If only we had nationalized under HillaryCare in 1993, today we'd enjoy lower quality and much higher taxes.

Why, or why, did we not turn over 20% of our economy to Clinton when we had the chance?

Our best hope now is Chelsea, who will lead the Entitlement Trash Rebellion in 2012 with, of course, her mother as a close advisor

Hey Tony Roma, remember when you saw Obama say he was gonna reduce it by $3,000 and you believed him?

Hope and change you can believe in.

Right, Obama started Medicare. Next!

This is the reason we need single payer health care. We need to increase the pool of available funds while spreading the risk across multiple generations of healthy people.

People who don't smoke, drink or use drugs and stay in shape should be able to pay less for their health insurance.

#6 | Posted by fwthom

They already do.

#5 | Posted by Prolix247

WHo is going to pay for welfare fucks and illegals? I do not want to. Life is tough, if you can not afford it, it is time to do the right thing.

#8 | Posted by chickenrancher

With a pool of 350 million people it wont matter anymore. They are all paying into one system.

By the way - It was your republican masters that let the Illegals in to push your wages down. Talk to George and Dick about it or shut the F@@ck up.

OKAY!!

With a pool of 350 million people it wont matter anymore. They are all paying into one system.

So with that logic you of course are in favor of a flat tax since we are all paying into one system -- right? Just as you feel the ones who take care of their bodies better should pay the same health tax, you must think that those who take care of their portfolios better should pay the same as tax on their profits as well?

(here it comes)

"But this is different!"

Michelle obama looks like her insurance should be double for the size of bottom she is floating.

Michelle obama looks like her insurance should be double for the size of bottom she is floating.

Posted by moneywar at 2009-02-24 09:10 PM | Reply

WOW Unfuckingebleivable Moneywar.

Larry

Yeah larry,

It is huge. Every time I see her it gets bigger and bigger. Her kids could play hide-n-seek behind it and never know from one side to the other.

Don't need cussions on the bleachers, shes has plenty.

Single payer is the cheapest, and must eventually happen, whether we want it or not. We've ignored socialized medicine for far too long, and fallen behind via our inaction as we've watched as other counties have paid less and received more. The Medicare tsunami coming at us has been apparent for over a generation. This is not a partisan problem; both parties are guilty, and both will feign surprise when we have no other choice. The economies of scale will eventually force us into managed health care, since we've ignore for too long the economic realities of supply and demand. Think of it: as baby boomers age, demand will spike. Projections foolishly peg medical inflation at the same rate as regular inflation. Does anyone really believe that?

Just like balancing the budget, the longer we wait to face economic realities, the worse the day of reckoning.

People who show up at the emergency room who have over dosed on drugs or big fat fucks who show up with heart attacks or strokes should be left on their gurneys until they recover or die. That will cut health care costs in half.

The knuckledraggers chimed in early and heavy on this one. I guess their Moms gave them some extra computer time tonight.
None of them explained why sending shitloads of money to Big Pharma CEO's in exchange for shitty pens and boner pills is better than putting it into a government sponsored program.
I guess that's because they hate America but are afraid to admit it.

#14 | Posted by Danforth

...while in the process we gradually watch a substantial decline in medical advancements not to mention rationing and long-lines that are inherent with a single-pay system (just ask the Brits).

Sorry. No-thanks.

Sometimes you get what you pay for and numerous improvements are available in regards to healthcare in this country that don't necessitate a complete government-takeover.

People who show up at the emergency room who have over dosed on drugs or big fat fucks who show up with heart attacks or strokes should be left on their gurneys until they recover or die. That will cut health care costs in half.

#15 | Posted by fwthom

I'd be interested to see where you got your information. Hmmm, let's see, $8,160 dollars for every man woman and child in the US times the U.S. population which is about 275 million. That's about $2.25 Trillion dollars. So, you say that fat fucks and drug overdosers in the ER cost us about half of that which would be $1.12 Trillion dollars. Wait a minute, it's just FuckWadThom talking out of his anus as usual!!!

Sometimes you get what you pay for and numerous improvements are available in regards to healthcare in this country that don't necessitate a complete government-takeover.

#17 | Posted by JeffJ

I didn't get what I paid for last year.

"..while in the process we gradually watch a substantial decline in medical advancements not to mention rationing and long-lines that are inherent with a single-pay system (just ask the Brits)."

Then what's your answer for the tsunami coming at us? How will society pay for Cadillac Care for everyone, or will only the wealthy be able to afford medical care?

Your dire predictions are coming at us anyway, clear by the laws of supply and demand. We can't keep our heads in the sand any longer.

Your dire predictions are coming at us anyway, clear by the laws of supply and demand. We can't keep our heads in the sand any longer.

I completely agree - as much as Social Security solvency is ballyhooed - Medicare is in much worse shape.

At the end of the day, there are no easy answers - I don't pretend otherwise. Having said that, a single-pay system is FAR from Utopia. It is fraught with serious problems...problems which are clearly verifiable. So, before we move toward a centrally-planned economy, I suggest we look toward other means of mitigating these looming problems.

It's already centrally planned.

theyrule.net

Costs will increase no matter what. Doesn't matter whether it's a private or public payer system.

Great article:

Top 10 Reasons for Expensive Healthcare Costs:

1. Nobody shops for value.
2. Medical innovations are usually more expensive, not less.
3. Health care is a "luxury good".
4. We don't pay for what we consume.
5. Baumol's disease.
6. The old.
7. The uninsured.
8. The fat and lazy.
9. Because death is sometimes the low-cost option.
10. Malpractice.

If single payer systems work so well and provide such great coverage why do the wealthy in other countries come to our hospitals to get treatments?

Not that I think the current system is good, fair, or efficient; however, the single payer medicare system is full of problems. The most obvious of which is the fact that Doctors lose money on some procedures and make money on other procedures because some bureaucrats decided what the procedure should cost and are not often right.

The problem is affordable healthcare not who pays for it, and like it or not hospitals are going to treat people without the ability to pay for it and that cost get passed to those of us who do have insurance anyway.

The problem is cost:
A) Hospitals are allowed to charge vastly different prices to different people.
B) Insurance companies are allowed to price fix. There is no link from the advertised price that you would pay with no insurance and price that your insurance company negotiates.
C) The actual cost to the recipient (you and me) is not connected to the out of pocket expense at the hospital. How many people think going to the doctor costs $10, 15 or 20 or whatever your copay might be.

I don't know the answer, but dogmatically sticking to the concept of universal healthcare provided by the government or a totally free market solution is retarded... yeah I made fun of the handicap

By the way - It was your republican masters that let the Illegals in to push your wages down."

So you are ignorant to believe approx 12 million people just arrived since 2001? Now that is funny!

ScienceDaily (July 12, 2005) The United States continues to spend significantly more on health care than any country in the world. In 2005, Americans spent 53 percent per capita more than the next highest country, Switzerland, and 140 percent above the median industrialized country, according to new research from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

"We can't blame the United States' higher health care costs on limiting procedures in other countries or the elevated number of law suits filed in the United States," said Peter S. Hussey, PhD, co-author of the study and a recent graduate of the Bloomberg School of Public Health's Department of Health Policy and Management.

"As in previous years, it comes back to the fact that we are paying much higher prices for health care goods and services in the United States. Paying more is okay if our outcomes were better than other countries. But we are paying more for comparable outcomes," said Anderson, who is also the director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Hospital Finance and Management.

I haven't spent that much on health care my whole life.

"I haven't spent that much on health care my whole life."

Teenage years are like that.

I haven't spent that much on health care my whole life.

#30 | Posted by KBM

You have always had 100% employer covered health care that had no effect on you actual salary?

where do you work?

Rampant Racketeering by the Medical Mafia!!!

In Mexico prescription medication is 1/20th the cost of the same drugs in the U.S.! Most medical procedures and surgeries in Mexico are similiarly very low priced compared to the States.
In the USA big medical corporations and pharmaceutical companies are gouging Americans for whatever they can get away with! So far the US Congress/Senate have rubber stamped this outrageous racketeering,robbery and victimization of Americans by the medical/health (Mafia)industries!
*Its also no coincidence that these huge medical/pharma corporations were among the biggest supporters and bankrollers of the Obama Presidential Campaign!

So with that logic you of course are in favor of a flat tax since we are all paying into one system -- right? Just as you feel the ones who take care of their bodies better should pay the same health tax, you must think that those who take care of their portfolios better should pay the same as tax on their profits as well?

(here it comes)

"But this is different!"

#10 | Posted by goatman at 2009-02-24 09:08 PM | Reply |

Do you really propose we implement healthcare based on a profit/loss scheme?

Is making money and not dying really in the same league for you?

You can't treat healthcare like you would treat buying a new car (or some other product) Healthcare is not a good or service that people can go without.

If we treated healthcare in a purely free market manner it would be underconsumed and result in higher overall costs in the long run. In addition it's not a product or service that can easily be compared on a price / level of service basis because both parties do not have equal access to information. In addition the care recipient cannot shop the cost of emergency room care.

That being said, anyone who thinks that letting the the government administer healthcare as one giant HMO will lead to cheaper, better care is a little naive. What we will get is FEMA, adminsitrating care with the compassion of the IRS, in the conditions of underfunded VA. NO THANKYOU

It's really a catch 22 because it cannot be treated as a free market good, but the quality of care, level of service, etc is dependent on profit motivation.

The effort should be focused on reducing the costs. Currently there are 2 plans.

A)The free market purists: Screw you if you don't have access to health care (you can go to the ER, drive up the cost, but I won't see it because my employer pays my insurance, they are less competitive with foreign companies because their the don't have that cost, etc ...) and

B) Everyone needs health care, if you don't have it the government will pay for it.

Not only do both create perverse incentives but neither do anything to address the problem. Why is it so expensive to go to the doctor.

To those of you taking the "life's tough, deal with it" approach, I'd beg your indulgence for a second so I can explain my own situation.

I have a chronic thyroid condition and generalized epilepsy, which leads to my having to take a cocktail of 4 different pills 3 times a day just so I can lead a normal life and go to work just like the rest of us. Neither of these conditions are curable, which means that in all likelihood I'm going to be taking these medications for the rest of my life.

Right now, my employer offers me no healthcare and there's no sign that they will do so at any time in the near future - especially with how the economy is at the moment. I'm existing on the remnants of a plan that my parents purchased for me as a gift after I graduated from college because my student insurance wore off. Buying my own plan is out of the question because of my two pre-existing conditions, plus the extremely high cost of living in NYC.

In 2007 I was billed $17000 for a one-week stay at one of the NYU medical centers just so they could figure out exactly how to treat me. My prescriptions are so expensive that filling one of them at the beginning of the year meets my deductible. This is tertiary to all the EEGs, MRIs, CAT scans, and bloodwork I have to go through.

So I ask you, dear jackasses, what would you have me do? Stop taking the medications that keep my seizures under control and have a grand mal 3 or 4 times a week? I wouldn't be able to hold a job. Move somewhere else where cost of living is cheaper? Tempting, but I can't afford to move, and I'd have to find a job in the new area first. Get a new job? Again, tempting, but the job market is abysmal right now and unemployment is so high that it's extremely difficult for me to distinguish myself from the thousands of other potential candidates.

I'm not asking for pity, and I'm certainly not asking for a government handout or welfare. All I want is an affordable healthcare system. Something with low deductibles and a reasonably established network so I don't have to beat the bush to find a good epilepsy/endocrine specialist.

Is that so much to ask for?

Just as you feel the ones who take care of their bodies better should pay the same health tax...

#10 | Posted by goatman

Each of us is not born equally physically or mentally. At some pint in life, most of us will develop health problems not necessarily due to poor life style choices.

For example, an appendix gone bad can't be predicted, but a bad appendix if not accurately diagnosed early can lead to big time problems and cost. Mine for example was in a warm-up stage for months, but never seemed to present as anything other than gastric pain. It burst, but fortunately contained itself, and didn't spread infected goop though my abdomen. Still, after the surgery and a few days in the hospital it was over $37,000, of which I paid $600 because I had good health insurance at the time.

A lady I know is not so fortunate. Recently, she too was diagnosed incorrectly. The next day, she was admitted though the ER, her appendix had burst, and she did have massive infected goop spread throughout her abdomen. She was in an induced coma for 2 weeks in the ICU, then another couple of weeks in the hospital. She will be going back for a few days stay for some plastic surgery to seal up the huge holes left from the drainage tubes. Currently, the bill is over $500,000. She is unemployed (lay off a while back), has no health insurance. The hospital is starting to pester her about payment. All she has for assets is a small house and an older Toyota. No way is she going to come up with half a million dollars. What happens now?

I would be in favor of some sort of universal healthcare for the ghetto and trailer trash class as long as they don't go to our hospitals and we don't have to look at the MFs, YUK!!!

#10 | Posted by goatman

Universal health care is needed in order to bring down costs for everyone. It will take the decision making away from private industry bureaucrats who make money from denying care you have paid for which drives up costs. If you say how, here is how:

You pay a monthly premium for your medical benefits. You go to the doctor and he prescribes X procedure. The insurance company denies the procedure so the patient does not get care. Eventually once the illness manifests itself to the point of being critical the patient ends up in the ER and has to pay for the procedure themselves (which they cannot) so they either go in debt and claim bankruptcy and stiff the hospital and doctors for the bill which costs are passed on to you and me.

As far as taxes - We should stay with a tiered (progressive) tax system as those who make more money need to pay a little more. I am in a fairly high bracket due to my income and investments but I should pay more taxes due to the fact that I use more infrastructure to make my money. The infrastructure is paid for by my taxes so it is in my best interest to have the best infrastructure my taxes could buy. In the end I make more money for it.

The reality is if business paid their actual taxes and not hide money off-shore or in tax loop-holes individual taxes would decrease. So it is wise not to blame your neighbor for your taxes blame corporations who have abandoned their roles as citizens.

#27 | Posted by MSgt

Remember Reagan?

I thought so...

Insurance companies of any stripe make bankers look like amateurs when it comes to stealing money.

LOL @ #41

I really do not see why we can not adopt a dual system. Universal Health Care that covers everyone to a basic level of care, and Private Health Care for those who don't feel like waiting 3 hours for their appointment or 2 weeks for their MRI.

Oh and the lack of innovation in health care anywhere but America is bunk. Currently I am in a medical trial for MS medication that is totally revolutionary. A once a day pill vs. taking shots every day/every other day/ or once a week (the current choices for those of us with MS) this wonderful new treatment comes to me courtesy of the Swiss.

The Republicans let them (illegals) in for business purposes so the Democrats could get them to vote.

If you smoke, you should pay 20 - 25% of YOUR medical bills, it was after all your choice! If you don't you should pay 20 - 25% of your bill, then your insurer picks up the rest. There are people out there who, thru no fault of their own need medical aid. They should be supported to the extent they are unable to pay these limits, this means some may have all their bills paid by us, THE GOVERNMENT.

No one should be allowed to come here from another country simply because they would be treated for free, as currently is the case! The care of choice should be their own country, exceptions if unable to perform the task. In that case there would be no recourse, possibly establish an international fund for this purpose, requiring proof of eligibility prior to transport.

There needs to be limits due to pricing into the markets, with the Govt being the insurer of last resort, only for the cronically/terminally ill. Everything cannot be paid by us. It is not cost effective or within our capacity to do so!

Not long ago--Prime Minister Gordon Brown argued proudly that NHS under his leadership [Labor Government] dropped a waiting period for surgery from 18 months to mere 8-9 month. This is great news for those who could not wait any longer--for whatever reason.

#44 | Posted by Liberty

Without listing the type of surgery your post is moot.

WHo is going to pay for welfare fucks and illegals? I do not want to. Life is tough, if you can not afford it, it is time to do the right thing.

#8 | Posted by chickenrancher at 2009-02-24 08:53 PM | Reply | Flag

Anytime you get fucked, it IS welfare.

#36 | Posted by Kinger at 2009-02-25 09:31 AM

I feel for you as I'm in the same boat minus the epilepsy + 2 other autoimmune disorders. Fortunately, I have insurance - for now. I'm looking at a layoff in the next year or so.

My meds at this point are pretty inexpensive and I've already switched 2 of the 3 over to the local pharmacy's 90 day supply for $9.99 plan. I don't worry about visiting doctors so much as hospitalization. Doctors will usually give you cash discounts. But if this nodule in my thyroid grows, and I have to have surgery...then what?

I've said it before and I'll say it again (and someone else said it above) - we need a mixture of private and public. Say what you will but the French have done it and WHO rates their health system consistently #1. Yeah their taxes are high but probably not much higher than ours are now.

However, as some have not-so-tastefully pointed out, there needs to be some provisions of some sort for those who will not take care of themselves - if you are obese, have substance abuse problems, or smoke, I think you should go to the bottom of some priority list or be eligible for only the most minimal care. And this liberal doesn't think you should be eligible for anything beyond the most rudimentary life-saving care if you can't prove your legal right to be in this country.

"I haven't spent that much on health care my whole life."

I'm glad for you. What a blessing.

Do you have kids? My daughter broke her arm & between the initial ER visit, co-pays, follow-ups, & Rx, it was damn near $12,000!

My insurance covered all but my $500.00 deductible so cost or no, I'm keeping insurance on the kids. We FIND a way. Not easy but we do it.

"Anytime you get fucked, it IS welfare."

OUCH!
That is a "cringe" kind of funny but funny nonetheless.

I'm against Socialized medical care on moral grounds - I do not want the government making the choice of who gets care when they can directly benefit by deciding to withold care.

Same reason Social Security should be privatized - the givernment benefits when people die early.

More importantly, in order to reduce the costs of Socialized medicine people would be forced through laws to eat properly, etc. Yea, a good idea, of course, but it's also an invasion of privacy.

The health care system in the US needs to be changed. Yea, it was a nice benefit for companies to provide it but that also makes people uncertain about leaving a job - I think it gives a business too much power over a person.

The government can't go it becasue of the moral issue - companies shouldn't do it becasue of the crap when you switch plans/jobs.

If people just took it among themselves to get their own it wouldn't be an issue.

More importantly, in order to reduce the costs of Socialized medicine people would be forced through laws to eat properly, etc. Yea, a good idea, of course, but it's also an invasion of privacy.

#50 | Posted by Spielmannsfluch

This happening much in countries with socialized medicine? You know, like England, Australia, Canada, Germany, much of the rest of Europe? Oh, and the U.S. with its Medicare.

Run, the sky is falling, the sky is falling!!

#52, I really don't care what they're doing - regulating diet is already happening here without Socialized medicine. This will encourage it.

Liberals are normally a huge advocate of privacy rights - why the flip on this issue?

I'm against Socialized medical care on moral grounds - I do not want the government making the choice of who gets care when they can directly benefit by deciding to withold care.

#50 | Posted by Spielmannsfluch

So is more moral to have a private industry bureaucrat making the choice of who gets care when they can directly benefit by deciding to withhold care?

I say it is immoral to make health care beyond the reach of men, women and children for a profit margin...

#45 | Posted by Prolix247

Does it matter? Elective surgery is not covered.

#55 | Posted by Liberty

Of course it matters. Some procedures are for life threatening illnesses (heart surgeries) while other procedures are for life stabilization (knee surgeries).

I have in-laws who live in Canada and I wish I got the services they receive. One of my in-laws just received a Lap Band which I would call elective, she could have always dieted, Eh?

I have to believe that an annual checkup, eye testing, and dental care has to cost less than 8,000 dollars per person. Are we being robbed?

Star Wars medical technology is not what we need. I believe we need national single-provider healthcare for the citizens of the United States.

I have to believe that an annual checkup, eye testing, and dental care has to cost less than 8,000 dollars per person.

You have to be right. My company says they pay half of our premiums. I pay about $120/mo which is $1,440/yr. Double that and we have less than $3k/yr. Now that is medical only, but dental is far less. Without looking at my pay stub, I'd say about $600/yr.

Oh, yes, that's single person, no dependants. Maybe that $8k was for a family?

I think the $8,000 is average cost per person who actually receive treatment of some kind, not just your annuals.

Your annuals should only cost $0-$500 per year (Approximately) depending on your coverage.

I pay 5400 a year towards premiums. That is for my whole family and is for High Deductible Health Plan with a HSA. My company contributes 3k a year to the HSA that leaves me with 2.5k possible out of pocket.

So my max per year for my whole family is 7900.

Now the total cost exceed 7900 counting what my employer contributes plus what my insurance picks up. Of course being on a High Deductible Health plan I see where the money goes so I make choices to conserve money. If I have a relapse instead of the IVsteroids that costs about 1600 I go with the Prednisone for about 4. It doesn't work quite as well I have to take for a month instead of a week and I have residual problems because of it but it saves over 4500 a year figuring an average of 3 relapses a year. I also signed up as a guiena pig so I would get my meds free. Sure it might be a sugar pill and do me no good but it might be the real thing.

Now I'm ok with the choices I have to make to be able to aford some care, but I can't say I am real thrilled with the idea that I some times have to take lesser care because of cost.

However with full socialized medicine it would not be my choice but the governments choice of what level care I got and that I would not be ok with.

You can get free government run healthcare right now - Just join the military.

The average healthcare is about 12,000 a year. This includes dental and optical.

The average healthcare is about 12,000 a year.

Why do you think the feature story is wrong?

I'm against Socialized medical care on moral grounds

#50 | Posted by Spielmannsfluch

And there are those who truly believe that not having a national healthcare system is immoral. That if one is a member of a society, a civilized nation, healthcare is a right, not a privilege for only those who can afford it.

You can get free government run healthcare right now - Just join the military.

#61 | Posted by MSgt

Yeah, ok. I'll tell my 70 year old dad with Parkinson's Disease to get right on that. Oh wait. He already did that. Those military benefits just carry on for the rest of his life, right? Um no. Fortunately he has insurance from retirement and Medicare.

But wait, what about me? I'm a 42 year old female with existing medical conditions (not of my own making). Will the military take me? At my age, with my medical conditions?

Not exactly the answer for everyone is it?

"I feel for you as I'm in the same boat minus the epilepsy + 2 other autoimmune disorders. Fortunately, I have insurance - for now. I'm looking at a layoff in the next year or so."

"But wait, what about me? I'm a 42 year old female with existing medical conditions (not of my own making). Will the military take me? At my age, with my medical conditions?"

Posted by ProudLiberal

I hate to say it, but you're gonna be so screwed if you get laid off. If possible, you'll get COBRA after being RIF'd, but it won't be cheap. A couple of years ago, I was paying $322 a month for my Aetna plan continuation via COBRA. That was for 18 months worth, the extend of COBRA coverage. Fortunately I attained a position with a good corp.

I did mucho research into private HC insurance. I am relatively healthy with no pre-existing medical conditions. If I was going to match what I had, it wold have been more than the $322 I was paying via COBRA. A friend of mine with a couple of medical conditions couldn't even find a provider at any price.

And it is this that is the major fault with private insurance. Pre-existing condition(s)? Tough luck, pal!

If single payer systems work so well and provide such great coverage why do the wealthy in other countries come to our hospitals to get treatments?
#26 | Posted by chlorinehair5 at 2009-02-24 10:23 PM

The truth is that when foreign nationals come to the United States for treatment, their government's healthcare system cuts a check to reimburse the US Hospital.

Do some reading, and start thinking for yourself, instead of rattling off Republican talking points.