health care
in [Golf]
|
From: Jack Hollis on 20 Feb 2010 21:16 On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 18:56:15 -0700, Howard Brazee <howard(a)brazee.net> wrote: >On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 19:53:00 -0500, Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)aol.com> >wrote: > >>In the UK 11% of the population has private health insurance. Why do >>you think they choose to pay for something that they can already get >>for free? > >People under social security also buy private health insurance. And >do. It doesn't mean they are willing to think about getting rid of >their social security. It's people on Medicare that have to buy supplemental insurance because Medicare is inadequate. I've been paying into Medicare since 1965 I was 18 years old and haven't gotten any benefits back yet. Now in two years I will be eligible. You would think that after paying into the system since 1965, I would have good health coverage. Unfortunately, I still have to pay for supplemental coverage and fork over deductibles and co payments. Medicare is a huge rip off. If I could have opted out of Medicare when I was young, I would have gladly done it. You would have to be a fool to voluntarily join such a program. >>Rich Canadians, including government ministers, come to the >>US for health care. Why do you suppose they do that? > >Because we treat Rich People well. Certainly better than Canada is able to.
From: Carbon on 20 Feb 2010 21:23 On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 18:51:05 -0700, Howard Brazee wrote: > On 20 Feb 2010 17:33:33 GMT, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> > wrote: > >> Here's a parallel that makes sense. The war on healthcare is a lot >> like the so-called war on drugs. The US has spent trillions of >> dollars over the years incarcerating a higher percentage of its >> population than any other first world country. And for what? For a >> drug problem is at least as bad here as in countries like Denmark, >> where you can get pretty much any drug you want without fear of going >> to jail. The whole thing is a ridiculous waste of money and has been >> for the past 40 years at least. >> >> Year in and year out, Americans pay more for healthcare per capita >> than citizens of any other first world country, thanks in no small >> part to a massive bureaucracy designed to weed out the unentitled. >> The joke is that it costs more to run than just giving healthcare to >> the poor to start with. Like the war on drugs, the war on healthcare >> is an ill-considered policy that has always done much more harm than >> good. > > But there are lots of people who are willing to pay the costs of these > two battles, even without any hope of success. It is the Righteous > way. > > Others are willing to pay for a similar losing war against obesity. > Spend the money and ignore the results. I guess it must be freeing to allow all of your decisions to be made based on some canned ideology or other. But where money and lives are involved, I will take reason over misguided righteousness any day.
From: dene on 20 Feb 2010 22:17 "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message news:4b8096de$0$4982$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 16:13:43 -0800, dene wrote: > > "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > > news:4b802399$0$4892$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > > > >> I work in IT. Like a lot of businesses, my company has shed a > >> percentage of its permanent workforce and any new hires are brought > >> on as contractors. You would have liked this one fellow. He kept > >> telling me how the US healthcare system is the best one in the world, > >> even though as a contractor he had no benefits. He had a cyst appear > >> on his stomach. It got to the point where he couldn't ignore it and > >> he had to get dug out, on his lunch hour, as an outpatient. > >> > >> It turns out he has cancer. I saw him the other day. All his hair has > >> fallen out and he has big bags under his eyes. I assume he's getting > >> chemo somehow. If he does survive I imagine he will lose everything > >> he owns. I don't know the particulars about how his healthcare > >> coverage lapsed, but I do know he was laid off from his previous job > >> and it took him a long time to find a new one. He has kids to look > >> after. I assume he decided that paying the mortgage and putting food > >> on the table was more important than health insurance. > > > > Assume is right. There is always the untold story. Find out what it > > is. > > I will not pump him for details for the sake of some Usenet argument. > > I do know he was unemployed for almost a year and got close to > foreclosure on his house. He told me that by the time he got hired he > had gone through his savings and had about maxed his credit cards. It > seems pretty obvious to me that he couldn't afford to feed his kids and > pay health insurance at the same time. > > The system absolutely needs an engine replacement if guys like him are > falling through the cracks. Even if he survives he will be dead broke > and won't be able to get insurance because of his now pre-existing > condition. He's a stand-up guy and he's fucked. It's not right. If what you said is the entire truth, then reform must address people in his situation. -Greg
From: Carbon on 20 Feb 2010 22:48 On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 19:17:16 -0800, dene wrote: > "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > news:4b8096de$0$4982$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... >> On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 16:13:43 -0800, dene wrote: >>> "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message >>> news:4b802399$0$4892$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... >>> >>>> I work in IT. Like a lot of businesses, my company has shed a >>>> percentage of its permanent workforce and any new hires are brought >>>> on as contractors. You would have liked this one fellow. He kept >>>> telling me how the US healthcare system is the best one in the >>>> world, even though as a contractor he had no benefits. He had a >>>> cyst appear on his stomach. It got to the point where he couldn't >>>> ignore it and he had to get dug out, on his lunch hour, as an >>>> outpatient. >>>> >>>> It turns out he has cancer. I saw him the other day. All his hair >>>> has fallen out and he has big bags under his eyes. I assume he's >>>> getting chemo somehow. If he does survive I imagine he will lose >>>> everything he owns. I don't know the particulars about how his >>>> healthcare coverage lapsed, but I do know he was laid off from his >>>> previous job and it took him a long time to find a new one. He has >>>> kids to look after. I assume he decided that paying the mortgage >>>> and putting food on the table was more important than health >>>> insurance. >>> >>> Assume is right. There is always the untold story. Find out what >>> it is. >> >> I will not pump him for details for the sake of some Usenet argument. >> >> I do know he was unemployed for almost a year and got close to >> foreclosure on his house. He told me that by the time he got hired he >> had gone through his savings and had about maxed his credit cards. It >> seems pretty obvious to me that he couldn't afford to feed his kids >> and pay health insurance at the same time. >> >> The system absolutely needs an engine replacement if guys like him >> are falling through the cracks. Even if he survives he will be dead >> broke and won't be able to get insurance because of his now >> pre-existing condition. He's a stand-up guy and he's fucked. It's not >> right. > > If what you said is the entire truth, then reform must address people > in his situation. Thank you. I couldn't agree more.
From: assimilate on 21 Feb 2010 00:53
On 20-Feb-2010, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > >>>> I am in favor of universal healthcare mainly because it is cheaper, > >>> > >>> no matter how often you say this, it will never be true. > >> > >> The US spends more per capita on healthcare than any other country in > >> the world. Average life expectancy in other first world countries > >> with universal healthcare is much better than the US. Both of these > >> stats can easily be verified. I can only wonder at the strength of > >> your fanaticism. > > > > sorry but you need to mesure true cost. The real advantage of UH (for > > the govt) is that it hides the real costs, much like your co-pay hides > > the real cost of care. > > That is the true cost, in raw dollars and as a percentage of gross GDP. > Since it's so easily verified, sane people generally accept that the US > has the most expensive healthcare in the world. Generally the ideologues > respond with the "if it's the most expensive it must be the best" > argument. Of course that argument is also highly suspect in light of > other easily verified stats, such as average life expectancy by country. you will never get beyond stage 1 thinking it is clear. -- bill-o |