Tim Noah posts an article on Slate.com positing that healthcare may well become the #2 most-important issue in the upcoming presidential election (behind the ubiquitous war in Iraq). He discusses Barack Obama's proposed healthcare plan (.pdf file), concluding that it is "better than it looks."
Here in Escambia County, 1 in 5 people have no healthcare insurance. In Houston, it is 1 in 4. Similar stories are being heard all over the country. Some folks will be vigorously opposed to any national healthcare plan ("socialized medicine" appears to be the preferred epithet) no matter the need, cost or results. I think it is absolutely necessary, and what's more, inevitable.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Sorry Pat but I don't trust such statments that say 1 in 5 Escambia Co. residents do not have healthcare. Where do these stats come from? I say 1 in 5 Esc. residents either work in the strip clubs or spend most of their time there. Lets clean the pole, improve the quality of the beer and we won't need no stinking Nat'l healthcare.
After heated converstations with Cory and yourself about Gov't sponsored healthcare vs private care, I would like to offer the following:
As you know, my Cocker Spaniel just got interred at the teaching vet hospital at LSU. After an one hour inspection of my dog, my wife and I were called into a room to discuss the diagnosis. We were greeted by Professor Headland and no less than five interns. She explained in great detail the problems along with colored pictures of the anatomy of the problem areas of my pet. We left our pet with the Dr. and went home with the understanding that our dog would have to undergo several days of treatment.
The next morning we received a call from the professor/DR explaining exactly the problems and procedures to follow. Three hours later, we received a call from one of the interns asking if we understood the diagnosis and procedures and if he could be of any help to understand any step of the procedures to follow. Later that night, we received a call from our local vet who had been apparently been apprised of all events asking us if he could help us understand what is going to happen to our pet and if he could help us in any way. Add to this, that we will be called everyday for the next 7-10 days that our dog will be in the vet hospital just to inform how he is doing.
Now,,,, lets compare this totally privately funded service vs the so called humane treatment we all get from our local hospitals that are by Cory's addmission "all Gov't funded because we don't pay taxes on it" We all have had the experience of not getting information on our loved ones at the hospital. The nurses are instructed to say nothing and the doctors are either too busy or too noncaring to bother with you to inform you of what is going on.
Information is nonexistant on all levels and this is care paid for by insurance. Imagine what it would be like if it was on a Gov't wage. The point is that the Vet facilities depend on the funds they receive from their clients, the humans have to rely on the reputation of their insurance companies ability to negotiate a better price. If the Govt is allowed to control the entire healthcare system, then the young bright minds coming up who now aspire to be doctors with their exoribant salaries, will go to another field. All of these things and many more point to one thing. Gov't sponsored healthcare can only lead to a weakenng of our already weak healthcare system.
Jerry:
Leaving aside your obviously idiotic comparison with veterinary clinics, I think I understand your point (and I'm not talking about the one on your head). My position is that we are in an untenable position now. Because anyone can go to an emergency room and is guaranteed to receive healthcare, regardless of their ability to pay, we are paying much higher healthcare costs as a society than we should be. Things need to change, one way or the other. Either we abandon healthcare as an entitlement for all people and move to a purely private-pay system, or we move to socialized medicine for all. I favor the latter. You seem to favor the former. You are a mean, mean man. :-P
Im not mean. I want all people to receive the best health care available. Im just afraid of the corrupt inept mess our gov't would make if it was their burdon alone.
Instead of the govt taking over, how about the govt just make it mandatory for all business to offer health insurance? That would mean the 95% of our population with jobs would have health insurance. The other 5% would still be able to receive health care under the current system.
Maybe that would be a workable solution. I don't know. What do we do with those businesses that simply cannot afford to purchase insurance for their employees? Do we just force them out of business?
You don't force them out of business, they just do what every business does and that is charge more for their services. Of course that means that we pay more but we will pay more if the gov't takes it over as well and I would rather have the choice to pay an extra quarter for my burger than get another 5% added to my tax bill.
Jerry,
You still don't get it. We are talking about single payer insurance, not Government employed doctors. 99% of the health care community is perfectly happy to take payments from Medicare, Medicaid, Tricare and the Federal employees health insurance plan. All, if you will, Government health care. My experience, and I am sure there are exceptions on both sides, is that the Federal government pays approximately 40% of the revenues a physician now receives
Post a Comment