Personal or government responsibility???

[Niccivan]

I have to say in Britain private health care is great if you want something straight forward like an operation.

But whatever the faults of the NHS they are the only ones that pick up the pieces when the money runs out which often happens in complicated treatments ie ongoing illnesses, cancer etc.

I hate big government but a civilised country should be able to look after its ill and its old.

FAO nicivan if you dont have cover and need treatment (breast enlargements perhaps?) dont worry just catch a plane to the UK we treat foriegners for free, how fuckin mad is that.

If plastic surgery was truely offered for free.....I'd hop on a plane tomorrow

[bluffmanxx]

hey MF, do they cover the airfare too???? i might be able to plan a visit if they do

[mooch81]

They'll treat you for free, but you'll be in the country long enough to become a full fledged citizen before you were able to be seen ...

And I believe I'm the one who implied you were a socialist if you approved the idea behind the US's latest push to national health care. And I said that for the sole reason that the latest push involved heavy taxing of "the evil rich" and little bit more taxing of the middle class to pay for everyone's healthcare, which basically would make the rich less rich, moving them towards the middle class, the middle class a little closer to the lower class, and the lower class aren't paying a dime so they'd be moving on up into the high lower class/low middle class. An effort to move all americans into a fully dependent situation where government is the only one who can take care of us, and make us all feel like we're equal in terms of livability.

i.e.: socialism.

[bluffmanxx]

"tax the rich" AKA income redistribution. how much is enough???

[LadyWrestler]

http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/bl071299.htm

In 1959 Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev said to America: "Your grandchildren will live under Communism." He was talking about us. We are those grandchildren.

[calgaryjimbo]

Are you guys shitting me? Seriously? Are you actually suggesting that a) the rich forking out $100 a month to a national health care system would reduce them to middle class, and b) supporting the poor with health care would elevate the poor to middle class status?!?

First of all, it goes without saying that the rich get whatever health services they require, irrespective of cost and will happily pay top dollar for front-of-the-line treatment. "Forcing" them to submit to the same system of treatment as the unwashed masses is almost certainly cheaper for them than their current practices!

Second, do you really live in a society so jaded, so lacking in compassion, that you would rather see the poor die from lack of treatment than see a couple of your dollars per year give them a fighting chance to make something of themselves? And I'm not just talking about the ultra-poor. I'm talking about the tens of thousands of borderline families who have just enough to disqualify them from social assistance but not quite enough to keep food on their plates.

Doug, kudos to you for getting through a tough situation with a shrug, an "it's just life" attitude, and finding a way to make it all work. But there are a LOT of people out there who, through no fault of their own, are faced with situations that simply can't be overcome without help. It saddens me to think that so many Americans would just ignore that very real problem rather than try to move forward with something that will help level the playing field.

Again, I'm not saying a national health care system is perfect. Far from it. As Dale has also pointed out, there is lots of room for abuse of the program on both the medical side and the patient side. But at least we're not saying "too bad for you" to the underprivileged.

And to the suggestion that a state-run program limits health care choices, I could not disagree more. In my experience, it expands choice almost without limit. I don't have to pick from a specific set of recommended doctors when choosing a GP or a specialist. I don't have to go to a particular clinic or hospital. I don't have to buy the brand name drugs for my prescriptions if there's a generic alternative. No, I make ALL the choices for my service, without having to explain myself to a government agency or an HMO or anyone else. My health care is covered. Period.

Socialism is not a dirty word, nor is it the equivalent of communism. The "socialist" nation in which I live has plenty of obscenely rich people and, to be honest, plenty of desperately poor as well. But the socialism we have here ensures every man, woman, and child gets an education and gets treated by a doctor when needed. If that makes us a horrible country, well, I can live with that.

P.S. Our socialist dollar is worth $1.07 USD as of yesterday's closing.

[ctmason-SK]

Look, i am not for a total goverment take over of medicine..never have been, probably never will be.

But when families in this country face ecomomic ruin because of unforseen health emergencies...well too me thats wrong.

The system needs fresh ideas......enough about branding people by labels because they may hold a different view on how health care is distributed..people(politicians?) should try to work together to come up with solutions...the best ideas from all parties and ideologies...try to cooperate instead of demagogue...and maybe we can get somewhere.

I guess im dreaming.

[Niccivan]

Are you guys shitting me? Seriously? Are you actually suggesting that a) the rich forking out $100 a month to a national health care system would reduce them to middle class, and b) supporting the poor with health care would elevate the poor to middle class status?!?

First of all, it goes without saying that the rich get whatever health services they require, irrespective of cost and will happily pay top dollar for front-of-the-line treatment. "Forcing" them to submit to the same system of treatment as the unwashed masses is almost certainly cheaper for them than their current practices!

Second, do you really live in a society so jaded, so lacking in compassion, that you would rather see the poor die from lack of treatment than see a couple of your dollars per year give them a fighting chance to make something of themselves? And I'm not just talking about the ultra-poor. I'm talking about the tens of thousands of borderline families who have just enough to disqualify them from social assistance but not quite enough to keep food on their plates.

Doug, kudos to you for getting through a tough situation with a shrug, an "it's just life" attitude, and finding a way to make it all work. But there are a LOT of people out there who, through no fault of their own, are faced with situations that simply can't be overcome without help. It saddens me to think that so many Americans would just ignore that very real problem rather than try to move forward with something that will help level the playing field.

Again, I'm not saying a national health care system is perfect. Far from it. As Dale has also pointed out, there is lots of room for abuse of the program on both the medical side and the patient side. But at least we're not saying "too bad for you" to the underprivileged.

And to the suggestion that a state-run program limits health care choices, I could not disagree more. In my experience, it expands choice almost without limit. I don't have to pick from a specific set of recommended doctors when choosing a GP or a specialist. I don't have to go to a particular clinic or hospital. I don't have to buy the brand name drugs for my prescriptions if there's a generic alternative. No, I make ALL the choices for my service, without having to explain myself to a government agency or an HMO or anyone else. My health care is covered. Period.

Socialism is not a dirty word, nor is it the equivalent of communism. The "socialist" nation in which I live has plenty of obscenely rich people and, to be honest, plenty of desperately poor as well. But the socialism we have here ensures every man, woman, and child gets an education and gets treated by a doctor when needed. If that makes us a horrible country, well, I can live with that.

P.S. Our socialist dollar is worth $1.07 USD as of yesterday's closing.

Yes Jim!!!! I agree completely!!!! My family is almost one of those borderline families. (I say almost because we can eat - we just can't seem to keep our electricity and other ultilities on )

[bluffmanxx]

yes, life is full of difficult choices.

1) beer

2) electricity

3) vacations with lots of beer

in my insensitive, intolerant opinion this is at the heart of the problem. not just regarding government health care. (which if it was done better and more efficiently i might actually be in favor of)

the U.S. has just experienced it's first NEGATIVE personal savings rate since the great depression. What this means is that personal spending was greater than personal income.

crappy personal and governmental fiscal policies pretty much explains why that Canadian dollar is now worth more than the U.S. dollar eh Jimbo???

expectations have certainly changed in a pretty short time. think about what your grandparents expected and how they lived and then think of how much more we have now and how much more we expect.

i'll ask again...how much is enough when it comes to the government providing for the citizens who can't or won't provide for themselves???

i think we all agree that basic needs should be covered...but what is basic?? food, clothing, shelter and how much more?? a car?? cable TV?? cellphones?? limited healthcare?? full healthcare?? Should those who are able be required to do some sort of work to receive benefits??

[Niccivan]

yes, life is full of difficult choices.

1) beer I don't buy my own beer - my friends bring it over and leave without it.

2) electricity we usually have - usually

3) vacations with lots of beer I haven't been on a vacation in 7 years. visiting family and not paying for a single thing (except one night in a bar) was the only amount of money spent)


not saying you were talking about me here Just seemed a little coincidental