Health Care for Everyone

[CMvan46]

Find a rich guy who is paying for your treatment and shake his hand.

You see but I could say the same thing about the roads you drive on, the public schools in your city, or the fireman in your county.

Rich people inevitably pay for more things because they pay more tax. Where that money goes is another thing. I would assume as Vandenhal said a lot of that money is financing a few wars right now.

Yes some Canadians go across the line for specialized treatment now and then but personally I've never met one person who has. I don't think our system is perfect but it's damn good.

I do think there should be some private options (which we have a few now) but for the most part waiting for treatment isn't that bad. I've had numerous surgeries and I've never waiting long at all.

 

[Danoff]

You see but I could say the same thing about the roads you drive on, the public schools in your city, or the fireman in your county.

Rich people inevitably pay for more things because they pay more tax. Where that money goes is another thing. I would assume as Vandenhal said a lot of that money is financing a few wars right now.

Yes some Canadians go across the line for specialized treatment now and then but personally I've never met one person who has. I don't think our system is perfect but it's damn good.

I do think there should be some private options (which we have a few now) but for the most part waiting for treatment isn't that bad. I've had numerous surgeries and I've never waiting long at all.

You should shake the rich guy's hand for paying for your roads and public schools and firemen too. He doesn't use them any more than you do.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

You see but I could say the same thing about the roads you drive on, the public schools in your city, or the fireman in your county.

Rich people inevitably pay for more things because they pay more tax. Where that money goes is another thing. I would assume as Vandenhal said a lot of that money is financing a few wars right now.

They also get alot more tax breaks than the average tax payer. To say they pay alot more money because they are rich is something the extreme right has never talked about, but don't get me wrong the left seems to make it seem like they get a credit for every step they take. However, I would like to say if you read the tax codes for our country (U.S.) you'll see what tax breaks you get for donating a sum of money for example and other things. The idea that some are asking is forget the tax breaks, a simple percentage is all that is needed from everyone and that is what is taken out...that is all no games needed.

 

[CMvan46]

You should shake the rich guy's hand for paying for your roads and public schools and firemen too. He doesn't use them any more than you do.

No you missed my point.

Rich people pay for the stuff you use too. So why is it so horrendous that healthcare fall under that same branch? Instead of funding free healthcare you guys choose to dump a whole lot more money into a massive military and navy. That's each country's choice and right to spend their tax dollars how they please. But we do it differently. I suppose that's one plus at being allies and neighbours with a county which does spend their money that way.

The rich guy comment is a rediculous attempt at bringing down my point when his money is still going somewhere; if it's not healthcare then it's a war or roads or schools...

I'm was just saying this isn't something that should be blown off immediately and with the hatred that the American people seem to have for the idea. It has a ton of positives to it and I think because in general people strongly resist change that it's not even being given a chance.

 

[Danoff]

They also get alot more tax breaks than the average tax payer. To say they pay alot more money because they are rich is something the extreme right has never talked about, but don't get me wrong the left seems to make it seem like they get a credit for every step they take. However, I would like to say if you read the tax codes for our country (U.S.) you'll see what tax breaks you get for donating a sum of money for example and other things. The idea that some are asking is forget the tax breaks, a simple percentage is all that is needed from everyone and that is what is taken out...that is all no games needed.

Actually this is very much incorrect. Poor people have the most tax breaks, followed by middle class, with rich people getting the fewest tax breaks. There are no tax breaks that I know of that require a threshold income before they become viable. The only limiting factor that I have ever seen for a tax break is having too much income to qualify for it. Poor people are very much allowed the donation tax break. The only people that I know of who do not get a tax break on donations are those that hit the alternative minimum tax - which is in the tax structure to help make sure we soak the rich.

The thing most people point to as being a tax "loophole" for the rich is the capital gains tax, which is taxed at 15%. Capital gains is, of course, a flat tax that applies to all people equally - rich or poor alike. So to say that rich people get loopholes because capital gains tax is lower than income is not correct.

No you missed my point.

Rich people pay for the stuff you use too. So why is it so horrendous that healthcare fall under that same branch? Instead of funding free healthcare you guys choose to dump a whole lot more money into a massive military and navy. That's each country's choice and right to spend their tax dollars how they please. But we do it differently. I suppose that's one plus at being allies and neighbours with a county which does spend their money that way.

The rich guy comment is a rediculous attempt at bringing down my point when his money is still going somewhere; if it's not healthcare then it's a war or roads or schools...

I'm was just saying this isn't something that should be blown off immediately and with the hatred that the American people seem to have for the idea. It has a ton of positives to it and I think because in general people strongly resist change that it's not even being given a chance.

It's not hatred. It's economics. Nationalized health care will necessarily lead to inefficiency, rising costs, reduced innovation, and rationing. Those are all inescapable economic results of nationalization (of any industry).

I agree with you that rich people pay a disproportionate amount for all government activities. I always advocate that we equalize what everyone pays, not advocate yet ANOTHER system (healthcare) that relies on soaking a minority of voters, and instead, reduce the size of government. Cutting military spending does not mean spending it on healthcare, it means cutting taxes.

 

[Bigbazz]

I find it strange that america doesnt want a type of free health care system. A lot of people here in the UK would be completely ruined without it.

I saw some video of this American woman who had cancer, she had to live in a tent in a field because she needed to sell her house to pay for her medical bills. From my point of view that is some ****ed up ****.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Danoff I consider the loopholes and the fact that corporations which have a group of rich people at the top, have been known not to have to pay taxes. Which then becomes a larger gain obviously for that year. There are loopholes which seem like breaks, and their are plenty of breaks if you do certain things as a business owner. Like donating a sum of money to organizations during the FY.

 

[Danoff]

I find it strange that america doesnt want a type of free health care system. A lot of people here in the UK would be completely ruined without it.

I saw some video of this American woman who had cancer, she had to live in a tent in a field because she needed to sell her house to pay for her medical bills. From my point of view that is some ****ed up ****.

I explained why above. Oh and no responsible adult would end up having to live in a tent because of cancer. My boss's wife and kid had cancer and he paid almost nothing.

Danoff I consider the loopholes and the fact that corporations which have a group of rich people at the top, have been known not to have to pay taxes. Which then becomes a larger gain obviously for that year. There are loopholes which seem like breaks, and their are plenty of breaks if you do certain things as a business owner. Like donating a sum of money to organizations during the FY.

Donations are tax breaks for everyone equally (unless you pay AMT - in which case you're screwed). This is not a rich loophole. Also, what's wrong with donating money? It's not like they get to donate it to themselves and keep it. They gave it away to charity.

There are no loopholes for rich people in the tax code. There are tax breaks for business owners to keep them from paying taxes on business infrastructure but this is something available to ANYONE who opens a business - not just rich people.

Many rich people do not pay taxes because they do not earn money. Someone who makes $10 million off of a movie one year, does not necessarily make $1 the next year.

There is no way around this. The US tax code does not start offering breaks once you reach a certain income level. It doesn't exist, it's nowhere in the tax code. What IS in the tax code is a series of "phase outs" so that you no longer get a break once you make more than a certain amount. I'll restate it:

People who get tax breaks (from most to least)

1) Poor people
2) Middle class
3) space
4) Rich

Rich people get the fewest tax breaks in the tax code. It is fact.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Never said there was anything wrong...I was giving an example which I stated so let's not twist it like I'm a Scrooge or something and be a bit more intellectual about things. So articles like this are wrong...cause there are many others like it.

 

[CMvan46]

And Danoff what would happen to a guy like me? I'm still living at home while I go to school and have a fukl/part time job depending on school at the moment but what happens after?

You know how many American insurance companies would cover me with a pre-existing condition? Maybe a few but not at reasonable cost.

I know plenty of reasonable adults with my disease that CAN'T afford treatment. Not because they are irresponsible, not because they are lazy, and not because they aren't educated, no it's because they can't keep a job a lot of the time with what we have and therefore no, medical insurance. This is just 1
disease.

Reality is the comment about the women living in a tent is reality for some people. Some people are too sheltered to know what some people go through on a daily basis. The only reason I have a 1000 posts on here is because of the crap and pain I deal with everyday and I'm considered "mild to moderate", I can't imagine those with other diseases or illness, I couldn't ever move to the states I'd damn near die.

 

[Danoff]

Never said there was anything wrong...I was giving an example which I stated so let's not twist it like I'm a Scrooge or something and be a bit more intellectual about things. So articles like this are wrong...cause there are many others like it.

I skimmed the article and didn't see anything incorrect. Did you want me to look at something specific? Tax deductions are naturally going to help the rich more than the poor because the rich pay more taxes. But that same tax deduction is there for the poor in every case that I can think of. It's not discriminatory. It's hard to get a benefit from a tax deduction when you don't pay taxes to begin with.

And Danoff what would happen to a guy like me? I'm still living at home while I go to school and have a fukl/part time job depending on school at the moment but what happens after?

No clue. I have no idea what your personal situation is, and I don't know what you'd do here. I can tell you what I did if it helps:

- On my parents health insurance until college
- Once in college, joined the student health insurance plan
- After college, joined my work health insurance plan

I don't think group plans pay attention to pre-existing conditions, but I don't really know for sure. I'm not an expert in health insurance. Foolkiller knows the ins and outs better than me.

Reality is the comment about the women living in a tent is reality for some people. Some people are too sheltered to know what some people go through on a daily basis.

Like I said, my boss's wife had breast cancer, and his kid had leukemia. I don't know how it makes me sheltered to know people like this. My point is that getting a serious disease in the US doesn't mean you have to go live in a tent.

 

[Dapper]

Find a rich guy who is paying for your treatment and shake his hand.

This is the under lying problem with capitalist.

That's not proper. That's broken in a very critical (and predictable) way, which is why Canadians cross the border and pay cash to avoid waiting in line.

Canadians wait longer because there are more people in line, more people in line=longer line.

 

[Keef]

This is the under lying problem with capitalist.

What's wrong with shaking a rich man's hand? Never know, he might offer you a job.

 

[ALP1986]

I find it strange that america doesnt want a type of free health care system. A lot of people here in the UK would be completely ruined without it.

Indeed. Its fairly hard to understand the mind set of some people. In the years I've spent talking to Americans and engaging with their far-right groups, all i've been able to conclude is that there doesn't seem to be the same sense of community that we have in europe (amongst people with those views). Its like everyone is just in it for themselves. Although it does seem that it is still largely based in a vocal minority.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Indeed. Its fairly hard to understand the mind set of some people. In the years I've spent talking to Americans and engaging with their far-right groups, all i've been able to conclude is that there doesn't seem to be the same sense of community that we have in europe (amongst people with those views). Its like everyone is just in it for themselves. Although it does seem that it is still largely based in a vocal minority.

You're right that is the overlying attitude with America that we're there for ourselves, but we think that the gov't should be entitled to do everything we ask of them. However this isn't the majority I'd say. There are a number of people that dont want free healthcare for all just as long as they have it, and I think that is the problem. So long as a person has all that they've asked for who cares about the guy next door. Yet you also missed another important factor that is probably different from Europe but I can't assume that since I don't live there, anyways the other factor is pride. Alot of people dont want help and would rather work hard to get their own health or other system than ask for the gov't or a friend to help them out. So you have a group of selfish as well as a group of pride driven people. However, this isn't the story for everyone.

 

[Joel]

Maybe if the United States wasn't spending a ton of money on wars, they could have the funding for proper Public Healthcare like we have in Canada. For example, in my province we have OHIP (Ontario Health Insurance Plan), every resident with a OHIP card is covered in Canada. In essence our healthcare isn't federally run, American's would consider it State-run. This is where 'Obamacare' gets the whole concept wrong by trying to do it Nationally. Public-run healthcare should be state-run, but this would be expensive as well (Canada has 10 provinces and 3 Territories. Whereas USA has 52 states). A more economically viable method would be to create 3 healthcare zones. (i.e. West Zone covers western Area of USA, East Zone covers eastern area, Central Zone covers central area). States pool together X % revenue and use X amount of money for that region's healthcare. Is it the best idea out there? No. Is it better than Obamacare? Yes.

Vandenal, I'm Canadian as well, and I am not a fan of OHIP. The actual quality of care is for the most part among the best, but there's a reason the richest Canadians go to the US for health care. Did you hear about Newfoundland's premier going to the US for heart surgery? http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/story/2010/02/01/nl-williams-heart-201.html

He had two choices. Wait in line for "free", or pay for the best health care in the world. Doesn't sound proper to me. There's a reason why people who have money get things done in the US, because the health care there is so much better. OHIP is a high level of care, yes. But you're fooling yourself if you think the care we get compares to a well insured American. OHIP pisses away money like it's nothing, because when you get down to it, it is nothing to the health care system. People in this country are OK with forking over huge chunks of their income to health care. In the public conscience, raising taxes is bad, "unless it's for health care".

 

[Pyle_PMG]

Okay, I understand what your saying Noob616, if the USA could somehow just subsidise health care for low-income families and/or people with severe medical conditions, would this not be a more feasible method?

 

[FoolKiller]

I have recently discovered the publicity campaigns that exist against the reforms... The misinformation is quite shocking.

Have you read the actual bill for the reforms? I posted the link to it in this thread (I think - but I have posted it on this site as it is public record). The reforms create absolutely nothing like what you have. It takes our current system and makes people buy insurance, whether they want to or not. It basically creates more business for the insurance companies.

But I find it funny that you talk about misinformation after posting a report on a study that was designed to make the US healthcare system look bad. Does that study factor in the American lifestyle and its affect? I mean, when I see a 400lb woman complain about not being able to pay for both food and medicine I have trouble not laughing.

This thread is a massive eye opener for a Canadian like myself.

I for one am a massive advocate for free healthcare. I have an chronic life long disease that costs a little over $2000 a month in medication though so maybe my view is slightly skewered.

Once upon a time (around four years to the day) I was as healthy as could be. I played a ton of sports, mainly hockey and baseball, and besides a lot of broken bones was rarely if ever going to the hospital or clinic for anything. Then I was diagnosed and well I was in clinics, hospitals and treatment centers more than my own house it seemed. I thank god for our healthcare system, I go for blood tests monthly (and sometimes weekly) which are all free, I get my $4000 medication every other month free, I see my specialist free, I see my local GP free, and I get one wicked excuse to get out of anything. Oh well that's free anyways :lol

Anyway this isn't a pity post but my point is you never know when anything could change. People I know in the states with my disease often go bankrupt due to it or leave there disease untreated. It's bad enough treated and I can't imagine what those people go through. I for one think it's better to constantly know that if anything goes wrong that your covered. I couldn't imagine always worrying about insurance and how to pay for everything.

Anyway that's my extremely biased $.02

Interesting. I was born with my heart condition and by the time you even knew you had a problem I had already had two surgeries, a stroke, recovered from partial paralysis, and was on medications for congenital heart failure, epilepsy, and ulcerative colonitis.

Since then I have been married, had a daughter, got a pacemaker, and then a year ago (six months after my daughter was born) I found I was going to need a heart transplant because I cannot survive another surgery. A transplant will cure my current heart problems and remove my need for most of my current medicines but will leave me with a whole new disease and a whole new set of extremely expensive medicines.

Oh, and a month ago the company I worked for and had my health insurance through, went bankrupt. I am currently still unemployed.

And I disagree with you. My well being is not the responsibility of any other man. Was it fair that I was born this way? No. Does that make it fair or right for everyone else to have to take care of it? No.


And, none of what you are calling free actually is free.

I find it strange that america doesnt want a type of free health care system. A lot of people here in the UK would be completely ruined without it.

I saw some video of this American woman who had cancer, she had to live in a tent in a field because she needed to sell her house to pay for her medical bills. From my point of view that is some ****ed up ****.

See what I said above about my own situation. I can guarantee you that I will never wind up living in a tent. As Danoff said, there is zero reason why that should happen in the US. There are dozens of ways to have your treatment paid for via charities, aid programs and Medicaid. The simple fact is that someone who is living in the tent because of medical bills hasn't explored or accessed all their options. The day I lost my job and coverage there were three of us on phones with people to explore my options so that I did not lack coverage. I found out that there are tons of ways to get coverage. There are individual plans (that are expensive), there are organized coops where you get on a group plan outside of work, and there are dozens of organizations to help you fund your medical treatments. And none of this includes that I have the option to file for unemployment, disability, and medicaid. I did the math and I could actually receive more government aid than I was making when I had a job.

But the US system doesn't take care of people in bad situations, right?

Okay, I understand what your saying Noob616, if the USA could somehow just subsidise health care for low-income families and/or people with severe medical conditions, would this not be a more feasible method?

This does exist. If someone trashed talked the US system and made it sound like you buy or you die they are either ignorant or lying.



As I sit here, unemployed, waiting for the right person to die before I can even hope to live more than a few more years, I have to wonder how it is exactly that people get the crazy negative ideas they have.

That said, I have always said that our system needs many fixes. I have mentioned many of them here many times before. The simple fact is that we need to allow the system to work without the interference that the likes of Ted Kennedy created to screw it up even more. The more I government gets involved the worse it gets. You would not believe how many times I call insurance or doctors with a question and get met with, "By law I am not allowed to know that information, sir." I have to call my doctor or one of the RNs to get what I need, taking them away from caring for patients who are there with immediate medical issues. I feel bad every time my transplant coordinator has to call me back after 7:00 PM from the office.

 

[BrutherSuperior]

Okay, I understand what your saying Noob616, if the USA could somehow just subsidise health care for low-income families and/or people with severe medical conditions, would this not be a more feasible method?

We do.

Medicaid is a state run 'program' that pays the medical bills for low income families and people who need long-term care like kidney dialysis until a donor is found.

The problem with this system is if you're bill is $100, the state only pays $65 meanwhile everyone else with private insurance or paying out of pocket subsidize the $35 shortfall through higher bills. In addition, the state does not pay right away and some doctors just flat-out refuse to take Medicaid patients b/c the state treats the medical provider so poorly.

 

[FoolKiller]

The problem with this system is if you're bill is $100, the state only pays $65 meanwhile everyone else with private insurance or paying out of pocket subsidize the $35 shortfall through higher bills. In addition, the state does not pay right away and some doctors just flat-out refuse to take Medicaid patients b/c the state treats the medical provider so poorly.

Have to correct you a bit. I have read enough insurance statements to know the doctor will charge $100 and insurance will pay $45 and I pay nothing, on a 100% coverage plan. The subsidization comes in that $100 charge. It is $100 to individuals, which means if you pay 20% you will pay $20, insurance pays $45. What the individual pays is unaffected by the contract the insurance company has.


So, the way the system is setup is that the only subsidies are actually coming from individuals' out-of-pocket expenses. However, insurance companies are rarely negotiating a payment plan that pays less than the actual cost of the procedure, but doctors who accept medicare/medicaid are forced to accept below cost.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Have to correct you a bit. I have read enough insurance statements to know the doctor will charge $100 and insurance will pay $45 and I pay nothing, on a 100% coverage plan. The subsidization comes in that $100 charge. It is $100 to individuals, which means if you pay 20% you will pay $20, insurance pays $45. What the individual pays is unaffected by the contract the insurance company has.


So, the way the system is setup is that the only subsidies are actually coming from individuals' out-of-pocket expenses. However, insurance companies are rarely negotiating a payment plan that pays less than the actual cost of the procedure, but doctors who accept medicare/medicaid are forced to accept below cost.

Well and as I have come to find out from the state healthcare system, sometimes the doctor doesn't get paid (like in my case) and all those under that insurance must be let go by the private practice. This is obviously due to the doctor not being paid for services. So yes the system needs to be fixed

 

[GTsail]

....Donations are tax breaks for everyone equally (unless you pay AMT - in which case you're screwed). This is not a rich loophole. Also, what's wrong with donating money? It's not like they get to donate it to themselves and keep it. They gave it away to charity.

There are no loopholes for rich people in the tax code. There are tax breaks for business owners to keep them from paying taxes on business infrastructure but this is something available to ANYONE who opens a business - not just rich people.

Many rich people do not pay taxes because they do not earn money. Someone who makes $10 million off of a movie one year, does not necessarily make $1 the next year.

There is no way around this. The US tax code does not start offering breaks once you reach a certain income level. It doesn't exist, it's nowhere in the tax code. What IS in the tax code is a series of "phase outs" so that you no longer get a break once you make more than a certain amount....

I'm in agreement with Danoff on this.

As far as I know there aren't any tax deductions/loopholes in the IRS Tax Code in regard to personal income taxes that are only available to high-income taxpayers. It's as Danoff says, the myriad of tax deductions/tax credits/loopholes are available to everyone regardless of income, and some deductions can phase-out for those with high income. Sure, there are many deductions/credits that only high-income taxpayers take, but this does not mean that they are unavailable to lower income taxpayers if the lower income taxpayer meets the rules/restrictions related to the deduction or credit.

The only thing that I've thought of that comes close as an exception to this is that there is a tax deduction that has a small "floor" which must be exceeded before any tax deduction can be taken. An example of this is the $100 floor for Personal Casualty Losses, where no deduction is allowed until the loss exceeds $100, (however this is an administrative exception, and was not intended to provide any particular extra benefit to those with higher income).

This "floor" is a very small exception, and would only be a percentage benefit not a dollar benefit, so the thrust of Danoff's post is correct in my opinion.

The only other exception that I can think of is social security taxes that have the $106,800 wage limit for the OASDI tax, however these SS taxes are not Personal Income taxes, so they belong in a different discussion.

Respectfully,
GTsail

PS: Sorry it took me so long to respond to this, but I did have to wade thru some 20,000 pages of the IRS Tax Code and the Income Tax Regulations. HA!

 

[Danisfast]

Have you read the actual bill for the reforms? I posted the link to it in this thread (I think - but I have posted it on this site as it is public record). The reforms create absolutely nothing like what you have. It takes our current system and makes people buy insurance, whether they want to or not. It basically creates more business for the insurance companies.

But I find it funny that you talk about misinformation after posting a report on a study that was designed to make the US healthcare system look bad. Does that study factor in the American lifestyle and its affect? I mean, when I see a 400lb woman complain about not being able to pay for both food and medicine I have trouble not laughing.

Yes, I have read the bill. It's a mess; the idea though (and thread topic) was originally to have healthcare for everyone (which is really the issue at hand here, hence the reason the NHS was brought into the debate in the first place by the American media, probably). Unfortunately, enough of America seemed so disapproving of the notion of state healthcare that Obama's administration had to water it down until he could at least cover most of those currently unprotected.

As for that report: yes, the tabloid may not be presenting the data in an unbiased, scientific manner, but those aren't warbled statistics cherry-picked to create an opinion, and you know it.

If you want more facts, the WHO website has information outlining that not only does the US government already spend more of its budget on healthcare than the UK government does, but it also leaves out between 10% and 15% of its population.

The US government spends more per person: not even taking into account the private sectors, of which the US government holds approximately a half-and-half balance of the total expenditure. This is against the UK, which is more like 16.5% private. It's also generally no more effective: the last 'table', although over ten years ago, had actually ranked the US twice as many places below the UK (37th and 18th respectively).

With people paying into private funds (or receiving medical as a part of their job/benefits), it makes me wonder actually, where is all the extra money going? It's either just a really inefficient system that leaks capital, or that dough is disappearing into someone's pockets.

Or both.

Apologies for the liberal use of italics/bold, I have just discovered them!

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Yes, I have read the bill. It's a mess; the idea though (and thread topic) was originally to have healthcare for everyone (which is really the issue at hand here, hence the reason the NHS was brought into the debate in the first place by the American media, probably). Unfortunately, enough of America seemed so disapproving of the notion of state healthcare that Obama's administration had to water it down until he could at least cover most of those currently unprotected.

As for that report: yes, the tabloid may not be presenting the data in an unbiased, scientific manner, but those aren't warbled statistics cherry-picked to create an opinion, and you know it.

If you want more facts, the WHO website has information outlining that not only does the US government already spend more of its budget on healthcare than the UK government does, but it also leaves out between 10% and 15% of its population.

The US government spends more per person: not even taking into account the private sectors, of which the US government holds approximately a half-and-half balance of the total expenditure. This is against the UK, which is more like 16.5% private. It's also generally no more effective: the last 'table', although over ten years ago, had actually ranked the US twice as many places below the UK (37th and 18th respectively).

With people paying into private funds (or receiving medical as a part of their job/benefits), it makes me wonder actually, where is all the extra money going? It's either just a really inefficient system that leaks capital, or that dough is disappearing into someone's pockets.

Or both.

Apologies for the liberal use of italics/bold, I have just discovered them!

So basically healthcare ran by the U.S. gov't is a bad idea. I'd also like to say you're one of the few people I've seen that talks politics and uses facts backed from respectable sites with actual statistics. I'd like to say thank you whether I like it or not you actually did some great fact checking.

 

[sniper338]

With people paying into private funds (or receiving medical as a part of their job/benefits), it makes me wonder actually, where is all the extra money going? It's either just a really inefficient system that leaks capital, or that dough is disappearing into someone's pockets.

That extra money goes to pay for the rampant abuse of the Medicare system. It goes to pay for families that make dozens of ER visits a year when their kid has a runny nose, it pays for families who show up in a Mercedes yet slap that state Medicare card on the counter when it's time to pay. And it pays for the weekly visitors who show up weekly for "back" pain so they can get their fix. It pays for the mom who decides that her child should ride in an ambulance to the hospital because ACCESS will cover it instead of driving the child in her car. Here in Arizona our state medicate program is called ACCESS and is funded in part by federal money. It is the most overused and abused part of the state budget and its sickening how people can get away with what they do.

Now don't get me wrong, there are some people who really need it and I support them being able to get healthcare without having to go bankrupt. Its just the blatant abuse by people who use the system that ruin it for most people.

 

[Danoff]

That extra money goes to pay for the rampant abuse of the Medicare system. It goes to pay for families that make dozens of ER visits a year when their kid has a runny nose, it pays for families who show up in a Mercedes yet slap that state Medicare card on the counter when it's time to pay. And it pays for the weekly visitors who show up weekly for "back" pain so they can get their fix. It pays for the mom who decides that her child should ride in an ambulance to the hospital because ACCESS will cover it instead of driving the child in her car. Here in Arizona our state medicate program is called ACCESS and is funded in part by federal money. It is the most overused and abused part of the state budget and its sickening how people can get away with what they do.

Now don't get me wrong, there are some people who really need it and I support them being able to get healthcare without having to go bankrupt. Its just the blatant abuse by people who use the system that ruin it for most people.

Also it goes to innovation, which is something the US still does.

 

[Pyle_PMG]

Also it goes to innovation, which is something the US still does.

You are right. I refrained from posting in this thread for a while to give me time to think and grasp what you have said, and I must say you are correct.

The US features some of the best hospitals in the world for research and innovation.

There is no free healthcare. For the money Canadians pay in taxes, private healthcare would probably be cheaper.

I read the Obamacare bill, it is flawed. It will cost more money and does not do that much.

Sorry for being a jerk earlier and posting before knowing and understanding your argument.

Sincerely,
VANDENAL

 

[Danoff]

I don't see anywhere that you were a jerk. 👍

 

[Keef]

The learning process always starts by not understanding something. Taking steps to resolve that, doing your own research, and learning something you didn't know before makes you that much smarter, and a better person as a whole. 👍

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

The learning process always starts by not understanding something. Taking steps to resolve that, doing your own research, and learning something you didn't know before makes you that much smarter, and a better person as a whole. 👍

Keef you bring a tear to my eye, then again we agree on politics it seems on this forum so it must be natural. Good post though!