Medical bills are way too expensive... But why?

[BainbridgeShred]

Saying their is no moral argument against centralized healthcare is like saying their is no moral argument against Communism. Sure the ends might be righteous (Might be..) but the means to them didn't work. Neither does centralized healthcare work. My moral argument against centralized healthcare is that it isn't moral for the government to limit the availability of specialist doctors in the country in order to keep prices down so they can pay for their own system. It isn't moral to make citizens wait years upon years to have their painful tumors removed when there are people who could perform the surgery.

[janis]

Most of the 40 million people who can't afford healthcare in the US work full time at essential jobs that cannot pay enough to get them health care. Yet it is these people who support the lifestyles of the wealthier people in the population. Many people have to do crap jobs, garbage removal, cleaning, etc, so that we can have our lifestyle. Doesn't the US promise a decent standard of living in return for hard work. These workers have earned their right to healthcare by doing essential and undesirable jobs to support the economy and the community. Further, there is money in the economy to pay them. Their healthcare would be covered by having the top 2 percent of the community paying the taxes that they used to pay and the taxes they avoid paying. It is only fair that the wealthy pay for their own lifestyles and that people who provide those lifestyles get paid fairly for it.


some rebuttal:

It isn't moral to make citizens wait years upon years to have their painful tumors removed when there are people who could perform the surgery.

I agree, so why is this the case in the US?

My moral argument against centralized healthcare is that it isn't moral for the government to limit the availability of specialist doctors in the country in order to keep prices down so they can pay for their own system.

This is not a fault of universal healthcare, it is the government who is restricting the funding. Also your argument against universal healthcare seems to imply that the government is funding the current healthcare regime, which would seem not to be the case. Indeed universal healthcare is only good if it is "universal" i.e. an improvement over the current system of socioeconomic discrimination. Personally I believe that the well-being of human beings should not be contingent on their wealth or socioeconomic status but rather is an inalienable right conferred upon people from their very being. Also as I mentioned earlier there are many hard working people, the working poor, who really deserve healthcare and yet don't get it. Universal healthcare is a much fairer system in this respect.

[james_dean]

Damn Janis, said exactly what I'm thinking, 10x more eloquently.

[Outsider]

I'm not at my argumentative best at the moment, and not as well studied-up on some of the issues at hand as I have been last week, and I haven't crunched all my numbers yet, but I wanted to clear up a few things for Janis's and everyone elses sake:

Janis said:

When did everyone (particularly policymakers) get indoctrinated with the idea of "user pays"? it seems to be a relitavely recent phenomenon. There seems to be a really big double standard, that the user pays only if they are poor. The US government supports and subsidises the wealthy and corporations, yet nobody seems to mind, but as soon as people try to provide healthcare for the disadvantaged in the community there is a huge problem. Why is it that many policymakers, supposedly elected by the population, are encouraged to subsidise the people who need subsidies the least? Further, why do people support this system when it clearly is not in their self interest to support it?

and:

Also your argument against universal healthcare seems to imply that the government is funding the current healthcare regime, which would seem not to be the case.

Janis, everybody else,
In the United States, MASSIVE health care programs are funded by Federal and State governements. They are simply not Universal programs, and this is basically so that the government doesn't pay for people who can afford to pay for themselves.

The Medicaid program is actually a series of 50 different health insurance programs that are administered by each state in the country, and overseen by the federal gov't (one program per state, with federal law outlining certain requirements, but the state making and administering its own specific plan). The cost of the program is split roughly 50/50 between the federal gov't and the state. The purpose of Medicaid is to provide health insurance specifically for individuals and families with low incomes and resources, with emphasis on covering children and their parents, senior citizens, and the disabled. About 43 million people are insured by Medicaid, and the cost of the various programs apparent accounts for, on average, about 1/4 of the total budget of each state. I am not sure if that is before or after the federal government reimburses about half of the states' expenditures.

Medicare is a health-care program run entirely by the federal government and covers people who are 65 years of age or older and some younger people with some specific health problems like kidney failure or who are classified as disabled. The Medicare program covers approximately 42.5 million people. That number is expected to grow to at least 77 million people in the next 25 years. The federal goverment spends about 13 percent of its annual budget on Medicare benefits. Thats nearly 250 billion dollars each year (and that doesn't include Medicaid, or social security benefits, etc)

The Veterans Administration also provides health insurance (as well as housing assistance, educational assistance, and other benefits) to tens of millions of American armed services veterans. I couldn't get a really good number, but apparently at least 26 million people receive benefits from the VA. The Veterans Administration currently has an annual budget of about 60 billion dollars to spend on health, education, housing, etc. I think the health care is the biggest chunk of that budget. Apparently, the VA is the largets employer of health care professionals in the US, and it is estimated that about 1 out of every 4 doctors in the country spends some portion of their career working for the VA.

There are a number of smaller state and federal government programs in that specifically support the healthcare needs of the disadvantaged and the disabled in the US, though Medicare and Medicaid are by far the largest.

I'm not getting in to the pros and cons of those programs right now. I just wanted to correct Janis's mis-informed belief that various levels of government in the United States DON'T pay for health insurance for the poor. Like I said at the outset, I haven't done all my reading or my math yet, but it sounds like the US Goverment shells out for the healthcare of at least twice as many people as live in Canada and Australia combined, and the total cost of all that health-care is, I believe, greater than the total military spending of the US that everybody out there keeps bringing up for comparison.

The United States spends hundreds of billions of dollars each year on the health needs of our poor, disabled, and elderly.

[Switch Kicker]

Switch Kicker:

Driving a car a convenience, it's not a neccessity. I have no problem riding a bike to work or school.

Spoken like a typical insensitive inconsiderate youth. Riding may work fine for you for now, but go and tell your parents or your grandparents that they should pedal their middle-aged and elderly butts to work this winter. Go and tell it to a mother or three that she should bring her kids to the pediatrician's office by bicycle, or that she should do grocery shopping for her entire family and carry everything back to the house on her bike. A car might be a conveniece for you, for now but that doesn't make it so for everybody for all time. Your own circumstances are bound to change and you might not find a car so frivolous then. But, until then, put your money where your mouth is and sell your car. If the vehicle alone isn't worth enough to buy some health insurance for your and your girlfriend, maybe the money you save on gas and insurance is.

Why should the government give more finacial support to our personal health care? Because we pay fucking taxes you dumbass.

Taxes pay for alot of things. Mine pay for education and public libraries, amongst many other things. Taxes don't pay for everything. An individual is still responsible to get some things for himself, or don't you believe that? Hey, you pay taxes, so why doesn't somebody come and take care of your every need for you? Isn't that covered by your taxes? You want 100% provided to you for your taxes, but you only cough up 25% of your paycheck to Uncle Sam. Are you willing to give 100% to get 100%? Are you ready to cede control of your finances entirely for somebody else to provide for all your needs?

And it's more like 20 years you ass. 12 grades, and then 8-12 years of medical schooling.

20 Years won't even get you a license to practice general medicine in this country. The radiologist who reads your X-Rays typically needs 25 years (1-12, 4 year college, 4 year medical school, 1 year internship, 4 years residency in radiology) Specialized surgeons like cardiac and neuro-surgeons need 27. The anesthisiologists whom the surgeons depend on need 24 years to be licensed. Think about that: a surgeon with 27 years of learning cannot even perform his work without another expert with at 24 years worth of school to support him, never mind the nurses. Doctors in their residency are often required to work OVER 80 HOURS A WEEK. And in those hours they are responsible for life and death decisions and operations. I think those guys earn their pay.

c-fan,

It all comes down to doctors protecting themselves from malpractice suits, as well as the profitability of the insurance industry for both doctors as well as the insurance industry itself.

So what you're saying is that its lawyers suing doctors that brings medical cost up. I agree. The answer to that is tort reform, not medical reform.
As for our for-profit medical world, it has lead to the development of medical ultra-sound, CAT Scans, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging, all medical breakthroughs that we benefit from. The CAT and MRI were deemed worthy of Nobel prizes (taken home by Americans, btw).

Why is it so expensive to drive a vehicle? Gas, and that alone. And why is gas priced so high? The war, and that alone. And where fuck are alot of our tax dollars going to? The war.

Now they're debating going to war with N. Korea too. Fuck that, I will go AWOL, and get a Dishonorable Discharge, and move to the fucking UK, before I remain a member of this country as a civilian or soldier. The financial system has gone to shit, it's not worth living here anymore.

And don't you preach to me about my youth. I know and understand that there are people that need vehicles as a form of transportation. But Joe Shmoe Fuckhead 16 year old punk ass who's parents are loaded, doesn't need to be driving his F-350 up and down broadway every fucking night for fun.

Food can't be related to this. It doesn't cost $70 to visit the grocery store. it doesn't cost 2 grand to fix a stomach pain. (Caused by hunger of course.) The cost of eating for one person is only aobut $150 a month. The cost of some perscriptions that some people need, can cost around $200-300 a month.

And mind you, every living thing needs to eat. The reason the government should pay more towards our health is because, one, we pay taxes for it, and two, it's isn't your fault that you were walking down the street one day and somebody smokes you with their car and drives off. And don't fucking tell me, "Well it's not the gov's fault either." Because that's the reason we pay taxes for HEALTH CARE. We don't pay taxes for FOOD, at least not for anyone in the middle class.

Not every living thing goes through medical problems like these. I think, that if you are going to die from a purely natural cause, that you should have to pay for it out of your pocket. But if you're going to die because of cancer because your spouse smokes, or if you get smoked by a car, or something, that isn't natural or your fault, then the government should be there to help support you, because you support them, by paying fucking taxes.

Single mother Marry-Ann with a single child, who can't hold a job because she's too irresponsible to make good decisions, shouldn't receive food stamps and welfare checks unless she's putting something into the government herself. Without honest effort, you shouldn't receive help. The child, should be taken from you, and supported through foster care or adoption or what not.

I'm just sick of working my ass off, being a good citizen, doing my duty as a soldier, and then watching the government take care of fucking losers, that wouldn't make a responsible decision if their life depended on it, and then fucking over the working class. The people that actually, work for a living, the ones that deserve a little help when they rarely ask for it.

And I don't need to make a logical statement if I don't want to. The fact of the matter is, this is all fucking wrong, and things need to change soon.

Attacking my grammar or writting skills will fall on deaf ears.

peace.

[ShredEX]

Canada=Free Healthcare=Owns Tiered System Healthcare

[crazylegs32]

In The USA illegals get free healthcare if they are really Ill. If I sneak into Canada and get sick with a longterm illness will they take care of me or deport me?

[HighDemonslayer]

oooh, I want to throw some dripping red meat on this fire, big time.

But for now, Ill offer one justification for Med. bills to be so high:

1. We have to insure that lawyers can live lavish lifestyles of decadence and excessive carbon-footprints.

I mean c'mon, politico attorneys (like John Edwards, for example) need to milk many hundreds of millions of dollars in settlements, destroying medical providers.

Better that he ride around in Gulfstreams and luxury yachts(defending the common man), than have affordable healthcare for an undetermined number of peons, eh I mean people.




-n

[ShredEX]

ah how appropriate that you have a Chapelle show clip as your sig. Jon have you not seen the episode where Dave wants to become president so his campaign commercial is based on giving people free Canadian citizenship cards so they can get free healthcare. Regarding your question though as just being a border jumper and getting hooked up I'm not sure what the policy is if there is any, I do recall seeing a news special a couple years back about Americans coming north to purchase their prescription drugs at a much lower cost though.