Michigan Votes Forum

 The immoral system of “profit” based health care in the United States is contrary to civilized norms in any other industrialized country.
Each year in the United States, the health care insurance industry rakes in approximately 60 billion dollars in profits.
These profits, this money, paid by people for health insurance is above and beyond the salaries of every
single person in the health insurance industry.

 
If a “for profit” health care system is predicated on its ability to make money, they would want those of us lucky enough to actually have and afford health insurance to be either healthy or dead.
Health “care” is not their goal.
In other words, if their “compassion” for our illnesses or injuries is limited to their profit or loss statement, than the people in such a barbaric system are at the mercy of bureaucrats.
Which is the supposed reason they rally against a single payer, Universal health care system in the first place.

A single payer universal health care system for the United States would insure every person in the USA.
A universal health care program in the United States would not limit people to where or which doctor they could go to.
A single payer universal health care system would ensure that the monies paid by people for health care would go......for health care !
Universal health care saves costs simply by being available and serves as preventative medicine. Prevention is certainly more cost effective than retro-active treatment and care.

Universal health care would return the decision making power to those that should have it. The health care professionals and their patients. Eliminating the billions of dollars wasted on insurance industry salaries and their subsequent profits.
Finally, a single payer, universal health care system is a “payment” system, not a health care delivery system.
For profit, managed health care is immoral for a multitude of reasons, not least of which is because health care is not a commodity people shop for. By definition, a third party (insurance companies) for “profit” health care systems' goal is profit, NOT providing health care.

In every industrialized, civilized country in the world, health care is a “right” by virtue of being a person.
If in the United States, every “person”, not citizen, but “person” is entitled to an an attorney whether or not they can afford one, than why would people who are not under suspicion of committing a crime be denied health care.

The United States has the best health care in the world, yet it means very little when the populace has no access to it. Some would argue that universal health care is socialized medicine. Well, it is.
But what is wrong with having public schools or public libraries or the military? All of these things can be classified as “socialized” programs.

No one seems to have a problem with paying for car insurance because it is the law, but we as a society cant seem to pool our tax money to insure all of our people? It makes no sense.
It is time the United States joins the civilized world, its people and leaders need to realize that being a part of this country means contributing to the society in which they are a part.

A country in which ...... "For the people, by the people” means “them” the people as much as it means “me” the people !
“Born in liberty” does not mean that the founding fathers ever meant its future citizens to ... "live in abject poverty” or to “die in neglect.”

 dear trueblue.

show me one CIVILIZED COUNTRY who has SUCCESSFULL FULL COVERAGE HEALTH CARE FOR ALL OF IT'S CITIZENS.

it ain't canada, england, or any european country. it SURE ain't the russian republic, and it ain't anwhere else, but i'm interested to see what you consider a successful full coverage health are system for all citizens looks like.

in other words, whose model should we use?

 Quite simply,  YOUR WRONG.

Both countires you name AND the rest of Europe have a better health care system than the immoral "for profit" system the USA has.

I recommend that you first go and actually READ my post, than do your own homework on the subject and not parrot the propaganda you have obviously swallowed, hook line and sinker.

 dear trueblue.

first, what is IMMORAL about profit?

second, you can't name a SUCCESSFUL FULL COVERAGE TOTAL HEALTH CARE SYSTEM THAT WORKS anywhere in the world, can you? it's certainly not the british system, as they are certainly NOT full coverage, and they are certainly NOT successful. they still operate because it would be prohibitively expensive to replace them. perhaps you haven't spoken to a SATISFIED CANADIAN, BRIT, OR AUSSIE who is happy with  their particular form of SOCIALIZED MEDICINE. even OUR OWN MILITARY MEDICAL SYSTEM won't work on a greater scale, as it would have to to cover each and every citizen. maybe we should take up the FRENCH system? or the RUSSIAN?  they've had tons of successes, haven't they? NOT!!!.

now, you were asked to provide ONE SUCCESSFUL TOTAL COVERAGE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM THAT WORKS, and i'm waiting to see which one YOU THINK WORKS. it should be interesting reading IF YOU EVER GET AROUND TO ANSWERING THE QUESTION.

 Your opinion regarding universal health care is a hundred eighty degrees opposite my experience.  The availability of health care in Western Europe pales by comparison to what is readily available in the United States.  Are you aware that a recent "goal" for UK hosptals was to reduce the waiting time to access care?  That this goal included emergent care?  That, unable to do so in practice, emergent patients are left waiting in ambulances outside the hospital proper -- because the "wait clock" doesn't start until they are actually inside the joint?  Are you aware that just three years ago the Supreme Court of our socialist neighbor to the north, Canada, ruled that it's ongoing experiment with socialized medicine was a travesty of inefficiency, inequality and has resulted in extended waiting periods for surgeries that we take for granted? 

In its ruling, the Canadian Court stated that access to a waiting list is not access to health care.  In fact, the court nearly declared the national restriction against private health insurance/payment for services unconstitutional.

I am a forty-five year old male with a significant preexisting condition (diverticulitis).  I pay for my own health insurance:  $165/month.  Now, as a matter of full disclosure, I do carry a high deductible.  But a hundred sixty five a month?  How is that cost prohibitive?

Moreover, hospitals in the United States are required to provide emergent care regardless of a patient's ability to pay.   

Clearly, our allegedly "immoral" for-profit system has resulted in the best care being available to the most people.  Period.  To claim otherwise is a lie.

And to the extent that insurance costs are higher than we might like, the first issue is tort reform.  Frivolous civil lawsuits have resulted in high med-malpractice premiums, the practice of "defensive medicine" (unnecessary tests that effectively increase the cost of care) and ridiculous litigation costs, which include not only the verdict awards themselves, but increased litigation costs generally, including amounts for pre-trial settlement.  All of which are passed onto consumers and their insurers. 

 by the way, trueblue,

which IMMORAL, FOR PROFIT, BILLION DOLLAR INDUSTRY do you work for?

crazycajun:

 dear trueblue.

first, what is IMMORAL about profit?

second, you can't name a SUCCESSFUL FULL COVERAGE TOTAL HEALTH CARE SYSTEM THAT WORKS anywhere in the world, can you? ........now, you were asked to provide ONE SUCCESSFUL TOTAL COVERAGE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM THAT WORKS, and i'm waiting to see which one YOU THINK WORKS. it should be interesting reading IF YOU EVER GET AROUND TO ANSWERING THE QUESTION.

 Again, YOU need to actually READ my post  because first of all you make no sense.

I have already answered you.  Either you are being accidentally obtuse or intentionally dishonest.

If you cannot grasp the idea of  what is right and what is wrong, no blog will change that.

If you personally do not like other systems because they are  not "UP" to your standards  I am really surprised you would accept the sham we call health care in this country.  I know the USA can be not only as good as those other systems but EVEN BETTER.

So  why is our system the worst of the industrialized countries?? 

Not only is your faith in the USA seriously mis-guided but your lack of even trying to do anything about it  truly pathetic and certainly Un-American.

And when it comes to profit  (again you didnt READ the original post, so you dont have any credibility) ....profit at the expense of someones health or life is just that.....immoral.  

If you dont understand that, you are not a person of any socially redeeming qualities.

The third party (insurance industry) for profit health care system is immoral and must GO !

Universal health care  for ALL the people now !! 

Just like civilized countries do.  And we could do it even better!!

Sidney:

 Clearly, our allegedly "immoral" for-profit system has resulted in the best care being available to the most people.  Period.  To claim otherwise is a lie.

I am very pleased that YOU are fortunate enough to have  AFFORDABLE health care.

As we  are all  very painfully aware,  that is NOT the case for the VAST majority of Americans, and that is unacceptable for even ONE person let alone millions.

Your good fortune does not make the truth a "lie" and your selfishness in thinking the system is "ok" because you are not getting screwed is not an example of "good" civic mindedness in ANY country.

If you ever claim to be "proud" of your country,  you might want to try and be a part of the country you CLAIM to be so proud of.

"Screw my neighbor"  has NEVER been an  "American"  tradition.  And some of us DONT want it to become policy!!

TrueBlue:

crazycajun:

 dear trueblue.

first, what is IMMORAL about profit?

second, you can't name a SUCCESSFUL FULL COVERAGE TOTAL HEALTH CARE SYSTEM THAT WORKS anywhere in the world, can you? ........now, you were asked to provide ONE SUCCESSFUL TOTAL COVERAGE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM THAT WORKS, and i'm waiting to see which one YOU THINK WORKS. it should be interesting reading IF YOU EVER GET AROUND TO ANSWERING THE QUESTION.

 Again, YOU need to actually READ my post  because first of all you make no sense.

<no, first of all, YOU need to answer my question, you never do say what is immoral about profit. even the bible tells us to go forth and PROSPER, not just multiply. you cannot prosper without making a PROFIT. if GOD tells you to go out and make a profit, who are YOU to say it's immoral?>

I have already answered you. 

<no, you haven't. you haven't even HINTED at an answer to the question of the immorality of profit.>

 Either you are being accidentally obtuse or intentionally dishonest.

<neither, i simply asked a question. YOU are being dishonest in your posts by stating OPINIONS that are not FACTS. YOUR opinion of the leftist ideal of UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE AT THE EXPENSE OF THE TAXPAYER is well known, but MISREPRESENTS WHAT THE FACTS ARE.>

If you cannot grasp the idea of  what is right and what is wrong, no blog will change that.

<i KNOW what is right and what is wrong. universal healthcare at the taxpayer's expense is WRONG. there is no successful model for it on the planet.>

If you personally do not like other systems because they are  not "UP" to your standards  I am really surprised you would accept the sham we call health care in this country. 

<i have friends in several countries who would argue with you, as they come HERE to get good healthcare.>

 I know the USA can be not only as good as those other systems but EVEN BETTER.

<it CAN be  better, IF we can get the DEADBEATS to PAY THEIR OWN WAY. if they did it right, it wouldn't be very expensive at all. look at the strides made in health insurance over the last few years, you don't see ANY advance in healthcare in other countries like you see here.>

So  why is our system the worst of the industrialized countries?? 

<who says it's the worst? how many people  from here go to canada for "superior" healthcare? NONE. how many canadians come to this country for "superior" healthcare? tens of thousands daily.>

Not only is your faith in the USA seriously mis-guided but your lack of even trying to do anything about it  truly pathetic and certainly Un-American.

<so, YOUR faith in OTHER COUNTRIES IS NOT UN-AMERICAN??? YEAH, RIGHT...>

 

And when it comes to profit  (again you didnt READ the original post, so you dont have any credibility) ....profit at the expense of someones health or life is just that.....immoral.  

<so, the automobile industry is immoral? they profit by producing the largest killer of americans on the planet.>

If you dont understand that, you are not a person of any socially redeeming qualities.

<you equate AGREEING WITH YOU and SOCIALLY REDEEMING VALUES. i wonder how that works, because, by your logic, applied from MY POINT OF VIEW, you have NO SOCIALLY REDEEMING VALUES EITHER. see how this insulting thing works???>

The third party (insurance industry) for profit health care system is immoral and must GO !

<i've read your socialist idealism now for about as long as i can take it. please answer the question, IF YOU CAN, and stop all the marxist drivel. it isn't becoming to a person who has lived all his life in this country, profited by a job in this country, and who refuses to LEAVE THIS COUNTRY when he thinks OTHER COUNTRIES ARE BETTER.  so, i'll ask the question several other's are chomping at the bit to ask. WHY ARE YOU STILL HERE IF WE HAVE A PISS POOR ;HEALTH CARE SYSTEM? WHY ARE YOU NOT LIVING IN CANADA? OR BRITAIN? OR FRANCE? OR GERMANY? OR RUSSIA? OR POLAND? NOT TO MENTION INDIA, PAKISTAN, OR SOMEPLACE WITH A BETTER CASE OF SOCIALIZED MEDICINE?>

Universal health care  for ALL the people now !! 

<do YOU have private health insurance? i wonder if you take some of your IMMORAL PROFITS YOU MAKE to spend on IMMORAL PRIVATE INSURANCE?>

Just like civilized countries do.  And we could do it even better!!

 now, i know thats a lot to absorb for a long term communist living incognito in this country, living off the immoral largesse of the government of michigan and the united states, but as one of the HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS under your plan, there are far too many WORTHLESS HEALTHCARE CONSUMERS who can spend ANY healthcare system right into the ground. just ask the FRENCH, who limit what care you get, and how often you get it. 

TrueBlue:

Sidney:

 Clearly, our allegedly "immoral" for-profit system has resulted in the best care being available to the most people.  Period.  To claim otherwise is a lie.

 

I am very pleased that YOU are fortunate enough to have  AFFORDABLE health care.

As we  are all  very painfully aware,  that is NOT the case for the VAST majority of Americans, and that is unacceptable for even ONE person let alone millions.

Your good fortune does not make the truth a "lie" and your selfishness in thinking the system is "ok" because you are not getting screwed is not an example of "good" civic mindedness in ANY country.

If you ever claim to be "proud" of your country,  you might want to try and be a part of the country you CLAIM to be so proud of.

"Screw my neighbor"  has NEVER been an  "American"  tradition.  And some of us DONT want it to become policy!!

 

 by the way, true...

it's LOVE thy neighbor, not SUPPORT thy neighbor.

the lord helps those that HELP THEMSELVES.

by the way, how much of your IMMORAL PROFITS do YOU give to the UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE CAUSE?

I DIDN'T THINK SO.....

crazycajun:

I DIDN'T THINK SO.....

Yes, you have made it abundantly clear that you do not "think" !

Merry Christmas.

Reply - TB:

Well...there you go again.  When you assert that "we are all very painfully aware that [AFFORDABLE health care] is NOT the case for the VAST majority of Americans...," you are doing nothing more than parrot the pop-news position on this issue.  And even by that leftie standard, you're extreme, as most Americans do have health insurance as part of their job, a retirement package or are in my group and pay for an insurance policy that suits them.  Let's not forget about Medicare, either (and you better not criticize it...'cause that's your wasteful national health care, right there). 

I am certainly not in the minority.

Look.  All you have to do is make a call.  Call a couple of companies or, better yet, call a broker.  Tell him your age and ask a ballpark cost for a major medical policy and find out for yourself how wrong you are about "affordability."  You'll pay for your doctor visits.  You'll pay for scripts.  But the thing that gets people in debt, serious illness or injury, will be covered.

I met a guy in Deadwood last summer who told me that he was about to file for bankruptcy for the reason that he had accumulated significant debt to a hospital network following a freak illness.  He was a relatively young guy, in his late twenties.  He was single, no dependents and employed in the construction field.  He had no insurance.  Why?  No reason.  He just didn't bother to purchase insurance because he didn't have any significant assets. 

Okay...so here's a guy who made a rational decision against carrying an insurance policy.  (Right or wrong, responsible or irresponsible, he made a choice.  It was not a question of being unable to afford such insurance.)  And when he needed emergent care, he received it without regard to his ability to pay.  When follow-up care was required, he received it without regard to his ability to pay.  And now, having run up a huge tab, he'll dismiss the debt in bankruptcy court.

Anecdotal, I know.  But this is characteristic.

You have a car?  You buy auto insurance.  You own a home?  You buy homeowner's insurance.  A boat?  A plane?  A train?  Whatever.  If you are a rational person, you probably assume insurance expense as part and parcel of ownership of big ticket items.  What's different about health insurance?  Purchase an affordable policy -- there's plenty of them out there -- or seek an employer who includes membership in a group policy as part of the employment relationship -- there's plenty of them out there.

In America, it used to be automatic that people assumed responsibility for themselves.  Individual responsibility and accountability is foundational.  And look where the concept's taken us:  In a relatively short period, the U.S. grew to be the greatest social, economic and military force in the history of the world.  (It sure as hell isn't Sweden.)

With regard to your last silly little line, I don't want to "screw my neighbor;" I expect my neighbor to get off his ass.

TrueBlue:

crazycajun:

I DIDN'T THINK SO.....

 

Yes, you have made it abundantly clear that you do not "think" !

Merry Christmas.

now you are refusing to answer questions AND casting dispersions on other people's thought processes. so, please demonstrate that YOU CAN THINK by answering the questions put to you. so far you aren't doing too good of a job of it.

oh, and if you THINK of it, try and answer the one about which IMMORAL, FOR PROFIT company pays your bills. unless, of course, you ARE in the employ of one of the satellite nations of the soviet union.

merry christmas, tovarich.  

When we talk about health care, it has to discuss universely as in entire globe there can be one or the other health problem. There are lots of ways to go for these issues.