posted on June 12, 2005 07:04:51 PM new
AMERICA'S LOUSY HEALTHCARE
RICHARD SCHWARTZ, NY DAILY NEWS - America doesn't have the world's best health care system, just the most expensive. For those of you who worry about your health and wealth (i.e., everyone), that's mind-bogglingly bad news. The numbers are grotesque. The United States spends 15.5 percent of its gross domestic product on health care, about $1.7 trillion a year. No other country comes close. Yet for all that money - equal to the entire economic output of France - 45 million Americans go without health insurance.
By the way, in France, which on a per-capita basis spends about half what we do on health care, everyone is insured. In fact, under France's universal health system, patients can visit doctors, even specialists, virtually any time they wish. . .
We're only No. 22 among industrialized nations in life expectancy (77 years). Japan is No. 1 at 81 years. We're No. 25 in infant mortality rate (6.8 infant deaths per 1,000 births). Sweden leads with only 3.5 deaths per 1,000. . .
PROGRESS REPORT - In a study conducted by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 41 percent of uninsured adults said they were unable to see a doctor when they needed to during the previous year and 56 percent did not have a personal doctor or other health care provider. In 2003, chronically ill uninsured adults were more than four times more likely to go without medical care or prescription drugs than chronically ill insured adults." Nevertheless, more than one in five uninsured adults with chronic conditions report spending at least $2,000 out of pocket in a year for medical care. In last week's Los Angeles Times, Barbara Ehrenreich pointed out the "average visit to an ER now costs a little over $1,000, which is a high price to pay for an asthma attack or an infant's fever."
RWJF estimates that 20 million working Americans are uninsured and the Washington Times reports rising health care costs are forcing companies to pass "more of their health care costs on to employees in an effort to cut business expenses." General Motors Corp., the nation's largest buyer of health plans, recently reported it lost $1.1 billion in the first quarter of 2005, its largest quarterly loss in more than a decade." The company "cited the cost of providing health coverage for its workers and retirees as a main culprit."
The first element of the Bush administration's response to America's health care crisis has been to cut funding for coverage and offer half-baked privatization plans like Health Savings Accounts that exacerbate existing problems and would help only 0.3 percent of uninsured adults. In his latest "victory," President Bush successfully lobbied Congress to cut federal funding for Medicaid, the nation's largest insurance program for the poor. Medicaid was already facing increased costs driven by "enrollment growth due to the economic downturn" during Bush's first term. In addition, Congress recently passed the White House-backed Bankruptcy Bill, which will make it harder for uninsured Americans to recover from crippling debt brought on by medical problems.
posted on June 12, 2005 07:17:00 PM new
chimpchamp you are right.
Maybe that is the way they do that in Canada, I don't know, but not in the Breast Centers or hospitals located throughout the US.
posted on June 12, 2005 07:23:54 PM new
Changed my mind...only to point out...just how ludicrous helen can get.
As I mentioned before, Your claim
not MY claim helen....a FACT anyone can verify.
...that 10,000 women had to wait for care in Canada seems petty when you consider the hundreds of thousands of American women who will die without even a diagnosis[/i].
Let's see....if we have 40,000 - 45,000 uninsured PEOPLE [which in total represent men, women and children] in the US...then only a portion of those would be women....
...then you, helen, speak of hundreds of thousands of american will will dies without a diagnosis.
It doesn't take a genius to see, but of course YOU missed it , that there isn't even that many uninsured women in America....so we certainly can't blame the lack of insurance on them developing breast cancer, or not finding it early enough.
Get real helen...THINK before inserting your foot.
That fact illustrates that the more serious problem is in the U.S. where the poor and middle class are excluded from health care because it is unaffordable
clearer now helen. Even if ALL the 45,000 were uninsured women....those above that amount [above those numbers] HAVE insurance.
geeze - talk about BLOWING things out of proportion.
~~~~~~~~~
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Jun 12, 2005 07:27 PM ]
Linda, it's 45,000,000 Americans uninsured....That's FORTY FIVE MILLION not 45,000
You said earlier, "Also...do you know what ever happened with the class action lawsuit by those 10,000 breast cancer patients? I believe last years when we spoke about their personal opinions of how long it took for them to get their treatment...that your courts had given their approval for the lawsuit to go forward. But I've not heard/read how it turned out, have you?"
Althought you didn't get an answer to the question above, you continue to ask about these 10,000 women while at the same time, with apparent ignorance of the outcome of the case, you use them in your argument. Do you know anything about the resolution of the case? Was there a suit or not?
posted on June 12, 2005 07:47:40 PM new
Here linduh, I typed this myself real slowly so maybe you could read it. Do you want me to delete the big words?
AMERICA'S LOUSY HEALTHCARE
RICHARD SCHWARTZ, NY DAILY NEWS - America doesn't have the world's best health care system, just the most expensive. For those of you who worry about your health and wealth (i.e., everyone), that's mind-bogglingly bad news. The numbers are grotesque. The United States spends 15.5 percent of its gross domestic product on health care, about $1.7 trillion a year. No other country comes close. Yet for all that money - equal to the entire economic output of France - 45 million Americans go without health insurance.
By the way, in France, which on a per-capita basis spends about half what we do on health care, everyone is insured. In fact, under France's universal health system, patients can visit doctors, even specialists, virtually any time they wish. . .
We're only No. 22 among industrialized nations in life expectancy (77 years). Japan is No. 1 at 81 years. We're No. 25 in infant mortality rate (6.8 infant deaths per 1,000 births). Sweden leads with only 3.5 deaths per 1,000. . .
PROGRESS REPORT - In a study conducted by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 41 percent of uninsured adults said they were unable to see a doctor when they needed to during the previous year and 56 percent did not have a personal doctor or other health care provider. In 2003, chronically ill uninsured adults were more than four times more likely to go without medical care or prescription drugs than chronically ill insured adults." Nevertheless, more than one in five uninsured adults with chronic conditions report spending at least $2,000 out of pocket in a year for medical care. In last week's Los Angeles Times, Barbara Ehrenreich pointed out the "average visit to an ER now costs a little over $1,000, which is a high price to pay for an asthma attack or an infant's fever."
RWJF estimates that 20 million working Americans are uninsured and the Washington Times reports rising health care costs are forcing companies to pass "more of their health care costs on to employees in an effort to cut business expenses." General Motors Corp., the nation's largest buyer of health plans, recently reported it lost $1.1 billion in the first quarter of 2005, its largest quarterly loss in more than a decade." The company "cited the cost of providing health coverage for its workers and retirees as a main culprit."
The first element of the Bush administration's response to America's health care crisis has been to cut funding for coverage and offer half-baked privatization plans like Health Savings Accounts that exacerbate existing problems and would help only 0.3 percent of uninsured adults. In his latest "victory," President Bush successfully lobbied Congress to cut federal funding for Medicaid, the nation's largest insurance program for the poor. Medicaid was already facing increased costs driven by "enrollment growth due to the economic downturn" during Bush's first term. In addition, Congress recently passed the White House-backed Bankruptcy Bill, which will make it harder for uninsured Americans to recover from crippling debt brought on by medical problems.
posted on June 12, 2005 08:12:53 PM new
Kraftdinner said:
Quebec, like Maggie summed it up (so very well, I might add), is a province onto themselves. They ALWAYS have problems and always run to the rest of the provinces to bail them out, yet cry for separatism. That's why I'm leery of any reports that come from there, but am not that blinded to other problems that need attention, like the ones I mentioned.
I agree, Quebec is a province completely different from the rest of Canada. The breast cancer patients resided in Quebec and it looks like their provincial government failed them. Quebec is not the norm for the rest of Canada so it's pointless to use it as an example for health care right across the country.
posted on June 12, 2005 08:47:40 PM new
This is from the Susan G. Komen Foundation
In addition to funding research, the Foundation and its Affiliates fund non-duplicative, community-based breast health education and breast cancer screening and treatment projects for the medically underserved. For funding through the Komen Affiliate network, please contact an Affiliate near you.www/Komen.org
These Free standing Mammography Clinics are throughout the US.
Breast Cancer is always treated whether they have insurance or not. Many Physicians have a service where they offer free medical care for patients without insurance and surgeons will do the same.
If they don't have insurance and cannot pay then they would fall under the state insurance plan. But I can only speak for Wisconsin.
Yes many people throughout the US have no medical insurance. Some choose not to have it others are unable to pay for it. The ones unable to pay for it need to check their state for the state insurance.
I think some people think that people who can't afford insurance will not get treated. That is wrong. Hospitals all the time write off medical bills because of that.
Many hospitals go broke because they do but the care is there.
posted on June 12, 2005 09:03:24 PM new
Just a side note. How come the Clinton administration didn't get a National Health Care Bill. Wasn't it one of his objectives of his platform?
A Health care bill has to be bipartisan or it will not work. Both the Democrats and Republicans have to work this out together.
First they need how to fund it. They need the initial amount to begin with. Of course taxes will go up and heaven forbid for that.
There is much to work out and it won't be accomplished soon. Once it is enacted there is no going back so they better be sure.
Of course with National Health Care will Physicians be happy with it. I doubt if any of you know the cost of education for a Surgeon, Heart Surgeon etc. How many years they go to school. Will students think twice before going into Medicine if we get National Health Care. I bet they will. It won't be coming soon.
posted on June 13, 2005 05:39:42 AM new
What is the underlying theme to this thread, national health care.
The government does not owe people health care, it is each individuals responsibility. Keep the government out of it. I will be appalled if or when national health care is brought to the US. That is not the American way to have everything handed to you.
posted on June 13, 2005 10:05:36 AM new
Linda_k, you're such a phoney. You have shown nothing but contempt and loathing for most of the French and for most Canadians, yet you sit here for days wringing your hands and raging over the fact that some French Canadian women in Quebec didn't receive proper health care.
Yet you coldly compare the deaths of your own country's troops (sent to a war based on lies) to mere traffic statistics. Over 1700 have been killed and about 13,000 severely wounded and are missing limbs or have permanent brain injuries yet you’ve never shown a second of caring or remorse for any of them here. Some will rot away in Vet’s hospitals, receiving inadequate care and drugged out of their skulls now for the rest of their lives.
Who the heck are you trying to fool....... you don't give a crap about any of them OR those women in Quebec either.
And please….. come back with something more original than your usual comments that I popped in, tagged along or that my crystal ball is broken or that you can lie all you want because it’s free speech or you know what you’re talking about because you googled it.
posted on June 13, 2005 10:24:37 AM new
I've just read the last page (cheated, skipped the last 4 pages)
I don't believe our gov. should have a National Healthcare. It would be a disater
Crow, yes we pay taxes. And there are those who do not pay taxes, but reap the benefits of fully paid healthcare (medicaid) cash (welfare) section 8 housing (federal) food stamps (state) utilities (state) (All paid by yours and my state and federal taxes. )
Wow, those benefits sounds pretty good, where do I sign up?
posted on June 13, 2005 10:42:06 AM new
kiara says, FALSELY, I might add:
yet you sit here for days wringing your hands and raging over the fact that some French Canadian women in Quebec didn't receive proper health care.
LOL...your crystal ball is not working once again, miss kiara. I am not raging, I am NOT wringing my hands, and it is NOT ONLY in Quebec ...it is widespread throughout your country.
So...let's see, that makes you WRONG on all FOUR of your ASSUMPTIONS [when speaking of the troops]. Still batting zero.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Jun 13, 2005 10:52 AM ]
posted on June 13, 2005 10:49:08 AM new
How many times to I have to repeat that this subject is currently in the news....all across our Nation. And as I told kiara in the beginning of this thread...the OP was from the NYT.
op-ed on this subject from today's WSJ.
The Canadian ruling ought to be an eye-opener for the U.S., where "single-payer," government-run health care is still a holy grail on the political left and even for some in business (such as the automakers). This month the California Senate passed a bill that would create a state-run system of single-payer universal health care. The Assembly is expected to follow suit. Someone should make sure the Canadian Supreme Court's ruling is on Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's reading list before he makes a veto decision.
The larger lesson here is that health care isn't immune from the laws of economics. Politicians can't wave a wand and provide equal coverage for all merely by declaring medical care to be a "right," in the word that is currently popular on the American left.
There are only two ways to allocate any good or service: through prices, as is done in a market economy, or lines dictated by government, as in Canada's system. The socialist claim is that a single-payer system is more equal than one based on prices, but last week's court decision reveals that as an illusion. Or, to put it another way,
Canadian health care is equal only in its shared scarcity.
posted on June 13, 2005 11:02:18 AM newCanadian health care is equal only in its shared scarcity.
So to get some kind of National Healthcare in the U.S. it would have to be tax paid, and A LOT of taxpayers (workers) But then IF they implemented this, how many would say to hell with it, and quit working, and still get the Health care? (and I am NOT saying that people would go up and quit, just a 'what if' question)
How many Canadians pay and how many do not?
Is the question, of which may have already been answered here.
posted on June 13, 2005 11:25:54 AM new
lol NTS - Questions aren't being answered by any of the lefties who've posted here. They just change the subject or ask questions of their own.
------------------------
Kiara thinks I'm raging because she and kd would like us to take their word alone, because they live there, that their knowledge of the whole system is correct....but other Canadian citizens don't see it the same way they do.
So...when that's pointed out...and they are questioned on the 10,000 breast cancer patients who filed a class action suit, because THEY didn't get good quality care in a timely manner.....kiara goes over the edge and judges that to be MY ranting.
Well...guess everyone in the US that is discussing this current news...is seen in the same light? I doubt that...kiara would rather present it as 'Linda's issue with Canada'...'Linda's issue with kiara' 'kiara thinks Linda's a phoney ...rather than it's a topic of discussion across our Nation.
Meanwhile....she goes 'off' on one of her own rants...changing the discussion topic back to the war in Iraq - our injured and dead soldiers - and rages herself about all that unrelated stuff.
Diversion tactics if I've ever seen them.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on June 13, 2005 11:44:35 AM new
First linduh you're a liar about who answers posts ..YOU don't .
Second: I AGREE with linduh 's and fenix's plan for America! I AGREE!
Since lowering worker's wages and benefits is their only answer to saving the economy then ALL worker's should make minimum wage !
Yup, then those CEO's will be assured that the 10 million they made last year will double next year ! YEEAAHH!!
This plan will solve several problems:
Illegals will stop flocking to America when they learn it's just as bad here
People will buy less and less because they have to""support"" the company through wage concessions. And we all know that when people's buying power slows the economy just BOOOMS!!!!
People will stop with the luxury items like children and homes. After all, if you work seven days a week who has time for "family values".
And those COSTLY vacation and paid sick days will be a thing of the past...must save the company, you know.....don't need time with your family or a day to spend with a sick child....let 'em home alone...you saw the movie...they'll be OK. And you shouldn't have had children if you couldn't afford them on minimum wages anyway.
Get sick...well, be sure to punch out on the time clock. And why are you leaving work just because you're sick ? You should be fired!You don't have health insurance anyway so suck it up !
Now, SOME will come in here saying "don't you ever think in gray always black and white blah , blah, blah,....
meaningless babble because when workers are forced to make concession after concession with NO concessions from upper management and executives
where do you think this is headed ???
I don't really care anymore so have sided with the all-knowing linduh and fenix.
Now, girls, what shall we do with those pesky homeless people...especially those lazy 8-year olds.....OH, I bet linduh has some plans!
And remember everybody....the "world's greatest country" owes you NOTHING
posted on June 13, 2005 11:57:41 AM new
I really have to say Linda that you are pretty good at pulling Crowfarm's strings and making her do her little puppet dances. In fact your so good at it that you do it without even trying, you are the Puppet-Master. Oh yeah, Fenix is pretty good at it as well.
Come on now Crowfarm, why won't you dance for me like you do for others, I guess i'm just not as good at pulling your strings as others are, oh well??
posted on June 13, 2005 12:07:41 PM new
Simple clear facts for those who skip pages or didn't grasp it the many other times it was posted:
Quebec is almost a country unto itself and in no way represents the rest of Canada.
Kraft and I have admitted over and over that Canada's health care system has problems.
As Kraft said, Linda_k doesn't want to hear us say that, so she pretends we've denied it and she answers like we have denied it.
Linda_k also calls Kraft a liar but Kraft is one of the most honest people on the board.
Canada is NOT the model health care system that the US should follow because it's a problematic system for reasons I've previously discussed here. Also politicians and governments have a way of screwing up the best of plans.
Most adults in Canada work for a living and purchase their own health care insurance, some through their employers. Self-employed persons purchase their own health insurance.
Despite what some seem to believe, not everyone is born equal....... the mentally deficient or the crippled or injured who are unemployable or on smaller incomes and some of the elderly who cannot pay for all of their health care receive help through their Provincial government.
Some who are struck with severe illnesses are assisted by the government if they are no longer able to be employed and do not have enough income to pay for costs of treatment.
Canada thinks it is preferable to assist them, rather than kicking them to the curb and abandoning them and letting them suffer and die. Many taxpayers seem to agree and they would like more of their tax dollars going to health care because they recognize the value of a healthy society.
FACTS can be read at the Health Canada website or Nationmaster encyclopedia or Provincial government sites. Your choice.
posted on June 13, 2005 12:17:33 PM new
lol yellowstone - You noticed, did ya?
She has been obsessed with me, been my shadow, and keeps hoping I'll give her just a tad of my attention..... and it drives her crazy that I won't. Thus...the continuing comments about me.
---------------
Does Socialized Medicine Work?
In the Cato Policy Analysis "Health Care in a Free Society: Rebutting the Myths of National Health Insurance," John Goodman, president of the National Center for Policy Analysis, explains that supporters of socialized medicine "insist that government will make health care available on the basis of need rather than ability to pay" and that the public "will have equal access to care."
However, history has not fulfilled these promises: "Wherever national health insurance has been tried, rationing by waiting is pervasive, putting patients at risk and keeping them in pain. Single-payer systems tend to leave rationing choices up to local bureaucracies that, for example, fill hospital beds with chronic patients, while acute patients wait for care. Access to health care in single-payer systems is far from equitable; in fact, it often correlates with income -- with rich and well-connected citizens jumping the queue for treatment."
posted on June 13, 2005 12:27:47 PM new
kiara mentions that I called KD a liar.
Yep, sure did. Why? Because she was speaking for Linda_K and it wasn't her place to do so. It's MY place to speak for myself.
And when anyone tells others how I feel, what I think, who I hate or don't hate, then I will call them on it. As I did.
She spoke for me and wasn't being truthful about my own positions.
And kiara, you'd call someone that does that to you WHAT??? exactly. No real need for you to answer....we've seen you personally GO OFF when you think it's being done to you or about your previous statements. But....I KNOW...that's somehow MUCH different.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on June 13, 2005 12:38:24 PM new
Same thing every day.
Blah, blah, blah
Rants and rages
Then she twists our words and rants on.......
Then when one of us reacts for the very first time and corrects her interpretation of our original comments we hear:
"Frankly I'm surprised to hear you speak that way, (insert poster's name here). I've never seen this side of you before. You must be having a bad day. I respected you but now I see that you are no different than those other ultra-leftie, socialist dems (usually names Crowfarm, Helen and Kiara at the top of the list)
Then the pitiful victim face
If anyone of those so-called ‘socialists’ posts so much as a smilie or a comment she then resorts to the Whaaaaaaaaa
Next a couple of her lap dogs come rushing in from the sidelines, yipping in illogical and gibberish talk and lap up her tears as they cover her back and try to attack.
Meantime the old farts who are still haunted by adolescent inner sexual frustrations are posting crude comments so she slithers along in their muddy little footprints egging them on.
posted on June 13, 2005 12:45:23 PM new
Rather than turning to a form of socialistic medicine....I think we could lower health care costs by doing several different things.
One would be putting higher limits on deductibles....that way the system would be used less by those with runny-noses if they had to pay for those visits themselves....up to a higher deductible.
Another would be continuing to suggest [NOT REGULATE] people maintaining healthier life styles. As we already know...those who don't take care of themselves are the majority of the cases of many diseases...like diabetes, heart disease, stokes, high blood pressure, etc. Some companies are already encouraging their employees by offer gyms at the work place...incentives to quit smoking....to loose weight...etc.
Again, my position is not FORCING this one the insured....just more encouragement to do so.
I also believe we're going to see the benefit of lower or not rising as fast insurance rates now that 'caps' have been put in place on lawsuits.
Maybe somehow the whole system of doctors mal-practice insurance being based on how many claims have been filed against them....rather than all paying such a high rate to 'protect' themselves. That would lower the costs substancially for doctors that haven't used the insurance to pay claims in their practices.
I'm sure there are many other ways we can deal with these problems...ideas from people much more educated than I, rather than turning to a system where we'll ALL have to suffer 300,000,000 of us.
But even more importantly than that, to me anyway, is I can't imagine our government regulating our health care, regulating how much THEY decide THEY will put towards care that has severe consequences to our well-being and to our lives.
Pick any government run program....see the waste..see the fraud...see the mis-management...and the high costs of running these programs...then ask yourself, "Do I really want more of the same, or is there another option?"
We all have seen/read about the cost of our government doing any job....vs...the much lesser cost when it's 'privatized' to out-side industry/business.
There's a GOOD reason for that.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
""Meantime the old farts who are still haunted by adolescent inner sexual frustrations are posting crude comments so she slithers along in their muddy little footprints egging them on. ""
posted on June 13, 2005 03:42:53 PM new
Nor can linduh answer questions....
"""posted on June 11, 2005 05:38:17 PM edit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes , the atheists like to point out that you "christians" are anything but.
Then a totally illogical statement as usual from La Duh,
""Then tell us they don't want US shoving our faith/religion/Bible down THEIR throats.""
So you call quoting a verse from your bible as "shoving ...down...throat..." ?
What do you call plopping a huge monument with the Ten Commandments inscribed on it on OUR courthouse lawn ?
And , if the righties can do it why do you think it's wrong for us....you should enjoy it!
And, I see you missed the message of the quote entirely....which is typical....most "christians" ....aren't.
I doubt that...kiara would rather present it as 'Linda's issue with Canada'...'Linda's issue with kiara' 'kiara thinks Linda's a phoney ...rather than it's a topic of discussion across our Nation.
