Printable View
i'm one of those people. i could easily get health insurance, if i wanted to pay it. unfortunately my biggest and most debilitating expense is taxes. if taxes were to go up i would pay that extra a month anyway. it would make absolutely no difference to me.
...also we could add college students to that list, who get to see a doc at a much lower price in a student health center. it was ten bucks to see the doc when i was in college.
Most of them are not lazy, they are just not old or sick enough to be eligible for those benefits.Quote:
Originally Posted by vashti [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
There was a lot of opposition to our current Universal health care system in Australia in the 70s as well from the right, but after it went in it became very popular. It was efficient. The medicare levy is quite low and most of the "Doom and Gloom" predictions from the right failed to materialize. Actually, after this system came in and everyone saw how popular it became, the right changed their policies and abandoned opposition to it.
Miso, if you think it won't make any difference to you, then at least think about millions of other people who simply can not afford health insurance or who are not illegible for it who would benefit from it. Think about how many lives could be saved.
haha while you research, i'll drink some more. where is vash?? because right now i'm drinking some wine...Quote:
Originally Posted by squirrley [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
personally i was really blessed in the fact that i never really needed health care. secondly, i always have had good insurance due to my father having a really good job while i attended college. i still don't need it, however, working at a fed job, you get all the benefits.
raverboy
Can you provide a source for that bit of wisdom that comes from a reputable source? Because common sense tells me that a fairly large number of people are going to put forth the least amount of effort required, and it is less effort to simply show up at the E.R. than it is to fill out a stack of paperwork.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mishanya [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
Aren't you going to comment on my GrkScorp-length post?
Common sense can tell different things to different people. But do you really think that the only reason why 50 million people in US don't have health insurance is because they are lazy?Quote:
Originally Posted by vashti [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
I don't know where Michael Tanner got his 7.5%+ figures from. All I know is Medicare Levy here is set at 1.5%. If it works this way here, surely it can also work this way in the richest country in the world where people earn more money than us?Quote:
Originally Posted by vashti [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
Excerpt:
A 1.5% levy is imposed on individuals with a taxable income of up to $50,000 per annum and on families with a taxable income of up to $100,000 per annum. For those on higher incomes, the levy increases to 2.5% unless they have private health insurance. Meanwhile, low income earners are exempt from the Medicare levy but contribute through indirect taxes.
There are also direct user charges above rebate levels. These progressive taxation arrangements mean that, on the whole, people contribute in line with their income. This is in contrast with private health insurance arrangements where contributors pay the same amount for the same level of cover, regardless of income.
I don't know which 7 1/2% you are referring to, but I am pretty sure that the director of research at the Georgia Public Policy Foundation knows a little more about it than you do.
And no, I don't think the only reason so many people lack health care is because they are lazy, but that would describe a large percentage. Where is your link to support your position? or do you merely base your opinions on Michael Moore's movies?
Vashti is completely right. Mishanya, it looks like you've been quite misled... Which makes sense knowing that you've based a good part of your argument on information coming from a Michael Moore film
Seriously, get your information somewhere else. Moore is a complete tool and makes his movies to very deliberately give people a warped view on things. If there were 5 instances of people being denied healthcare and thrown out on the streets, Moore would have made sure to talk about each and every one of those cases for a half hour each and fail to mention the other 100,000 times people in similar cases were not neglected
It's like when Rosie O'Donnell claimed that it was impossible for the airplanes to bring down the Twin Towers. I never knew Rosie had a degree in structural engineering and was qualified to make such statements!
I'm quoting the information provided by our government on how it works for us. I think that if we pay 1.5% here, why should it cost more for people in US?Quote:
Originally Posted by vashti [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
You want me to post statistic on why I think one fifth of US population is not lazy?Quote:
Originally Posted by vashti [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
I've only used Michael Moore in one example where a person was driven out of the hospital into a random location. Which leads me to a question, why did you say that I base a good part of my argument on information coming from a Michael Moore film?Quote:
Originally Posted by DoesntMatter [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
By the way, what is my argument? I'm saying that tens of millions US citizents are uninsured which is a fact [url]http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/income_wealth/007419.html[/url]
And that Permenent Residents and citizents are insured in Australia, thus if you don't have any money you will still recieve care.
What is you argument here?
The excerpt I included did not discuss YOUR country's health care system, but that of Canada and Europe (I believe). And yes, I would like to see a link that supports your statement that "most" of the 50 million are inelgible for some sort of health care. Be sure your link differentiates between legal citizens and illegal immigrants, because this is a very large part of the problem with the uninsured, unlike where you live.
My argument is that the healthcare system in the US is not as bad as you make it out to be. A lot of people are uninsured but they receive healthcare anyways, which is a point you seem a little reluctant to acknowledge
But my point about even mentioning Michael Moore is that it completely discrediting. Everything you have said seems to be his rhetoric. Such as saying there are only a few 'altruistic' hospitals, people are being dumped onto skid row left and right in an inhumane fashion, and wanting to believe that the reason a lot of people don't have healthcare is not because of their own laziness
Here is how I feel on the subject, being an American citizen. I can't see being required to pay for another person's health care, regardless if it is due to misfortune or their personal decisions in life.
However, I have no quarrels with donating money out of my own will to health care institutions who care for those who fall into the above category.
~Sphinx
Err... I'm Canadian, grew up in Canada but lived in the US as an adult for 8 years (& no back in Canada, of course). So I've had to deal with both systems.
My general impression about access is: if you are wealthy it makes no difference. Canada is a two-tier system in practice. While we have basic care provided, anything that's any good (dentist, eye care, prescriptions, counselling service, equipment such as crutches, and so on) requires our (or our employers) paying for an 'extended health plan'.
And yes, wait for services like medical imagery, surgery, etc. can be long, but there is a triage system for need in place.
Tho the status of the Canadian basic healthcare system is better than the US one in general, as always, it is the poor who suffers from the gaps in coverage. And it is being grossly mismanged by the government, FYI, so that doesn't help.
And no, docs don't make extra $ from unneeded visits (or whatever that comment was). In fact, physicians are actually limited in Canada to the number of patients/visits they can have in a day. And the billing for a particular service (eg.immunization) is government regulated. Once that daily cap is reached, the docs close shop & go play golf (or whatever). Even if its 1 pm in the afternoon. This has caused a lot of docs to head south of the border in the last decade.
And how bad do I make it seem? I didn't say that people get dumped left and right, I just brought one example from the movie (That example actually did happen in real life by the way). As far as wanting to have free healthcare and not getting it out of own laziness? Come on dude, who wouldn't want to have free healthcare? I'm surprised that anyone believes that the only reason why tens of millions of people don't have free health insurance is because they are too lazy to make a phone call. They don't have health insurance because they are either inelligible or can't afford it.Quote:
Originally Posted by DoesntMatter [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
As far as these "altruistic hospitals" go. (Apparently more altruistic than some people on this thread who don't want to be required to pay for someone else). My question is who pays and who regulates this alleged abundant free healthcare for the uninsured? Is it provided at the expense of the hospital like Vash said? (I.e. the hospitals get run down because they altruisitcally provide out of their own free will). And do all hospitals do this, or is it a case where some do and some don't? (Because really they don't have to).
On the side note, In Australia 37% of the tax revenue for Medicare goes into hospitals, public and private. Don't you think US hospitals would benefit from that?
Sorry my mistake Vash. I meant tens of millions either inellgible for Health Insurance OR can't afford it.Quote:
Originally Posted by vashti [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
[url]http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/SavingandDebt/Advice/StudySaysWorkingPoorCannotAffordBasics.aspx[/url]