Government Run Healthcare

a reply to: strongfp

Gosh, I have similar stories including my own sergeries, and I am not broken by bills, either.

So the none socialized system has also directly affected me. I have lower taxes and no VAT on everything on top of it too.

So take your pick, a lifetime of ridiculously high taxes, or some bills when you use your services.

originally posted by: olaru12
Trumps wall will be a government program. I'm signed on with a contractor/service LLC.

Name me one government-run program that is cost efficient, timely, effective.

Just one that came in under budget.

Just one.

Perhaps this one will be different....

So you are going to FILM it being built?

That would be grand, and just think of the money YOU will make!

a reply to: DBCowboy

"Name me one government-run program that is cost efficient, timely, effective. "

Medicare is administered at about 1% total cost,where as insurance overhead is about 20% average.

"Just one that came in under budget. "

SSA completed a new data center in 2016 that was estimated at $500 mil and came in a t$490.

a reply to: strongfp
Does a "Sue the Doctor/hospital" mentality exists in Canada ? are there "Ambulance chasing" lawyers in Canada ?

Erm, it is already government run.

Ever hear of HIPAA? or HITECH? Those are the "government" defined rules on how health care handles your personal data. It set the boundaries to the current situation we are in now. It starts with your rights to your data (or lack thereof) which in turn inscribes the boundaries all other "health care entities" can act towards health care providers. Which is all influenced by Big Pharma and lobbyists and all their money spent on trying to guarantee their monopoly.

The game is already rigged against you without the government's help thanks to Big Money. And it doesn't help when the guberment is not working for "the People" but are lining their own pockets.

Health care... another swamp that needs draining IMO. And that is not even politics talking... just truth.

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

Hillary Clinton initiated HIPAA.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Bonnie and Clyde ride again!

Health care, banks, Peruvian marching powder, satanic rituals, pogs,... wtf were they not into (besides themselves as sex partners!)??

Although, HIPAA was a first step towards what was already happening elsewhere. When you have a computer system that uses one file format that cannot send a file to another department because it uses a different one you have problems. The same was happening with health care data. It was just a matter of time.

Looks like a certain First Lady lined her pockets on this one. No wonder she does not have to work!

As Seasonal said, it is all going to crash.

ETA: Forgot about "Harry and Louise"! Thanks Wikipedia, for the trip down memory lane!

a reply to: strongfp

This isn't Canada..........there's not enough talent here to run anything that big correctly. Worse, we don't have a mono-cultural society like Canada, so there's no real "glue" tieing this society and its individual members together. Put another way, nobody, or very few, care about anyone except themselves and perhaps their own family. Its a highly competitive dog-eat-dog and devil take the hindmost society and economy.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: DBCowboy

...to everyone who would bray about healthcare being a right...

No. Just no. And I don't believe for a nanosecond that you don't know better.

It's because of those who refuse to honor and respect our ABSOLUTE INALIENABLE RIGHT TO CARE FOR OUR OWN HEALTH that government has been allowed to intervene, interfere, and take over our damn health care.

So let's call this what it is... You're quite happy to have government control as long as it benefits YOU and you don't give a rat's patootie about anyone else who suffers because of it. You also seem quite happy to rob from the poor to give YOU health care and deny it to others. The only thing worse would be if you actually took pleasure in others' pain for your perks.

You have one of the most backward views on this topic I have ever seen. How is your right to care for yourself connected to my wallet? How exactly am I stealing from poor people?

a reply to: whywhynot

Yep-President Socialist himself. Ya got that right.

originally posted by: stonerwilliam
I just saw on the news lately that out of 10 developed countries healthcare systems America came bottom of the pile

And the British Government run NHS came top

www.bbc.co.uk...

a reply to: DBCowboy

Nah not having that we pay less per head for healthcare and we get a better service then you.



I wonder how much my recent accident would have cost me in the states? hundreds of thousands I paid about 50 quid for my meds.
We just have to make sure the Tories destroy it.






Wise wise words from my fave MP Tony Benn.



RIP.

a reply to: alldaylong



Did not see any point in rubbing our cousins noses in it , you know how touchy they can be

I just don't understand why people are against it in the states? is it because it is socialist? because so is having an Army If you think about it and many appear to want to spend on that but not having socialist healthcare for all....it seems backward and immoral to me.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: seasonal

NHS in the UK. They employ more people than our own armed services and their cancer survival rates are sub par among other measures.

If you employ that many people, it cannot be more cost effective especially considering the ratio of citizens between the US and UK.

You cannot tell me that is more efficient.

'

Source that please

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: olaru12
Trumps wall will be a government program. I'm signed on with a contractor/service LLC.

Name me one government-run program that is cost efficient, timely, effective.

Just one that came in under budget.

Just one.

Perhaps this one will be different....

So you are going to FILM it being built?

That would be grand, and just think of the money YOU will make!

You are very perceptive. And not just video but stills as well. Interviews with the engineers, designers, everyone. Paid documentarion for the government archives and hopefully liaison with the msm. My gig with the GOP is paying off. It's who you know...eh!

a reply to: ketsuko

Researchers say the main reason for low survival rates in the UK seems to be delayed diagnosis, underuse of successful treatments and unequal access to treatment, particularly among elderly people.

However, patient factors are not accounted for, such as the level of smoking, alcohol misuse and poor diet in the UK.

It could be the case that poor cancer care in the UK is not solely to blame for the below average cancer survival rates, but may also be related to the factors listed above.

www.nhs.uk...

This age breakdown suggests American medicine possibly offers the world’s best cancer care, but only to patients with access to that care. Access for younger Americans depends critically on wealth. Poor Americans without insurance may not receive the excellent care available to wealthier Americans. At least not until their 65th birthday.

The US may offer the world’s best cancer care. However, we cannot boast of leading in cancer outcomes because access is problematic for non-seniors.

www.kevinmd.com...

US spends far more for health care than 12 industrialized nations, but quality varies

medicalxpress.com...://medicalxpress.com/pdf255233122.pdf

a reply to: ketsuko

There's 101 reasons the NHS isn't as effective as it should be.

Comparing numbers to the military is pointless, I honestly don't see the reason for it considering a modern army is based upon a mechanised system.

We don't have machines for every aspect of health care.

The armed forces don't have a history of being messed about with by a certain political party.

Practicing health care takes a lot of education, even for the "smaller" jobs whereas their is aspects of the military that anyone with working faculties can operate within.

Apples and oranges.

Anyways, as far as I understand it the NHS is stretched due to mismanagement, a lack of funding. Yet a good percentage of the mortality rates connected with cancer is due to diagnosis, you can't diagnose people who have not visited a doctor or clinic.

Seriously, sometimes it's the people at fault.

That being said, the system still needs streamlining, a person suspected to have cancer should be diagnosed within a few days at most, that requires machinery, tests and specialists in their chosen field. It requires funding too.

Unfortunately people diagnosed with cancer need to move around a lot for their treatment too.

I'm assuming you're British, can you remember all the walk-in centers? Government thought it was doing a good thing, taking a load off GP's and hospitals alike but the problem was never actual injury, of which walk-in centers were built for. No, a big issue was always diagnosing.

People still go to the doctors when they should be at A&E, a GP must ensure the person visits A&E then, as a duty. The end result is more cost and time wasted. The reverse is true too, people foolishly going to A&E for problems a clinic or GP can and should solve, the end result?

Financial cost and time wasted...

a reply to: DBCowboy

The house of cards will fall eventually. There wont be enough money in the system or peoples pockets to sustain a bloated government run by a bunch of children who don't know the value of a dollar let alone how to spend it responsibly.

a reply to: DBCowboy


I've personally experienced both sides. I paid for my own birth control for 16 years. I was lucky enough to always have a job with good insurance. Then I had my son at 36, I couldn't believe how expensive childcare was, so I had a tubal done, which I had to beg my dr for. I worked another couple of years full-time, and was told that if I didn't go a full year without missing one day I would be let go; because my son got constant ear infections at daycare; I had dr notes! I was in the CWA telecommunications union - so much for union protection.

The reason being is I was 20 hrs short of working my 1250 hrs that year due to taking off 3 months (unpaid) leave of absence after I had my son, I didn't want to risk those odds, so I packaged out.

I then went 2 years without insurance, which sucked. I paid for my sons' immunizations out of pocket, until I got him insurance again.

His father could have gotten it for him, but lied to me, and told me his company didn't offer it. I found out later that was a lie.



The problem lies with over-population, fraud, greed, plain and simple.

I cannot tell you how many people I see getting SSDI or welfare and continuing to have children, I'm talking like 5-8 kids. There cannot be an award system for irresponsibility; this is what is burdening the healthcare system, and making the working mans' healthcare go up; but nobody ever wants to address illegal aliens, or responsible birth control