'll go and vote in their own self interest.

We also eat real food instead of McS*it and our men are better lovers.
 
Lachean said:
Instead of giving him a reading list, how about explaining where he made an error in logic? Was he wrong when he said that personal responsibility was a key component of ones health?

The logic is lopsided when you see a society such as yours, where people essentially don't take personal responsibility for their health (you're all so fat), and the medical profession loves it because it makes them rich. Compare that to systems where doctors are public servants, not rich businessmen, and you have a different focus of responsibility. Yes people are encouraged to take care of their bodies, but they won't be penalised for being struck down with leukaemia while they happen to be earning minimum wage.

Your boyfriend can't speak for himself?




Lachean said:
Or was it that subsidies/nationalization minimizes personal responsibility? Are the "worlds of Health Economics" that far off from actual economics?
Oh what a dumb question.:roll:
 
Urethra Franklin said:
How do you get insurance in the US if you're unemployed with no hope of a job? And no employer wants to touch you because you're black and live South Central, and were failed by an educational system that wrote you off at a very age as one of those ghetto kids who's just destined for drug dealing? Don't come out with the everybody can get a job ***t because for some, paid emplyment is just a dream, and the capitalist system likes to keep it that way.

I believe my country offers a better social model to the sick, the poor, the elderly, the unemployed, the more vulnerable in society. The paradox of United Statesian society is that you have churches packed with people saying they want to help the needy, then they'll go and vote in their own self interest.

We also eat real food instead of McS*it and our men are better lovers.

You're talking to a minority who grew up out of a shitty part of DC. You're country may offer more social services but who's got a better GDP? How about standard of living? Health care quality?

In our country we criticise band-aid fixes to problems. Freedom and technology have given us abundance so that some may choose to give or not. Those who claim to in churches are hypocrits and you get no disagreement on that from me.

Dont generalize about Americans, my father was a chef @ the Watergate and I cook/eat quite well. And if I feel like eating crap I will, what is it to you?

How do you qualify that your men are better lovers?

Urethra Franklin said:
The logic is lopsided when you see a society such as yours, where people essentially don't take personal responsibility for their health (you're all so fat), and the medical profession loves it because it makes them rich. Compare that to systems where doctiors are public servantys, not rich businessmen, and you have a different focus of responsibility. Yes people are encouraged to take care of their bodies, but they won't be penalised for being struck down with leukaemia while they happen to be earning minimum wage.

What do you mean people dont take personal responsibility for their weight? I myself am fit, and I could be fat if I chose to be, but my health is important to me. There are no bans on gyms or healthy eating in America. We live and let live.

Urethra Franklin said:
Your boyfriend can't speak for himself?

Actually he is more than capable, I just happen to be only while you post your tripe. Where have I given indication of homosexuality, and are you homophobic?

You talk about your enlightended society, yet you do nothing but make intolerant generalizations and personal attacks.

Urethra Franklin said:
Oh what a dumb question.:roll:

What economist will tell you otherwise about the effects of subsidies to an industry? How about you debate me instead of slinging insults. Ran out of socialist tripe?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom