Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Do you think obese/overweight people should pay more for health insurance?

Options
1353638404175

Replies

  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    Like soldiers, police have some obligation to provide services if they're not legally able to strike (refuse to perform services).
  • stanmann571
    stanmann571 Posts: 5,728 Member
    Options
    Like soldiers, police have some obligation to provide services if they're not legally able to strike (refuse to perform services).

    Per the Supreme court, the required service is to investigate crimes and conduct a best effort to ascertain who may have committed the crime.
  • DamieBird
    DamieBird Posts: 651 Member
    Options
    I'd say no. Once you start down the path of limiting healthcare on being overweight, it can follow on to DNA testing for genetic disorders and being charged more for e.g. a great-aunt that developed glaucoma or had sickle-cell anaemia.
    We're better off keeping the simple system of universal healthcare where we pay the ~€100 per month with a deductible of €385 (though that keeps going up by around 15 euro each year), where the services of the healthcare provider are provided as part of the insurance (doctor, nurse, surgeon etc.) but the fees paid are for medicines and appliances. But I guess most answering your question aren't in The Netherlands.

    Is that deducible a yearly one? That would come out to nearly $450 US which would be very tough for some people living near or below the poverty line - and tough for others if it's a per procedure kind of thing. In the Netherlands universal system, what happens if people cannot afford the monthly fee or deductible?
  • jenilla1
    jenilla1 Posts: 11,118 Member
    Options
    DamieBird wrote: »
    I'd say no. Once you start down the path of limiting healthcare on being overweight, it can follow on to DNA testing for genetic disorders and being charged more for e.g. a great-aunt that developed glaucoma or had sickle-cell anaemia.
    We're better off keeping the simple system of universal healthcare where we pay the ~€100 per month with a deductible of €385 (though that keeps going up by around 15 euro each year), where the services of the healthcare provider are provided as part of the insurance (doctor, nurse, surgeon etc.) but the fees paid are for medicines and appliances. But I guess most answering your question aren't in The Netherlands.

    Is that deducible a yearly one? That would come out to nearly $450 US which would be very tough for some people living near or below the poverty line - and tough for others if it's a per procedure kind of thing. In the Netherlands universal system, what happens if people cannot afford the monthly fee or deductible?

    Most people in the US with deductibles would LOVE it if their deductible was ONLY $450. It's well into the thousands for a lot of people here. (And that's also a pretty tiny premium, too. Wish I could get one that low.)
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,503 Member
    Options
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    hesn92 wrote: »
    No. Everyone should be entitled to the same level of healthcare. I feel it's a basic human right. It's similar to charging people more who have a pre existing condition. What else, are we going to charge people more who have a genetic predisposition to certain Illnesses?

    Basic human rights would be life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

    You have no right to demand services provided by another individual.
    Wait, isn't that what insurance is though? If someone needed a car repair, they pay their deductible and the "pooled" money from everyone else pays the rest. How is that different than healthcare?

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png


    Are you forced to purchase insurance? Does the insurance company send over a law enforcement branch if you don't purchase their product?

    Apples and oranges. Insurance is a free market product.
    You are FORCED to get insurance if you WANT healthcare in the US. And if one doesn't get it and goes to the hospital for care because it's needed, it goes back to your "demand for services" that WILL be payed by your taxpayer money.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png
  • Alatariel75
    Alatariel75 Posts: 17,959 Member
    edited June 2017
    Options
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    There is just ONE reason that healthcare is expensive in the US............................................profit. Until the US becomes a not for profit venture, health care costs for people are just going to keep rising. And really we could have a decent government healthcare system if we diverted money to it. Problem is, taxpayer money is diverted to other profit ventures that benefit people in politics more than it does the people themselves.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    Every healthcare system is for profit. Are you suggesting that bureaucrats work for free?
    Socialized healthcare makes a profit? Military healthcare is for profit? Don't think so.
    You can never have decent healthcare without a motive of profit. This is the primary reason healthcare costs have risen beyond the rest of the consumer index - deliberate insertion of middlemen (government and insurance).
    Lots of countries don't have people pay insurance on healthcare and do just fine. Our own would be health care for the military. I grew up an Air Force brat and even today, my retired parents (both past 85 years old) get great healthcare at NO COST to them.
    If you allowed free market forces to compete then you would not have instances where Epipens rose to prohibitive prices. You would have competitive companies offering products at a reduced price to gain market share. Government is the problem, not the solution.
    Lol, wouldn't that be socialized medicine then? Affordability for ALL and not just the elite? And who's keeping big pharma and insurance companies happy? The people getting their palms greased by them. Health care shouldn't be for capital gain. I've personally worked in it and with people who suffer who busted their *kitten* working for decades only to use their retirement to pay for medical help not covered by insurance (mostly prescriptions drugs).

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png


    Edit: for context, I was responding to the bold, but it got hidden in the quote

    There's a huge difference between "for profit" and money generating. Of course the employees don't work for free in a not-for-profit health system. Payment of wages and expenses isn't profit - profit is whats leftover when you've paid wages and expenses.

    For profit systems are where the main driving force behind the entity is to make money over and above the cost of wages and expenses, in order to provide a return to shareholders/investors/owners.

    The US has one of the only "for profit" healthcare systems in the developed world. Places like Australia, for instance, invest all the money earned above and beyond the payment of wages and expenses back into the system.

    It doesn't mean it can't be rorted, and there haven't been instances where the wages being paid weren't exorbitant, but the main issue is whether they are setting out to generate a profit, which in the US they are, and most other places, they are not.
  • dybbukgirl
    dybbukgirl Posts: 16 Member
    Options
    Slippery slope IMHO.
    1st...smokers.
    2nd...obesity.
    next????
    Genetic predispositions based on DNA.
    What you ate for dinner.
    How much sleep you get.
    How fast you drive your car to work.
    What type of activities you do or don't participate in after work hours.

    Where does it stop?
    Corporations already have the power of PACs pushing corporate agendas.
    Do we really want to encourage them to take more power when it comes to how they price health insurance based on varying factors?

    "Careful what you wish, you may regret it. Careful what you wish, you just might get it"

    And of course it will all be in the name of "saving the company a few bucks" and "controlling skyrocketing insurance costs" which invariably get passed to you anyway. Yes...even the healthy "you" in the form of cost increases that outpace standard of living wage increases.

    This is what makes me worried, as I have 2 diseases that are potentially genetic. Studies are still being done on that, and right now there's only a correlation. I depend on certain medications that help me cope with those diseases. What happens to me when my premium goes up based on that? Nothing good. If I can't afford my meds, or can't afford my blood panels then I can't be treated at all. So what's the good of having insurance? Now extrapolate that from my relatively minor diseases to someone who has a severe disease that's genetically based. Possibly someone who is low income. What happens to them?

    Anyway, I don't recall ever having higher premiums when I was a smoker.

    Personally, I think hitting people in their pocketbook when it comes to obesity isn't a productive way about this. Poverty plays a huge role in obesity, so hitting people who are already down surely won't do much for them. If someone's premiums are so high, they can't actually afford to go see a doctor, what's the point? They should just suffer?

    Sounds too much like eugenics for me.
  • CSARdiver
    CSARdiver Posts: 6,252 Member
    Options
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    hesn92 wrote: »
    No. Everyone should be entitled to the same level of healthcare. I feel it's a basic human right. It's similar to charging people more who have a pre existing condition. What else, are we going to charge people more who have a genetic predisposition to certain Illnesses?

    Basic human rights would be life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

    You have no right to demand services provided by another individual.
    Wait, isn't that what insurance is though? If someone needed a car repair, they pay their deductible and the "pooled" money from everyone else pays the rest. How is that different than healthcare?

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png


    Are you forced to purchase insurance? Does the insurance company send over a law enforcement branch if you don't purchase their product?

    Apples and oranges. Insurance is a free market product.
    You are FORCED to get insurance if you WANT healthcare in the US. And if one doesn't get it and goes to the hospital for care because it's needed, it goes back to your "demand for services" that WILL be payed by your taxpayer money.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    We are now forced to purchase healthcare thanks to ACA - or pay the penalty. Of course paying the penalty is a much kinder option now that government involvement has demolished the market and any high cap policy options are gone.

    Nothing more terrifying than the words "We're from the government, we are here to help."
  • CSARdiver
    CSARdiver Posts: 6,252 Member
    edited June 2017
    Options
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    There is just ONE reason that healthcare is expensive in the US............................................profit. Until the US becomes a not for profit venture, health care costs for people are just going to keep rising. And really we could have a decent government healthcare system if we diverted money to it. Problem is, taxpayer money is diverted to other profit ventures that benefit people in politics more than it does the people themselves.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    Every healthcare system is for profit. Are you suggesting that bureaucrats work for free?
    Socialized healthcare makes a profit? Military healthcare is for profit? Don't think so.
    You can never have decent healthcare without a motive of profit. This is the primary reason healthcare costs have risen beyond the rest of the consumer index - deliberate insertion of middlemen (government and insurance).
    Lots of countries don't have people pay insurance on healthcare and do just fine. Our own would be health care for the military. I grew up an Air Force brat and even today, my retired parents (both past 85 years old) get great healthcare at NO COST to them.
    If you allowed free market forces to compete then you would not have instances where Epipens rose to prohibitive prices. You would have competitive companies offering products at a reduced price to gain market share. Government is the problem, not the solution.
    Lol, wouldn't that be socialized medicine then? Affordability for ALL and not just the elite? And who's keeping big pharma and insurance companies happy? The people getting their palms greased by them. Health care shouldn't be for capital gain. I've personally worked in it and with people who suffer who busted their *kitten* working for decades only to use their retirement to pay for medical help not covered by insurance (mostly prescriptions drugs).

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png


    It's rare that someone actually touts the VA as an shining example of socialized medicine, but if that's what you want to hang you hat on - be my guest. I'm a veteran and I should get no cost medical; however the scheduling and waiting lines make full time employment and service from the VA nearly impossible, unless you enjoy 6 months waiting lines.

    Who's keeping big pharma happy? Well first you would have to research the relationship between what the congressional committees allow pharma to charge. A convoluted relationship between market wholesalers, market retailers, insurance companies, hospitals, and any other select buying groups...and of course the government. Pretty simple when you see who's providing the bulk of campaign contributions though.

    Shouldn't is not a rational argument. You are actually making an argument against insurance, not for socialized medicine. Remove insurance, remove government. Unleash the free market and the cost of medicine will return to normal.


    Here's a lovely story highlighting the ultimate outcome of socialized medicine:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40454177

    In summary the bureaucrats decide who lives and who dies. When taken to higher authority the judges at the European Court of Human Rights concluded that further treatment would "continue to cause Charlie significant harm". Regardless of a US physician who has offered an alternative treatment the hospital will not release the child to the parent's custody.
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,503 Member
    Options
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    hesn92 wrote: »
    No. Everyone should be entitled to the same level of healthcare. I feel it's a basic human right. It's similar to charging people more who have a pre existing condition. What else, are we going to charge people more who have a genetic predisposition to certain Illnesses?

    Basic human rights would be life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

    You have no right to demand services provided by another individual.
    Wait, isn't that what insurance is though? If someone needed a car repair, they pay their deductible and the "pooled" money from everyone else pays the rest. How is that different than healthcare?

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png


    Are you forced to purchase insurance? Does the insurance company send over a law enforcement branch if you don't purchase their product?

    Apples and oranges. Insurance is a free market product.
    You are FORCED to get insurance if you WANT healthcare in the US. And if one doesn't get it and goes to the hospital for care because it's needed, it goes back to your "demand for services" that WILL be payed by your taxpayer money.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    We are now forced to purchase healthcare thanks to ACA - or pay the penalty. Of course paying the penalty is a much kinder option now that government involvement has demolished the market and any high cap policy options are gone.

    Nothing more terrifying than the words "We're from the government, we are here to help."
    That would be people who DON'T already have a healthcare plan right? And it goes back to your statement of "people shouldn't have to pay for others". No healthcare plan, they get hospitalized and it's back to the taxpayer paying for them.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png
  • stanmann571
    stanmann571 Posts: 5,728 Member
    Options
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    hesn92 wrote: »
    No. Everyone should be entitled to the same level of healthcare. I feel it's a basic human right. It's similar to charging people more who have a pre existing condition. What else, are we going to charge people more who have a genetic predisposition to certain Illnesses?

    Basic human rights would be life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

    You have no right to demand services provided by another individual.
    Wait, isn't that what insurance is though? If someone needed a car repair, they pay their deductible and the "pooled" money from everyone else pays the rest. How is that different than healthcare?

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png


    Are you forced to purchase insurance? Does the insurance company send over a law enforcement branch if you don't purchase their product?

    Apples and oranges. Insurance is a free market product.
    You are FORCED to get insurance if you WANT healthcare in the US. And if one doesn't get it and goes to the hospital for care because it's needed, it goes back to your "demand for services" that WILL be payed by your taxpayer money.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    We are now forced to purchase healthcare thanks to ACA - or pay the penalty. Of course paying the penalty is a much kinder option now that government involvement has demolished the market and any high cap policy options are gone.

    Nothing more terrifying than the words "We're from the government, we are here to help."
    That would be people who DON'T already have a healthcare plan right? And it goes back to your statement of "people shouldn't have to pay for others". No healthcare plan, they get hospitalized and it's back to the taxpayer paying for them.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    NO, that would be the people who had a healthcare plan that met their needs/desires, and that plan was deemed inadequate under ACA.
  • CSARdiver
    CSARdiver Posts: 6,252 Member
    Options
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    hesn92 wrote: »
    No. Everyone should be entitled to the same level of healthcare. I feel it's a basic human right. It's similar to charging people more who have a pre existing condition. What else, are we going to charge people more who have a genetic predisposition to certain Illnesses?

    Basic human rights would be life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

    You have no right to demand services provided by another individual.
    Wait, isn't that what insurance is though? If someone needed a car repair, they pay their deductible and the "pooled" money from everyone else pays the rest. How is that different than healthcare?

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png


    Are you forced to purchase insurance? Does the insurance company send over a law enforcement branch if you don't purchase their product?

    Apples and oranges. Insurance is a free market product.
    You are FORCED to get insurance if you WANT healthcare in the US. And if one doesn't get it and goes to the hospital for care because it's needed, it goes back to your "demand for services" that WILL be payed by your taxpayer money.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    We are now forced to purchase healthcare thanks to ACA - or pay the penalty. Of course paying the penalty is a much kinder option now that government involvement has demolished the market and any high cap policy options are gone.

    Nothing more terrifying than the words "We're from the government, we are here to help."
    That would be people who DON'T already have a healthcare plan right? And it goes back to your statement of "people shouldn't have to pay for others". No healthcare plan, they get hospitalized and it's back to the taxpayer paying for them.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    Are you deliberately failing to comprehend the distinction between being forced to pay into an unwanted/unneeded process and voluntarily paying into a risk pool?

    If socialized medicine is so wonderful and capitalism such a disaster why haven't you voted with your feet?
  • DamieBird
    DamieBird Posts: 651 Member
    Options
    jenilla1 wrote: »
    DamieBird wrote: »
    I'd say no. Once you start down the path of limiting healthcare on being overweight, it can follow on to DNA testing for genetic disorders and being charged more for e.g. a great-aunt that developed glaucoma or had sickle-cell anaemia.
    We're better off keeping the simple system of universal healthcare where we pay the ~€100 per month with a deductible of €385 (though that keeps going up by around 15 euro each year), where the services of the healthcare provider are provided as part of the insurance (doctor, nurse, surgeon etc.) but the fees paid are for medicines and appliances. But I guess most answering your question aren't in The Netherlands.

    Is that deducible a yearly one? That would come out to nearly $450 US which would be very tough for some people living near or below the poverty line - and tough for others if it's a per procedure kind of thing. In the Netherlands universal system, what happens if people cannot afford the monthly fee or deductible?

    Most people in the US with deductibles would LOVE it if their deductible was ONLY $450. It's well into the thousands for a lot of people here. (And that's also a pretty tiny premium, too. Wish I could get one that low.)

    Oh, absolutely agree!!! If my employer-based insurance's yearly deductible was only $450 and it only cost $100ish per month I'd be super happy! Luckily I get VA care for my most problematic stuff and since I live pretty far from a VA center, I get to use a local doc for general care, but I still pay for additional insurance for anything not service connected and for some medications. I'd be in terrible shape if I didn't have VA care for my knee - they've paid for 4 surgeries, nearly a year of PT, and a whole host of medication and ER visits related to those injuries.

    I was thinking more in terms of people who would otherwise be on medicare/medicade, etc and cannot afford even basic insurance. Does the Netherlands universal healthcare system have a program for those who cannot afford the premium and or deductible? For some reason, I also wasn't sure that it was in fact a yearly deductible. On a co-share basis, that would add up very quickly after a few trips.
  • stealthq
    stealthq Posts: 4,298 Member
    Options
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    There is just ONE reason that healthcare is expensive in the US............................................profit. Until the US becomes a not for profit venture, health care costs for people are just going to keep rising. And really we could have a decent government healthcare system if we diverted money to it. Problem is, taxpayer money is diverted to other profit ventures that benefit people in politics more than it does the people themselves.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    Every healthcare system is for profit. Are you suggesting that bureaucrats work for free?
    Socialized healthcare makes a profit? Military healthcare is for profit? Don't think so.
    You can never have decent healthcare without a motive of profit. This is the primary reason healthcare costs have risen beyond the rest of the consumer index - deliberate insertion of middlemen (government and insurance).
    Lots of countries don't have people pay insurance on healthcare and do just fine. Our own would be health care for the military. I grew up an Air Force brat and even today, my retired parents (both past 85 years old) get great healthcare at NO COST to them.
    If you allowed free market forces to compete then you would not have instances where Epipens rose to prohibitive prices. You would have competitive companies offering products at a reduced price to gain market share. Government is the problem, not the solution.
    Lol, wouldn't that be socialized medicine then? Affordability for ALL and not just the elite? And who's keeping big pharma and insurance companies happy? The people getting their palms greased by them. Health care shouldn't be for capital gain. I've personally worked in it and with people who suffer who busted their *kitten* working for decades only to use their retirement to pay for medical help not covered by insurance (mostly prescriptions drugs).

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png


    Keep in mind that the only difference between 'for profit' and 'not for profit' is that in 'not for profit', money over and beyond the previous fiscal year budget must get put back into the system in the form of increased salaries, research and development, expansion, increased inefficiency, etc.

    In 'for profit' all or some of that money may or may not be distributed to shareholders/owners.

    In both, there is plenty of incentive to take in more money than is required.
  • CSARdiver
    CSARdiver Posts: 6,252 Member
    Options
    stealthq wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    There is just ONE reason that healthcare is expensive in the US............................................profit. Until the US becomes a not for profit venture, health care costs for people are just going to keep rising. And really we could have a decent government healthcare system if we diverted money to it. Problem is, taxpayer money is diverted to other profit ventures that benefit people in politics more than it does the people themselves.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    Every healthcare system is for profit. Are you suggesting that bureaucrats work for free?
    Socialized healthcare makes a profit? Military healthcare is for profit? Don't think so.
    You can never have decent healthcare without a motive of profit. This is the primary reason healthcare costs have risen beyond the rest of the consumer index - deliberate insertion of middlemen (government and insurance).
    Lots of countries don't have people pay insurance on healthcare and do just fine. Our own would be health care for the military. I grew up an Air Force brat and even today, my retired parents (both past 85 years old) get great healthcare at NO COST to them.
    If you allowed free market forces to compete then you would not have instances where Epipens rose to prohibitive prices. You would have competitive companies offering products at a reduced price to gain market share. Government is the problem, not the solution.
    Lol, wouldn't that be socialized medicine then? Affordability for ALL and not just the elite? And who's keeping big pharma and insurance companies happy? The people getting their palms greased by them. Health care shouldn't be for capital gain. I've personally worked in it and with people who suffer who busted their *kitten* working for decades only to use their retirement to pay for medical help not covered by insurance (mostly prescriptions drugs).

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png


    Keep in mind that the only difference between 'for profit' and 'not for profit' is that in 'not for profit', money over and beyond the previous fiscal year budget must get put back into the system in the form of increased salaries, research and development, expansion, increased inefficiency, etc.

    In 'for profit' all or some of that money may or may not be distributed to shareholders/owners.

    In both, there is plenty of incentive to take in more money than is required.

    Which again is why I question the difference between for profit and non-for profit systems. Non-profit organizations are just window dressing and I suppose make those envious of profit feel better...but still remain as profit. It's a ridiculous distinction.
  • jenilla1
    jenilla1 Posts: 11,118 Member
    Options
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    There is just ONE reason that healthcare is expensive in the US............................................profit. Until the US becomes a not for profit venture, health care costs for people are just going to keep rising. And really we could have a decent government healthcare system if we diverted money to it. Problem is, taxpayer money is diverted to other profit ventures that benefit people in politics more than it does the people themselves.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    Every healthcare system is for profit. Are you suggesting that bureaucrats work for free?
    Socialized healthcare makes a profit? Military healthcare is for profit? Don't think so.
    You can never have decent healthcare without a motive of profit. This is the primary reason healthcare costs have risen beyond the rest of the consumer index - deliberate insertion of middlemen (government and insurance).
    Lots of countries don't have people pay insurance on healthcare and do just fine. Our own would be health care for the military. I grew up an Air Force brat and even today, my retired parents (both past 85 years old) get great healthcare at NO COST to them.
    If you allowed free market forces to compete then you would not have instances where Epipens rose to prohibitive prices. You would have competitive companies offering products at a reduced price to gain market share. Government is the problem, not the solution.
    Lol, wouldn't that be socialized medicine then? Affordability for ALL and not just the elite? And who's keeping big pharma and insurance companies happy? The people getting their palms greased by them. Health care shouldn't be for capital gain. I've personally worked in it and with people who suffer who busted their *kitten* working for decades only to use their retirement to pay for medical help not covered by insurance (mostly prescriptions drugs).

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png


    It's rare that someone actually touts the VA as an shining example of socialized medicine, but if that's what you want to hang you hat on - be my guest. I'm a veteran and I should get no cost medical; however the scheduling and waiting lines make full time employment and service from the VA nearly impossible, unless you enjoy 6 months waiting lines.

    Who's keeping big pharma happy? Well first you would have to research the relationship between what the congressional committees allow pharma to charge. A convoluted relationship between market wholesalers, market retailers, insurance companies, hospitals, and any other select buying groups...and of course the government. Pretty simple when you see who's providing the bulk of campaign contributions though.

    Shouldn't is not a rational argument. You are actually making an argument against insurance, not for socialized medicine. Remove insurance, remove government. Unleash the free market and the cost of medicine will return to normal.


    Here's a lovely story highlighting the ultimate outcome of socialized medicine:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40454177

    In summary the bureaucrats decide who lives and who dies. When taken to higher authority the judges at the European Court of Human Rights concluded that further treatment would "continue to cause Charlie significant harm". Regardless of a US physician who has offered an alternative treatment the hospital will not release the child to the parent's custody.

    I think some VA clinics must be more impacted than others, then. Because my husband was able to get his latest appointment within 10 days. That's much faster than the three month wait I had to get an appointment just to see a GP with private insurance.

    I'm not sure the story you brought up about the terminally ill kid is relevant to this thread. Terminally ill patients are allowed to die naturally in non-socialized medical systems, too. This poor kid's parents were grasping at straws to try an experimental treatment that had never been tried before on his condition and that multiple experts agreed would not have reversed his brain damage. So best case scenario, this kid lives longer, but in no better shape than he currently is. How is that a good thing? The potential treatment being offered would not have cured this child, but only "possibly" prolonged his life, while "potentially" causing additional harm/genetic mutations/pain/discomfort to him. IMO, not all medical intervention is a good thing. Sometimes it's best to let nature take it's course. I wouldn't want to be kept alive with a degenerative disorder that has destroyed much of my brain, and caused me to lose all normal functioning with no hope of improvement - only the possibility of living longer in that condition. I feel bad for the parents - no one wants to lose a child - but I can't fault the medical team in this case, and I wouldn't exactly call the doctors caring for him "bureaucrats."

  • CSARdiver
    CSARdiver Posts: 6,252 Member
    Options
    jenilla1 wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    There is just ONE reason that healthcare is expensive in the US............................................profit. Until the US becomes a not for profit venture, health care costs for people are just going to keep rising. And really we could have a decent government healthcare system if we diverted money to it. Problem is, taxpayer money is diverted to other profit ventures that benefit people in politics more than it does the people themselves.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    Every healthcare system is for profit. Are you suggesting that bureaucrats work for free?
    Socialized healthcare makes a profit? Military healthcare is for profit? Don't think so.
    You can never have decent healthcare without a motive of profit. This is the primary reason healthcare costs have risen beyond the rest of the consumer index - deliberate insertion of middlemen (government and insurance).
    Lots of countries don't have people pay insurance on healthcare and do just fine. Our own would be health care for the military. I grew up an Air Force brat and even today, my retired parents (both past 85 years old) get great healthcare at NO COST to them.
    If you allowed free market forces to compete then you would not have instances where Epipens rose to prohibitive prices. You would have competitive companies offering products at a reduced price to gain market share. Government is the problem, not the solution.
    Lol, wouldn't that be socialized medicine then? Affordability for ALL and not just the elite? And who's keeping big pharma and insurance companies happy? The people getting their palms greased by them. Health care shouldn't be for capital gain. I've personally worked in it and with people who suffer who busted their *kitten* working for decades only to use their retirement to pay for medical help not covered by insurance (mostly prescriptions drugs).

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png


    It's rare that someone actually touts the VA as an shining example of socialized medicine, but if that's what you want to hang you hat on - be my guest. I'm a veteran and I should get no cost medical; however the scheduling and waiting lines make full time employment and service from the VA nearly impossible, unless you enjoy 6 months waiting lines.

    Who's keeping big pharma happy? Well first you would have to research the relationship between what the congressional committees allow pharma to charge. A convoluted relationship between market wholesalers, market retailers, insurance companies, hospitals, and any other select buying groups...and of course the government. Pretty simple when you see who's providing the bulk of campaign contributions though.

    Shouldn't is not a rational argument. You are actually making an argument against insurance, not for socialized medicine. Remove insurance, remove government. Unleash the free market and the cost of medicine will return to normal.


    Here's a lovely story highlighting the ultimate outcome of socialized medicine:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40454177

    In summary the bureaucrats decide who lives and who dies. When taken to higher authority the judges at the European Court of Human Rights concluded that further treatment would "continue to cause Charlie significant harm". Regardless of a US physician who has offered an alternative treatment the hospital will not release the child to the parent's custody.

    I think some VA clinics must be more impacted than others, then. Because my husband was able to get his latest appointment within 10 days. That's much faster than the three month wait I had to get an appointment just to see a GP with private insurance.

    I'm not sure the story you brought up about the terminally ill kid is relevant to this thread. Terminally ill patients are allowed to die naturally in non-socialized medical systems, too. This poor kid's parents were grasping at straws to try an experimental treatment that had never been tried before on his condition and that multiple experts agreed would not have reversed his brain damage. So best case scenario, this kid lives longer, but in no better shape than he currently is. How is that a good thing? The potential treatment being offered would not have cured this child, but only "possibly" prolonged his life, while "potentially" causing additional harm/genetic mutations/pain/discomfort to him. IMO, not all medical intervention is a good thing. Sometimes it's best to let nature take it's course. I wouldn't want to be kept alive with a degenerative disorder that has destroyed much of my brain, and caused me to lose all normal functioning with no hope of improvement - only the possibility of living longer in that condition. I feel bad for the parents - no one wants to lose a child - but I can't fault the medical team in this case, and I wouldn't exactly call the doctors caring for him "bureaucrats."

    I can understand why proponents of socialized medicine would want to downplay this story and all others like it. This isn't a matter of being allowed to die - it's one of a bureaucratic panel deciding that a child will die in direct conflict with the wishes of the parents. Of course you wouldn't want to use a term such as bureaucrat as it hurts your narrative. How else would you describe the European Court of Human Rights?

    This isn't about you. Your opinion in this matter is irrelevant, as is mine. The only opinions that matter are that of the parents and the treating physicians, but this is never the case in a socialized structure. What is truly horrific is that the state now refuses to release custody of the parent's child to the parents.

    To be expected as in a socialized system the individual has no unalienable rights. Your rights are those the state allows you to have.

  • jenilla1
    jenilla1 Posts: 11,118 Member
    Options
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    jenilla1 wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    There is just ONE reason that healthcare is expensive in the US............................................profit. Until the US becomes a not for profit venture, health care costs for people are just going to keep rising. And really we could have a decent government healthcare system if we diverted money to it. Problem is, taxpayer money is diverted to other profit ventures that benefit people in politics more than it does the people themselves.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    Every healthcare system is for profit. Are you suggesting that bureaucrats work for free?
    Socialized healthcare makes a profit? Military healthcare is for profit? Don't think so.
    You can never have decent healthcare without a motive of profit. This is the primary reason healthcare costs have risen beyond the rest of the consumer index - deliberate insertion of middlemen (government and insurance).
    Lots of countries don't have people pay insurance on healthcare and do just fine. Our own would be health care for the military. I grew up an Air Force brat and even today, my retired parents (both past 85 years old) get great healthcare at NO COST to them.
    If you allowed free market forces to compete then you would not have instances where Epipens rose to prohibitive prices. You would have competitive companies offering products at a reduced price to gain market share. Government is the problem, not the solution.
    Lol, wouldn't that be socialized medicine then? Affordability for ALL and not just the elite? And who's keeping big pharma and insurance companies happy? The people getting their palms greased by them. Health care shouldn't be for capital gain. I've personally worked in it and with people who suffer who busted their *kitten* working for decades only to use their retirement to pay for medical help not covered by insurance (mostly prescriptions drugs).

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png


    It's rare that someone actually touts the VA as an shining example of socialized medicine, but if that's what you want to hang you hat on - be my guest. I'm a veteran and I should get no cost medical; however the scheduling and waiting lines make full time employment and service from the VA nearly impossible, unless you enjoy 6 months waiting lines.

    Who's keeping big pharma happy? Well first you would have to research the relationship between what the congressional committees allow pharma to charge. A convoluted relationship between market wholesalers, market retailers, insurance companies, hospitals, and any other select buying groups...and of course the government. Pretty simple when you see who's providing the bulk of campaign contributions though.

    Shouldn't is not a rational argument. You are actually making an argument against insurance, not for socialized medicine. Remove insurance, remove government. Unleash the free market and the cost of medicine will return to normal.


    Here's a lovely story highlighting the ultimate outcome of socialized medicine:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40454177

    In summary the bureaucrats decide who lives and who dies. When taken to higher authority the judges at the European Court of Human Rights concluded that further treatment would "continue to cause Charlie significant harm". Regardless of a US physician who has offered an alternative treatment the hospital will not release the child to the parent's custody.

    I think some VA clinics must be more impacted than others, then. Because my husband was able to get his latest appointment within 10 days. That's much faster than the three month wait I had to get an appointment just to see a GP with private insurance.

    I'm not sure the story you brought up about the terminally ill kid is relevant to this thread. Terminally ill patients are allowed to die naturally in non-socialized medical systems, too. This poor kid's parents were grasping at straws to try an experimental treatment that had never been tried before on his condition and that multiple experts agreed would not have reversed his brain damage. So best case scenario, this kid lives longer, but in no better shape than he currently is. How is that a good thing? The potential treatment being offered would not have cured this child, but only "possibly" prolonged his life, while "potentially" causing additional harm/genetic mutations/pain/discomfort to him. IMO, not all medical intervention is a good thing. Sometimes it's best to let nature take it's course. I wouldn't want to be kept alive with a degenerative disorder that has destroyed much of my brain, and caused me to lose all normal functioning with no hope of improvement - only the possibility of living longer in that condition. I feel bad for the parents - no one wants to lose a child - but I can't fault the medical team in this case, and I wouldn't exactly call the doctors caring for him "bureaucrats."

    I can understand why proponents of socialized medicine would want to downplay this story and all others like it. This isn't a matter of being allowed to die - it's one of a bureaucratic panel deciding that a child will die in direct conflict with the wishes of the parents. Of course you wouldn't want to use a term such as bureaucrat as it hurts your narrative. How else would you describe the European Court of Human Rights?

    This isn't about you. Your opinion in this matter is irrelevant, as is mine. The only opinions that matter are that of the parents and the treating physicians, but this is never the case in a socialized structure. What is truly horrific is that the state now refuses to release custody of the parent's child to the parents.

    To be expected as in a socialized system the individual has no unalienable rights. Your rights are those the state allows you to have.

    The treating physicians DID give their opinion and the court upheld it.