Yeah this.

this has a chance for goty thread...

"If you work hard you'll have no health problems" is probably an all time gem.

I don't think anyone has said that. I said I work really hard on my health, which improves my health.

Yeah, it's a sure way for neither you or your children to get leukemia.

UHC is better than the very stupid and inefficent system that we have in place now and free market solutions in healthcare are probably not a realistic political outcome, so I dont think its a bad goal.

I dont have a problem with it as long as A) I am still allowed to buy private insurance with my own money for upgraded care B) its paid for with some sort of universal fee rather than just wishing costs away with "we can tax the rich" C) we work to address the fact that a less profitable US healthcare market for pharma, medical equipment manufacturers, etc will likely slow down worldwide health innovation (doable, but lets figure out ways to increase innovation) D) we work to increase the supply of medical providers by easing restrictions on foreign doctors practicing in the US and increasing the number of medical school slots available in the US each year.

You are right, I'm sorry, your point was actually much worse.

This is one of the most ignorant and selfish posts I read in a while. From what I understand, you are inferring that people that have trouble paying medical procedures where just morons that gambled away their money or threw away their health. Sorry to be so strong, but this is just moronic. I'm sure you can think better than that.

You already posted enough to show us that you have very little understanding of medicine or biology, but this must be a new highscore.

Obv I'm not an expect on US healthcare, but I read enough to understand the very basic principle that even the hardest working man can go bankrupt and it won't be necessarily his fault. If that tiny sun ray causes just the right mutation you cells can't randomly detect in time ( because your body works just on that principle, randomly ), you are ****ed buddy. It doesn't mean **** that you worked hard.

Now let's take you. Let's say something happens to you that needs 100k or more in medical expenses right now then monthly treatment, which isn't rare at all. Would you be convered by your insurance for the rest of your life ( also why should they, they could lose money on you! )? Would you be ok with going bankrupt? After all, if you go bankrupt, it's your own fault.

The majority of people in our country die from heart disease, cancer, and respiratory diseases, which are caused in part from poor diet, smoking, and lack of exercise. Many of the people who die from these diseases threw their lives away.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/lcod.htm

There are millions of ways to die that are not your fault. Thinking you are entitled to perfect health and a long perfect life is ignorant. Yes, hard work does not prevent all diseases. It does help prevent the majority of diseases that kill americans. These are the diseases that healthcare in USA primarily pays for.

If I need 100k in expenses, I pay my deductible, and my insurance pays for it. I would not be covered for the rest of my life. I would come out of my pocket for any further treatment that I wanted. If this meant that I went bankrupt or died, so be it. I am not going to live forever nor do I expect to. Trying to get others to pay for your misfortune is selfish in my opinion.

There are millions of people out there who got "unlucky" who would love part of your paycheck. If you want to help them, donate to charity. I imagine you won't, because you care more about yourself than others like any other rational person.

I take this part back, I confused you with someone else.

I support UHC and I don't want to "try to get others to pay for my misfortune". I want to pay my money into a pool in order to share my risk with everyone else. I hope I never see a dime of it back.

Going bankrupt also means you are having someone else pay for your misfortune. Maybe you would choose death over missing your Visa payment, but most people wouldn't.

I completely agree that is perfectly reasonable for a large group of people to each pay into a pool to share risk. It is a great concept. Letting others into the group for free is where I get upset.

The problem with your position is that it ignores the actual reality of the situation. You see in the US currently those people who can't afford insurance do get health care, except it happens to be the most expensive form of care there is, through the ER. That is something that is not going away. So that being the case, why not let them into the risk pool where they can get that same coverage (and maybe even better), but without incurring the high costs?

So is it really progressive taxation that you're against more than universal healthcare?

Who gets in for free?

The 30 or so million people who did not have healthcare. Also, I do agree most of them do not get in for free; although, some do. They get in at a huge discount compared to their risk level.

You mean the poor schlubs who subscribe to your insurance company pay for it, right?

Uh...

I'd say there are a few more classes of people (wealthy folks for example) - but yes, absolutely

I'm just using Canada as an example since I'm familiar with it and the US System.

1. For people with insurance (the majority) much better choice of doctors. Compared to Canadians most insured Americans have better access to doctors. There are many Canadians that have to wait long periods of time to get a family doctor, and once they get one are stuck with someone they don't like because they have no other options.

2. Waiting Times. There are a number of services (some vital) that can be done faster in the US than in Canada.

3. The best service in the world is in the US. It just costs a lot of money. I think it's a plus to have a service where people can pay more to get faster/better care (as long as everybody has access to good care). This is something that doesn't exist in Canada for the majority of procedures.

I mean, do you honestly believe that a country that pays significantly more than any other country has a system with no benefits?

And just to be clear, you can read this thread and see that I think the US system is significantly worse than that of many other countries. I just think its good to realize that it does have benefits.

Philosophically I have no problem with this. If everyone is guaranteed a really good reliable standard of care, why shouldn't rich people be able to buy "luxury" services? Low Key, do you have a problem with this from a philosophical point of view?

No, not at all. I just felt that was the way he always came off when he talked about it. (Cain)

Sorry this is a crock. In actual fact an insured American is more limited in their choice of doctors because they can only go to pre-approved providers in their network. I encountered this literally all the time when I lived in the US, whereas in Canada I can go to whichever doctor I choose.

Also a crock. There are no unreasonable waits for any urgent or vital care, and only marginal waits for specialists. There are longer waits for elective procedures but that's the case everywhere.

Meanwhile in the US, if your doctor says you need an MRI or a visit to a specialist, that still has to be approved by the adjuster at your insurance company, which is 100% NOT the case in Canada. Up here if your doctor thinks you need something, you get it. Period. There is no mid-level bureaucrat looking over the doctor's shoulder like there is in the US.

This is another complete load of crap. Sure the service is better if you're super rich, but that's no different from Canada or anywhere. For the average insured person in the US you get the same level of care as everyone else, which is basically the minimal amount the insurance company can get away with paying for.

Well yeah, but only because, you know, all the stats keep saying so.

Especially since the country is paying like 30% of its health care dollars on administration costs (and CEO salaries, ldo) as compared to the socialized countries that are paying like 1-2%.

It has benefits if you're Beyonce and Jay-Z and can afford to rent an entire hospital when you have your kid. For everyone else it's pretty crappy.

And almost all of them are full and not accepting patients. This is the pattern in almost all Southern Ontario cities. I hear similar stories elsewhere but I have no first hand knowledge. It took me a year to get a doctor in Ontario - and that's not atypical. In the US every network I was part of had at least a half dozen doctors within a reasonable area that was actively accepting patients.

Lol, approval from the insurance companies usually comes within a few days. That's not a significant source of delays and almost all non-emergency procedures have wait times greater than that in Canada.

You don't seem to understand the law for medical treatment. I suggest reading over the link I posted a few pages back about how things actually work. The way that the rich get better care in Canada is to go to the US where they can spend the money.

You're kidding me right?

A few of these people get subsidies. Most of the people who would get in for free are already on Medicaid. Obamacare is not a handout. At it's core it's simply pooling people who are currently falling through the cracks and allowing them to purchase comparable health insurance to people who work for the govt or large companies. Why is this such a difficult concept?

In some cities yes, others no. I've lived in three different cities over the past 6-7 years and one has a shortage of doctors accepting patients.

Not for vital. I've been unlucky enough to have a ton of experience with this in the last 5 years and that just isnt the case. If you need something done, it gets done, right away. If you need a hip replacement so you can resume golfing, you need to wait 4 months, if thats too long, go pay someone to do it faster.

Those services that are available to a select percentage of the american population who happens to be loaded, are also open to the rich canadians as well. I know a rich guy who is hook, line and sinker into the whole "Canadian doctors suck". He didnt believe our doctors that he didnt have anything wrong with him, so he flew down and paid some expensive doctor in the US to tell him what our doctors had already said for free.

We're talking generalities here. It's well documented that in general Canada has longer wait times for many services and a bigger shortage of primary care physicians.

So you agree with me, right? Your example shows how rich people aren't served by the Canadian system but are by the American one.

I find it funny that you guys can't concede any benefit at all of the US system.

I don't know what you are saying. I don't own an insurance company if that is what you are implying. I pay for my insurance.

Even if I did own it, I would be directly paying for all my coverage. It would come out of the profits of the company, which would be my money. It is the same thing.

If it is not a handout why does it need additional taxes and increased spending?