» OLD MESSAGE ARCHIVES «
The Pop Culture Information Society...
Messageboard Archive Index, In The 00s - The Pop Culture Information Society

Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.

If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.

Custom Search



Subject: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: Don Carlos on 11/18/05 at 3:38 pm

One of the most common criticisms one hears of single payer universal health care systems (Canada

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 11/18/05 at 8:14 pm

I'm in favor of a universal single-payer healthcare system.  It will be cheaper, quicker, more accessible, and better for the public health.  We'll pay far less in administrative/bureaucratic overhead costs and the general public will live in greater security.
The only people who may see a slight downgrade in their healthcare are the very rich.  However, we in America are all slaves to the super rich, so there are billions of propaganda dollars riding on campaigns to insure that we of the great unwashed to get to encroach on the Donald's diamond doctors. 
The American consciousness thrives on jealousy and envy.  Those who have access to superior health insurance don't mind paying through the nose because it is a greater pleasure to see the darker, poor people across town not getting what you can get!
It's sick, it's stupid, and it's insane, but, hey, look who gets to set the national agenda: The Republican Party and entertainment industry executives!
http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/mittelgrosse/medium-smiley-104.gif

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: Skippy on 11/18/05 at 11:38 pm

Hey Don, I know what you're going through and know how excruciating the pain can be, I really feel for you.
I worked for a company that was bought out after the owner died. After making the change over to the new company, I was told my job required that I obtain a CDL license. I told them I couldn't because of a back injury, they said it was a requirement of the job and that they didn't believe me. So I informed them that I would get them some new test results. I got as far as having an ultra-sound and neurological conductivity tests performed and analyzed when they fired me. Then their insurance company tried to stick me with a $20,000 bill.
I hope and pray you don't have this experience and get better. Don't let them jerk you around.

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 11/18/05 at 11:59 pm

I had scoliosis when I was a kid.  Talk about some pain!  I was in a backbrace for nine months. 

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: ADH13 on 11/19/05 at 12:24 am



Meanwhile, while my condition is not life threatening, I live in almost constant pain, have difficulty sleeping through the night, and am severely limited in my ability to function normally.

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: Satish on 11/19/05 at 12:22 pm


On Nov. 21st I underwent a Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) procedure at the Rutland regional hospital (the staff was timely, kind, courteous, and in every way professional).

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: Alchoholica on 11/19/05 at 1:35 pm


I'm in favor of a universal single-payer healthcare system.  It will be cheaper, quicker, more accessible, and better for the public health.


You haven't experienced the NHS have you  ;D

My knee will eventually have to be fully reconstructed because they just didn't have the staff to do anything with me. I ripped my ACL in half and wasn't even see for 3 and a half weeks.

Oh and Carlos. When i had an MRI for 'severe head trauma' i didn't get the results for over a month  ;D
Plus i waited a good 2 months to be seen.

The NHS is a marvelous idea, but without taxes being 25% for the lowest earners and then everyone else paying more, there just isn't enough money for it i'm afraid.

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 11/19/05 at 3:58 pm


You haven't experienced the NHS have you

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: Alchoholica on 11/19/05 at 4:02 pm


I realize it is a complicated issue.  However, Americans pay a ridiculous amount for healthcare administration, and the attitude is you're only entitled to healthcare you can buy at free market prices.  Well, not "free market" prices, industry cabal prices.  Then you've got crazy wild jacked up insurance premiums that won't pay for half or more of the healthcare procedures you and your family needs.  Governments keep cutting medicaid programs, so the poor, the disabled, and the elderly get sicker, then it costs even more to treat them on emergency bases.  Besides, the income bracket-tiered healthcare market we have in America is bad for morale.  It is true you don't see the frightful costs in a lump sum of taxation, but the hidden costs, and the cumulative expenses add up to a gargantuan healthcare debacle.

I didn't mean to sound like I was "idealizing" socialized medicine, though.  There are problems in every system.  What the American government and the percentile of the super-rich that lead it by the ring in its nose won't admit is America's healthcare system done busted!  It ain't workin'!


Oh i agree with your points. The healthcare system in the U.S is awful. I'd love to see the actual costs for the Hospital when they perform surgery.
I'd have to study it more in depth to know what the basic comparison is, Economically, for an average earner. i.e do the taxes accumulate to more than Health care premiums.
But of course, not everyone is as sick as everyone else.

It's a curious situation, having to pay to be treated for something that could cause you to die.
"Well sir, you owe us $55,000 for your hopistalization"
"I don't have $55,000"
"We'll just take your house then."
"Where will i live?"
"On the street"
"I'll get sick"
"See you soon sir."

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: Don Carlos on 11/19/05 at 4:26 pm


You got the MRI on November 21st and phoned your doctor for the results on the 22nd? Are those typos? Your post is dated on the 18th, and besides, today's only the 19th. Those dates are still in the future. Did you mean November 21st and 22nd of last year?  ???

Anyway, according to your post, you could get an appointment with a neurosurgeon on the 29th. That's only about a one-week wait from when you were first diagnosed, which is hardly anything compared to the wait times for medical treatment in countries with universal, state-funded health care. Here in Canada, for instance, you might have to wait more than a year and a half to see a specialist.


You are absolutely right of course.  The dates should have been MRI on the 14th, results on the 15th, appointment for the 29th.  I was typing, I asked Cat, who was otherwise occupied, and she looked at the calander wrong.  Sorry for the confusion.

The state of Vermont has a "self insurance" system for its employees.  Like most workers, they pay part of the "primium" and a deductable.  The "primium" (I think 10%) and the state's contribution go into a pool which is used to pay for regular health care and for a catostrophic insurance policy (also known as a "stop loss policy").  It turns out that this year, and for the past 3 years, the self insurance fund has run a surplus, so the state has declared a moritorium on the employee contribution for Dec, which is part of the agreement with the state employees' union. 

A local school board negotiated another approach.  Both employer and employee contribute to a health savings plan, which is rolled over from year to year, so the less each person draws from his/her account, the more accumulates.  In this agreement, the board payed the entire allowable deposits for the first 2 years, will pay 90% in the third year, and 80% thereafter.  It also is buying a "major medical" or catestrophic loss policy which kicks in at a certain level of expense (don't remember the figure).  The board claims this will save them up to 50% on what they are currently buying through a for profit insurance co.  There are lots of possibilities, but the basic idea is that EVERYONE has a right to timely, quality health care at affordable prices.

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: CatwomanofV on 11/20/05 at 1:19 pm


You are absolutely right of course.  The dates should have been MRI on the 14th, results on the 15th, appointment for the 29th.  I was typing, I asked Cat, who was otherwise occupied, and she looked at the calander wrong.  Sorry for the confusion.





Sure. Blame it on me.




Cat

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: spaceace on 04/06/07 at 6:03 pm

Yes, I know it's an old thread.  I belong to an organization called H.E.L.P fund of PA.  We are promoting a single -payer universal health care piece of legislation going through the Pennsylvania house and senate.  Universal health care's time has come.  Most people know this, the problem is, how do we go about it.

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: LyricBoy on 04/06/07 at 8:42 pm


Yes, I know it's an old thread.  I belong to an organization called H.E.L.P fund of PA.  We are promoting a single -payer universal health care piece of legislation going through the Pennsylvania house and senate.  Universal health care's time has come.  Most people know this, the problem is, how do we go about it.


Why stop at health care?  Let's get Gov. Ed Rendell to give out free bus tickets, free tickets to the Penguins, and comps at the new casinos.  We'll simply tax the oil companies, and exercise eminent domain to seize the real estate of the citizens.

Mike Veon can be appointed administrator of this fund to make suuure that it has fiscal controls.

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: danootaandme on 04/07/07 at 7:14 am


Yes, I know it's an old thread.  I belong to an organization called H.E.L.P fund of PA.  We are promoting a single -payer universal health care piece of legislation going through the Pennsylvania house and senate.  Universal health care's time has come.  Most people know this, the problem is, how do we go about it.


Massachusetts is on to that right now.  They are ironing out the kinks so that single payers can get affordable care, the problem is the affordable part, which translates to the insurance companies.  Privatization of hospitals brought a surge in the cost of both health care and premiums.  Of course we can't blame the poor embattled insurance companies can we?

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 04/07/07 at 12:04 pm

Most hospitals run in the red.  They are not allowed to turn anybody away if they lack the ability to pay.  Should they be?
???

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: spaceace on 04/07/07 at 3:13 pm


Why stop at health care?  Let's get Gov. Ed Rendell to give out free bus tickets, free tickets to the Penguins, and comps at the new casinos.  We'll simply tax the oil companies, and exercise eminent domain to seize the real estate of the citizens.

Mike Veon can be appointed administrator of this fund to make suuure that it has fiscal controls.


Excuse me scuttlebum.  We are going up against Ed Rendell, so don't EVEN go there.  Ed has his plan that will have to have 42 other bill change in order to appease him.  Our bill, only 1.  His bill was made up by insurance companies, our would put them out of business.

As for Mike Veon, he wouldn't care go near this one.

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: spaceace on 04/07/07 at 3:14 pm


Most hospitals run in the red.  They are not allowed to turn anybody away if they lack the ability to pay.  Should they be?
???


With single payer universal health care, that would not be a problem. :)

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: danootaandme on 04/07/07 at 3:35 pm


Most hospitals run in the red.  They are not allowed to turn anybody away if they lack the ability to pay.  Should they be?
???


That is the myth.  The truth is that hospitals do turn away people if they lack the ability to pay.  There are stories of ambulances going from one hospital to another to find one with "a bed".  For those whose illnesses are in the realm of mental health it is ten times worse. Sometimes the people go into the emergency room and wait, and wait, and wait, and wait. 

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 04/07/07 at 5:42 pm


That is the myth.  The truth is that hospitals do turn away people if they lack the ability to pay.  There are stories of ambulances going from one hospital to another to find one with "a bed".  For those whose illnesses are in the realm of mental health it is ten times worse. Sometimes the people go into the emergency room and wait, and wait, and wait, and wait. 

OK, but when the swanky private hospital sends you away in the meat wagon, the can justify it by saying, "You will get adequate care at another facility."  That's when you end up in the ER of the overstretched, underfunded city hospital.  Sometimes homeless people sit there for days suffering from injuries and exposure.  Indigent families suffer the same fate.

I remember sitting in the ER doubled over in agony for hours in the waiting room before they brought me into an examination room.  And I set in there doubled over in agony for a whole 'nother hour before the doctor came in and even spoke to me...and another half hour before I actually received care.  And I had insurance!  If you dare complain about the wait time, you get this attitue like, "Who do you think you are, the Duke of Kent?" 

In the end, I thought, "Well they did get the diagnosis right, and I got me some Cipro and some Vicodin, so $75.00 isn't such a bad co-pay, but I had to do something while I was waiting 'coz I didn't want to watch Headline News or read three-year old dog-eared copies of Readers Digest, so I watched all the goings on in the ER, and I shouldn't have had to wait that long, come on!"  But I'm sure they would have a different story to tell!

I like how Dennis Kucinich shot down the word "insurance" when asked about his ideas for reforming the healthcare system.  He said someing like, "I'm not interested in selling health insurance, I'm interested in providing health care."

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: McDonald on 04/12/07 at 1:27 pm

I'm in total favour of the U.S. adopting a single-payer system. My mom lives in the States and has no insurance. I feel awful about it, but there's nothing I can personally do about it. I am covered under the provincial Québec plan, which means if I fell ill today and needed a doctor, I would simply make an appointment at the local CLSC (centre local des services communautaires) or at my family doctor, or if it was urgent, go to a drop-in clinic or the emergency room. I may have to wait a bit, but I'll be taken care of. If it were something very urgent, I would be seen right away.

The public insurance plans are organised at the provincial level. Every province enjoys a great level of autonomy in most affaires. So someone in Ontario has different regulations than I, someone in B.C. different than someone in Nova Scotia. What remains the same is that everyone is covered and everyone pays. Taxes are a bit higher up here, not all that much but a bit, but it's a small price to pay for having such a reduced level of stress over matters of health insurance. The concept of universal health care is something that people are committed to and the state of our health system is something all citizens keep a close eye on. We're always looking for ways to make it better.

There's nothing wrong with having to wait sometimes. People should stop being such babies about it. You aren't entitled to better health simply because you can afford the enourmous insurance costs yourself.

Also, Canada's system is not really "public" per se. It is system using mostly private enterprises (i.e. doctors' privaet medical practice) and some public institutions (i.e. most hospitals) and which pays them for their services with public funds.

Despite roadbumps like wait times, we all enjoy a very high level of service and quality in our system which is at least equal to if not better than that of the average insured person in the U.S.

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: spaceace on 04/12/07 at 7:12 pm

It's official The Family and Business Health Care Security Act of 2007 AKA - PA State Senate bill 300 has been introduced into both house and senate.  Single payer, comprehensive Universal health care.  We've got a lot of legislators on both sides of the aisle who are in favor of this... So, please wish us luck.  BTW this is NOT Rendell's bill. :)

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: Perpetual Guest on 04/16/07 at 5:01 pm


It's official The Family and Business Health Care Security Act of 2007 AKA - PA State Senate bill 300 has been introduced into both house and senate.  Single payer, comprehensive Universal health care.  We've got a lot of legislators on both sides of the aisle who are in favor of this... So, please wish us luck.  BTW this is NOT Rendell's bill. :)


Hmmm.....

Could you please explain exactly what is meant by "Single payer, comprehensive Universal health care"?

For instance, take a poor working class person whose entire paycheck goes to keeping a roof over their head, food in their mouth and clothes on their back. What is the cost of health care going to suddenly be for this person, who has no extra income...?

Is it going to be free?

Or is someone going to force them to pay for something they cannot afford...?

I love the idea that everyone automatically thinks that only the 'rich' will be affected by this type of change in the health care. The rich are never affected. The rich will be just fine. It will be the poor that will suffer, as they always do.

I don't need some government burocrat suddenly deciding I am going to pay  x amount for healthcare that I cannot afford.  >:(

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: spaceace on 04/16/07 at 5:11 pm


Hmmm.....

Could you please explain exactly what is meant by "Single payer, comprehensive Universal health care"?

For instance, take a poor working class person whose entire paycheck goes to keeping a roof over their head, food in their mouth and clothes on their back. What is the cost of health care going to suddenly be for this person, who has no extra income...?

Is it going to be free?

Or is someone going to force them to pay for something they cannot afford...?

I love the idea that everyone automatically thinks that only the 'rich' will be affected by this type of change in the health care . The rich are never affected. The rich will be just fine. It will be the poor that will suffer, as they always do.

I don't need some government burocrat suddenly deciding I am going to pay  x amount for healthcare that I cannot afford.  >:(




There is a 3% flat tax on income.  Some will be taken from cigarette tax and other sources.  No no one will be forced to pay for a bill they can't afford.  That is the purpose of single-payer comprehensive universal health care, so people don't have to decide between having food or paying a medical bill.
As for the rich, this bill takes the "class system" out of medical coverage.
I am more than aware of your concerns.  Concerns such as yours are why we are trying to get this bill through.


Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 04/17/07 at 12:07 pm

Illinois already has a program for kids and families, it's called "allkids."  The premium is based on family size and income.  The Gov. is currently trying to get another program passed that would help adults without kids also get low-cost (or no-cost) insurance.

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: limblifter on 04/24/07 at 9:37 am

I have a whole new appreciation for our health care system in Canada.

Last summer my grandfather was hospitalized in New York for heat exaustion. All they did was give him an I.V. for dehydration and kept him overnight for observation. The bill:

$872 for the hospital bill
$1300 for the emrgency room doctor bill

That to me seems insane!

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: Tia on 04/24/07 at 9:46 am


I have a whole new appreciation for our health care system in Canada.

Last summer my grandfather was hospitalized in New York for heat exaustion. All they did was give him an I.V. for dehydration and kept him overnight for observation. The bill:

$872 for the hospital bill
$1300 for the emrgency room doctor bill

That to me seems insane!
dude, they will GOUGE you. don't even get me started. you know what they charge for a cat scan? something like four, five grand. and they do it regularly for all sorts of ailments for which it isn't necessary. i mean, somebody's gotta pay for those jaguars and McMansions for american doctors, might as well be you and me and our families. and it helps that they hit us when we're down.

fkers. seriously, this subject pisses me off.

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: spaceace on 04/24/07 at 10:11 am


dude, they will GOUGE you. don't even get me started. you know what they charge for a cat scan? something like four, five grand. and they do it regularly for all sorts of ailments for which it isn't necessary. i mean, somebody's gotta pay for those jaguars and McMansions for american doctors, might as well be you and me and our families. and it helps that they hit us when we're down.

fkers. seriously, this subject pisses me off.


So what happens when they're only "State Workers"?

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: Tia on 04/24/07 at 10:56 am


So what happens when they're only "State Workers"?
i'm not sure what you're getting at.

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: spaceace on 04/24/07 at 11:27 am


i'm not sure what you're getting at.


I know of very few State Workers who can afford the lifestyle of a doctor.  The good Doctors may trade in their Lexus for a Volvo.

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: AnnieBanannie on 05/02/07 at 3:57 pm

A point about crowded emergency rooms.  If we had universal healthcare coverage, people would go to the doctor when they had a cold, or flu, or whatever.  Right now, people who can't afford a doctor visit sometimes go to emergency rooms for things like this, because the ER will not turn them away.

I was in the ER last year with severe stomach pain that turned out to be colitis (not the ulcerative kind, they thought it was either something I caught or else it was from stress).  Anyway, there were actually street people sitting there on stretchers, and from what they were saying to each other and the staff, a night in the ER was a regular occurrence.  Apparently this was a place for them to sleep.  ?!?!  Lutheran Hospital in Brooklyn, in case anyone's wondering.

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: CatwomanofV on 05/02/07 at 4:12 pm


A point about crowded emergency rooms.  If we had universal healthcare coverage, people would go to the doctor when they had a cold, or flu, or whatever.  Right now, people who can't afford a doctor visit sometimes go to emergency rooms for things like this, because the ER will not turn them away.

I was in the ER last year with severe stomach pain that turned out to be colitis (not the ulcerative kind, they thought it was either something I caught or else it was from stress).  Anyway, there were actually street people sitting there on stretchers, and from what they were saying to each other and the staff, a night in the ER was a regular occurrence.  Apparently this was a place for them to sleep.  ?!?!  Lutheran Hospital in Brooklyn, in case anyone's wondering.



That is very true. I have said it before, I will say it again, we don't have health care in this country, we have sick care. If insurance companies would pay for preventive maintence, a lot of trips to the emergency room would not be necessary.

The majority of cost of treatment goes to admin for the insurance companies. For one treatment (whatever it is) there is a pile of paperwork involved. You need to pay I don't know how many people to process that paperwork which has absolutely nothing to do with the treatment itself. And don't get me started on how much the CEOs salaries for these companies are. They are basically legal theives.




Cat

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: spaceace on 05/02/07 at 4:48 pm


A point about crowded emergency rooms.  If we had universal healthcare coverage, people would go to the doctor when they had a cold, or flu, or whatever.  Right now, people who can't afford a doctor visit sometimes go to emergency rooms for things like this, because the ER will not turn them away.

I was in the ER last year with severe stomach pain that turned out to be colitis (not the ulcerative kind, they thought it was either something I caught or else it was from stress).  Anyway, there were actually street people sitting there on stretchers, and from what they were saying to each other and the staff, a night in the ER was a regular occurrence.  Apparently this was a place for them to sleep.  ?!?!  Lutheran Hospital in Brooklyn, in case anyone's wondering.


Actually your first part I disagree with.  Can you steal something that is willingly given to you?  It takes all the thrill out of it, doesn't it?  I believe the situation will be monitored so that it would not be a problem.

If these people you are talking about are on Medicaid this will happen because they are not paying into it. 

I have always suggested a deductable of some kind to prevent this, based on income. 

As for street people.  What REALLY can you do???

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: lterhune on 05/03/07 at 9:29 pm



It's sick, it's stupid, and it's insane, but, hey, look who gets to set the national agenda: The Republican Party and entertainment industry executives!



That is such bunk.

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: Tia on 05/03/07 at 10:43 pm


That is such bunk.
dittoes! :D

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: spaceace on 05/03/07 at 10:57 pm


That is such bunk.


For once I'm inclined to agree with you.

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: lterhune on 05/04/07 at 3:07 pm


For once I'm inclined to agree with you.


Thanks, my day is made!

Subject: Re: Health Insurance Debate

Written By: Tia on 05/04/07 at 3:35 pm


Thanks, my day is made!

i disagree. :P

Check for new replies or respond here...