Healthcare is 'a privilege...not a right': GOP lawmaker

The older I get, the more it seems that wisdom is in knowing what I don't know.

I don't know enough about history or politics to be able to say what went wrong, where, or when.

I don't know enough about medicine to point fingers and say who exactly is profiting unfairly or making bad decisions.

I don't know enough about society or government to be able to say what's right or wrong for everyone.

So, what the heck do I know? I know there's something wrong with the health care system in the U.S. now:

-When my doctor orders a bunch of unnecessary blood tests that neither he nor I think I really need, but they're required to protect "them" from the risk of lawsuits.
-When I have to have tests I don't need just to be able to get the prescriptions I need on a perpetual basis for the same basic reason as above.
-When the ace wrap I can buy at the drugstore for $3 costs my insurance company over $100 and I still have to pay $15.72 of it.
-When they won't let me drive my husband from the "closest ER" (which I am required by my insurance provider to go to) to the hospital which can actually perform the surgery he needs, but then they charge my insurance $1500 for the 25 mile ambulance ride and I have to pay another $100. He had appendicitis and it was 24 hours before they did the surgery, BUT he had to go in an ambulance because his condition was "imminently life threatening." Right.
-When my insurance company gets to decide which medications I should get instead of my doctor. He wants me to have drug A, but it's not in the formulary and would cost $45 a month, so I end up asking for drug B, which doesn't work as well for me but only costs $10 a month because my insurance will pay for it.
-When pain medications are fully covered and cost me almost nothing, but the anti-inflammatory that treats the condition when taken consistently and greatly reduces the need for pain meds - well, it's NOT covered. Go figure.
-When I can get pain killers and drugs and fancy equipment (splints, braces, etc.) and time off work for an injury, but I can't get the physical therapy (or a chiropractor) that would treat the injury and greatly reduce the pain so I wouldn't need the pain pills and equipment and time off work.
-When a doctor knows that a particular herbal remedy would actually help me, but can't advise me to take it because it's not an FDA approved treatment.
-When the $35 epi-pen which could save my life if I'm stung by a bee isn't covered on my insurance, but they'll pay for the ($1500) ambulance ride and ER treatment if I'm stung and don't have one.

I don't know who's to blame and at this point, I don't really care. Why can't we just forget about whose fault this mess is and try to figure out who we can get to try to FIX it and come up with something reasonable that works?

I will say one thing though - I think the first step should be to stop all the lawsuits. If you don't agree with a doctor's recommendations you should have the right to refuse treatment or go to a different doctor, and if you do agree then you shouldn't get to sue him for inordinate amounts of money if he makes a mistake. Doctors are human like the rest of us and they do make mistakes. It's tragic, it's sad, etc. etc. but it's a fact of life and no one should get rich because a doctor did the best he could and it wasn't quite good enough. Deliberate malpractice or gross negligence is a criminal matter and could be handled by the legal system. Eliminating all the malpractice insurance and all the fears about getting sued might be a good start at reducing costs and improving care.

Likewise doctors should be able to decide what tests, medications, and treatments are best for their patient, not the HMO/insurance or the facility, and they should be able to take into account the patient's circumstances and opinion.

Just my opinion, and an expression of my frustration with how this type of thread always turns into arguing about who the "bad guys" are instead of considering possible solutions.

In my opinion, healthcare, like driving a car, is a ‘privilege’. The only real choice a person has is the right to live. And in order to prolong a decaying body, a ‘citizen’ should be able to obtain some sort of healthcare, affordable or not.

Whether the government has the right of ‘cap’ on fast and effective treatment is something to consider in light of how socializing healthcare system didn’t work for the Canadians.

Those who can afford medical treatment should have access to any new science and technology available in a free market system.

For those who don’t have the means, that’s where the ‘nationalization’ could play an important part in leaving no-one behind.

Originally posted by elfie

Originally posted by amari



Name me one person that does not recieve health care in this country just one. Haven't you helped to elect the leftwinged nuts that have moved us into socialism....

*snipped*

In all fairness it was Treasury Secretary Paulson who was on his knees begging for the TARP bailout as has already been pointed out in this thread.

We've had a socialized educational system for nearly a century.

A system based on medical decisions being determined not by doctors and their patients, but by insurance companies out to make a profit by systematically denying healthcare benefits to those in need is a devolved approach bordering on criminality.

[edit on 9-3-2009 by elfie]

What is wrong with making a profit that is capitalism and free enterprise and you don't think when the government gets a hold of your health care that they will not be denying and screening out who gets health care or not and not to mention the waiting lists to be treated.

That is exactly what is wrong with our educational system socialized education contributing to the dumbing down of America. Again government sticking their nose where they do not need to be envolved and regulating and brain washing our young children that government taking care of them is the only way instead of them being taught to do for themselves.

I can see where socialized health care might work in smaller countries, but there are too many risks and drawbacks trying to implement that into a country the size of the United States. I would hope that some day everyone did have health care, especially for children who are raised by irresponsible parents.

Health care is not a right, no, not currently. It is a privilege that comes with money or benefit.

While it is not a right, I do believe that providing it in an affordable manner is a moral obligation.

But lately all people do is hate each other and sue each other, so why would we mind an obligation like that? We're definitely on the wrong track no matter what happens, until, at least, the majority of us decide that we want to see our worst neighbor cared for.

Healthcare is a right in the sense that you should have access to the best treatment you can afford. The gov should not get between you and your doctor in other words. As to a right to gov furnished health care, that’s like praying for a curse.

We’re already far down the road to socialized healthcare here in the USA, unfortunately. Gov medical programs and companies supplying healthcare and health insurance have got us into the unnatural situation we have. Health care is as expensive as it is not because of all the new technology, it’s overpriced because people aren’t shopping for the best care they can afford. The natural market has been short circuited. Put the responsibility back in the hands of the individual and watch affordable and effective health care return.

Originally posted by sos37 What we have here in America isn't perfect, but it's the best health care in the world.

Yessir, it most likely is.

If, in fact, you can afford access to it.

As I said, I got cured of cancer for $32 out of pocket. My wife had an allergic reaction recently. 12 hours in emerg getting what they called 'the million dollar treatment. Follows-up with ultrasound and x-ray. Plus GP's.

$16 out of pocket...that hospital's parking rate was cheaper. Oh, and we didn't have to get a second mortgage on the house for either case.

What is or isn't a right, or a privilege changes over time. Sure, early this century, and before, health care was for the privileged. These days, it has become a right. If it weren't a right then people could get turned away at emergency rooms.

Calling it a privilege just stratifies the 'haves' and the 'have nots', the 'can affords' and the 'cannot affords'. We pay more in taxes, and I'm not just talking income tax, than any other civilized nation, but we can't afford even the most basic health care for the population. Oh, we sure can afford to fund wars, bank bailouts, etc...

The whole argument is ridiculous. On one hand people say they don't want a politician deciding who can or cannot get care, but on the other hand they push for insurance where someone without medical training decides who can or cannot get care based on a spread sheet balance.

The majority of those opposed either can pay for health care costs out of pocket, have insurance through their employers, or already have government paid for health care (politicians). They 'have theirs', and couldn't care if those who can't afford to pay for health care, can't afford health insurance, don't have employer paid health insurance, or can't use government health care get theirs.

It all comes down to 'us vs them'.

It all comes down to national priorities. We, as a nation, would rather throw money at warfare, anti-drug policing, bank bailouts, etc... rather than throw that money where it would directly benefit the population.

reply to post by Heike

Just my opinion, and an expression of my frustration with how this type of thread always turns into arguing about who the "bad guys" are instead of considering possible solutions.

You did a great job of describing examples of many of the things that ail our health care system.
I completely agree with your frustration.
You've laid out symptoms of the problem, and identified the major causes- insurance, government regulations and lawsuits. The only thing I would disagree with is your statement about "who the bad guys are".
In order to fix the problems, you must identify the problems, AND the causes of the problems(in fact, the prime movers of the problems).

Insurance: Problem #1-
Cause: Greed
Parties: Everyone- Insurance companies, Doctors, Providers, Patients
Rationale: Insurance companies are "for profit" organizations. They wish to
maximize profits, and cut costs. Therefore, they constantly raise
premiums, co-pays, exclusions, and minimize reimbursements.
Doctors, providers, want to get as much as possible in
reimbursements. So if they would charge $500 for a given
procedure, but know that an insurance company reimburses
$700, they will charge $800, knowing that you'll be happy to
"only" pay $100. The insurance company doesn't care, because
they will just increase premiums for the additional costs.
Patients will go along, because they look at it and say "What the
heck, if I didn't have insurance, I would have paid $500.

Government Regulations: Problem # 2
The FDA is in the pockets of the pharmaceutical
companies. Enough said there.

Lawsuits: Problem # 3
Cause: greed on everyone's part, which results in costs of
lawsuits being passed on in the form of increased costs across
the board.

Originally posted by amari
What is wrong with making a profit that is capitalism and free enterprise and you don't think when the government gets a hold of your health care that they will not be denying and screening out who gets health care or not and not to mention the waiting lists to be treated.

That is exactly what is wrong with our educational system socialized education contributing to the dumbing down of America. Again government sticking their nose where they do not need to be envolved and regulating and brain washing our young children that government taking care of them is the only way instead of them being taught to do for themselves.

The point being made is that the profit is gained by denying services to those who are paying the insurance for the very procedures and services they are being denied.

So you've attended an American school? Not certain what alternative educational system you are proposing or what thinking goes into your assumption that the current system encourages dependency on the government.






[edit on 9-3-2009 by elfie]

reply to post by wolf241e


How the F*CK has this nation survived for so long and become the most prosperous nation the world has ever seen without universal healthcare? Doctors from around the world flock here for their education. The same goes for patients. How did anyone ever get by before the concept of national healthcare?????

It's simple really this country has turned into a bunch of lazy SOBs with their hand out wanting everything laid in their lap. I wish we had a leader that would stand up at tell the nation to get off its ass and take care of themselves just like our grandparents did through the depression.

My father "65" recently went to the Social Security office to apply for his "earned" Social Security benefits. During the two hours waiting in a packed office, he saw only one person close to his age. Everyone else was younger and the vast majority were able bodied.

This nation will collapse at this rate and I can only rejoice in knowing that only the strong will rise up and see it through the hard times. The lazy bastards will be weeded out within months and we won't have to worry about everyone screaming they have a right to do nothing and have others support them.

reply to post by on_yur_6


So, is your father using medicare/medicaid? If so, why? Surely he wouldn't be one with his hand out, now would he?

reply to post by on_yur_6

My father "65" recently went to the Social Security office to apply for his "earned" Social Security benefits. During the two hours waiting in a packed office, he saw only one person close to his age. Everyone else was younger and the vast majority were able bodied.

They may not have all been there applying for benefits. Social Security offices do everything from benefits to providing replacement social security cards that were lost, or taking applications for a social security number.

Originally posted by pikypiky
In my opinion, healthcare, like driving a car, is a ‘privilege’. The only real choice a person has is the right to live. And in order to prolong a decaying body, a ‘citizen’ should be able to obtain some sort of healthcare, affordable or not.

Whether the government has the right of ‘cap’ on fast and effective treatment is something to consider in light of how socializing healthcare system didn’t work for the Canadians.

Those who can afford medical treatment should have access to any new science and technology available in a free market system.

For those who don’t have the means, that’s where the ‘nationalization’ could play an important part in leaving no-one behind.

So, why not both? Those who want to keep their private healthcare plan, and for those who don't have any, give them a national health care plan.

reply to post by on_yur_6

It's simple really this country has turned into a bunch of lazy SOBs with their hand out wanting everything laid in their lap. I wish we had a leader that would stand up at tell the nation to get off its ass and take care of themselves just like our grandparents did through the depression.

I agree with your sentiments, although I'm not sure I would have expressed it with such colorful language.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

This nation will collapse at this rate and I can only rejoice in knowing that only the strong will rise up and see it through the hard times. The lazy bastards will be weeded out within months and we won't have to worry about everyone screaming they have a right to do nothing and have others support them.

Unfortunately, this part of your statement will not come true, because we have a President that will make sure the lazy **** get whatever they want at the expense of those of us who have worked all their lives. That is what Obama's socialist state is all about. Don't blame me. I didn't vote for him. I saw through his rhetoric to what he really was in this thread I created back in July of 2008:


www.abovetopsecret.com...

Do we really want to elect a Communist?

Barack Obama was born of Communist activists, mentored by a communist writer and activist, spent his college days hanging around radical activists, worked as a radical community organizer learning the radical tactics of Alinsky, kept contact with radicals through the years, attends a radical church, and today lends his political skill to the international goals of radical activists, and has radicals working on for his campaign

reply to post by on_yur_6



Greed.

We used to have physician's who made housecalls. They were called "family doctors". They cared about their patients. Over time, doctors decided they wanted to specialize to make more money. More specialization, more cost increases. Soon, family doctors were fewer and fewer. Bigness and greed took over. It's the bottom line.......greed.

reply to post by SpacePunk


Neither. He's paid into the system for all of his life and the return on his money is pathetic.

[edit on 9-3-2009 by on_yur_6]

reply to post by aero56


What is needed is an insurance reform and and approximate range of what can be charged for materials. Hospitals overcharge to compensate for losses in other areas, ie the $300.00 ace bandage. Services should be subject to the doctor and what they are willing to charge. The best should charge the most for their services. A heart/brain surgeon should be making more than a general practioner, or someone who augments breasts!

reply to post by ProfEmeritus


Aside from a minor misunderstanding, I think we agree once again. I really don't care who the "bad guys" are and I'm tired of all the finger pointing and blame assignment. It doesn't really matter any more who the bad guys are.

Nothing will get any better until we, as you've done to an extent, identify the problems, and then come up with viable solutions to those problems.

In a healthy (functional) society/community, there would be enough people with the desire to help others to staff the medical and healthcare professions, and the people receiving care (not treatment, not procedures, but CARE) would reward their caregivers to the best of their ability. Some "poor" people may not be able to afford truly equitable renumeration, but other people of means would pay a little extra here and there, and ultimately the caregivers will be paid enough to want to keep doing what they love doing. Well, that's how it should be, I think, but our overgrown top heavy red tape nightmare of a system is so far from that now that I don't see how we could ever get back to it. Still, there must be solutions for some of the problems if only we could get our government and elected officials to take it seriously enough to find and implement solutions instead of either passing the buck or accepting the bucks under the table to maintain the status quo.

Originally posted by wolf241e


Jeeze..talk about a GOP blunder.

What in the hell was this guy thinking???

I see his side of the discussion but come on man..

I think that he deserved the ass kicking that he got from the anchor who was doing the interview. I'm usually on that side of the conservatives but not this time. Learn how to speak man!! Or at least tone down your rhetoric a bit.


rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

It's not a right, it's not in our constitution.. At least, I have never seen in the Constitution that 20% of my income should pay for the old, the decrepit, and the poor who refuse to buy health insurance.....

Thus, it's a privilege, not guaranteed right.