There is a Suicide Girl who has been a semi-invalid since a surgery in May, due to a post-operative syndrome, who is now having to sell her DVD's at one third price, and prints, in an effort to make enough money to see a doctor. I just want to say that this infuriates me. If she lived in Canada that system, though imperfect, would have provided her with multiple services and treatment options since she was released from the hospital 4 months ago - all waiting periods included. To those, from our President on down, who are phobic about federally subsidized health care because of some outdated conservative doctrinal bullshit about open market economy or free competition in the marketplace, I say bend over, grab your ankles and fuck you in the ass with a jackhammer. You smirking, yammering, murdering sons of bitches, who "federally subsidize" death, horror, genocide, terrorism, poverty, hunger and destruction all over the globe. I hope you die, in agony, alone, haunted by your sins, you motherfucking bastards.
I agree, universal health care is a better idea then subsidized corporate welfare, over-bloated defense spending, etc. If citizens could actually vote with their tax dollars (choosing, where say 50$ of their taxes were spent), we probably would have a very different society. But alas, our democracy isn't quite so democratic...
DarkBlueMarcy said:
well.... i don't wish DEATH on anyone. that would kind of deafeat the purpose. but i agree with your frustration and anger.
As I wrote that last night, I remembered a line from "Masters of War" by Bob Dylan, where he says "...I hope that you die". When he was asked about it he said that he was rather shocked by the intensity of his anger - because he really didn't wish death on anyone - but that on a "feeling" level that was what he honestly felt. It's a tough one...
I don't think we need socialized health care because I am afraid at the quality of services I see in countries that have it. I would much rather see something like a healthcare voucher and forcing insurance companies insure everyone and not be able to turn people down for coverage.
By the health care voucher I mean everyone would pay taxes as if we had universal health care but instead of the government running one big health care system you would use the voucher you get from the government and get to pick the company you want to get health care with. Then if you wanted you could supplement the voucher with your own money to get more services but every health care company would be required to offer a basic plan at the voucher price.
Not a bad idea hadees, the problem is you undermine the insurance companies ability to remain profitable by denying claims. Why not just cut out he middle man altogether (eliminating an unnecissary level of bureaucracy) and free up the medical community to practice medicine unperturbed by their influence?
hadees said:
I don't think we need socialized health care because I am afraid at the quality of services I see in countries that have it. I would much rather see something like a healthcare voucher and forcing insurance companies insure everyone and not be able to turn people down for coverage.
By the health care voucher I mean everyone would pay taxes as if we had universal health care but instead of the government running one big health care system you would use the voucher you get from the government and get to pick the company you want to get health care with. Then if you wanted you could supplement the voucher with your own money to get more services but every health care company would be required to offer a basic plan at the voucher price.
That might work. Would you insist on providers running A+E departments? And would the competition between providers not be a drag on the system?
(duplication of infrastructure, marketing costs, etc. etc.)
FellOnEarth said:
Not a bad idea hadees, the problem is you undermine the insurance companies ability to remain profitable by denying claims. Why not just cut out he middle man altogether (eliminating an unnecissary level of bureaucracy) and free up the medical community to practice medicine unperturbed by their influence?
Because I don't think the government can effectively run a health care system. I would rather have the government pay for it and have private companies compete the money. Thus I can choose the best service, if one sucks then I can drop it and pick another. If the government runs it and you get bad service you have no choice.
While listening to my favorite talk show host Rush Limbaugh, a women called in and started saying the reason most people don't have insurance is because they choose to not have it. They choose to spend money on other things.
5-6 years ago my premium would have been something like $80-90 a month, a male under 30 non-smoker,no pre-existing conditions.
SockPuppet said:
That might work. Would you insist on providers running A+E departments? And would the competition between providers not be a drag on the system?
(duplication of infrastructure, marketing costs, etc. etc.)
I haven't fleshed out the idea fully since I am not really in a position to implement it. However you are right there would be some more overhead on certain things but other things might end up costing less money since you know our government isn't exactly that great at getting us the best price *cough*Halliburton*cough* on things. And I still feel the ability to choose your provider is preferable to being forced into one system that might not be tailer to your need or be very good.
It all comes down to the fact I do think we need to have health care for everyone but from past experience of government programs I don't think the government is the best choice to provide that for us.
SockPuppet said:
That might work. Would you insist on providers running A+E departments? And would the competition between providers not be a drag on the system?
(duplication of infrastructure, marketing costs, etc. etc.)
I haven't fleshed out the idea fully since I am not really in a position to implement it. However you are right there would be some more overhead on certain things but other things might end up costing less money since you know our government isn't exactly that great at getting us the best price *cough*Halliburton*cough* on things. And I still feel the ability to choose your provider is preferable to being forced into one system that might not be tailer to your need or be very good.
It all comes down to the fact I do think we need to have health care for everyone but from past experience of government programs I don't think the government is the best choice to provide that for us.
Maybe you should flesh it out and send it to your congressman? Couldn't hurt to try, hm.
I do hear you about systems which can't be tailored. But I suspect that those which can somehow always wind up being tailored to the rich... which is not what we want, really.
phrogg
Greenville, SC
August 2005
SEP 23, 2007 08:56 PM