On Sep 14, 7:35*am, "HeyBub" wrote:
Mark & Juanita wrote:
DGDevin wrote:

Phisherman wrote:

I'm an extreme Libertarian and it is my guess no Libertarian will
support Obama's Health care plan. *It is financially irresponsible.
Government, please get out of my face!!!

So how do you feel about various industries including the health
insurance industry being in your face? *They keep raising the cost
of health insurance
while finding ways to deny coverage to those who need it.

*You do realize that if you don't like one health insurance company,
you are perfectly free to find another, or to lobby your employer to
change insurers -- if enough employees are having problems, your
employer will most likely listen. *If you are denied, nothing stops
you from fighting via the legal system or paying yourself -- that may
lead to indebtedness, but if people are willing to go into debt to
get that flat-screen TV or the newest car, you'd think something that
will save their lives would be viewed as a good investment. *If you
don't like the price, you can shop around -- you'd be surprised the
prices you can get on medical if you pay without insurance -- you
save a lot of paperwork for the doctors. *Do you think those options
would be available if the government runs health care? How many
choices do you have for the motor vehicle department?

i.e, if you can't see the difference between the choices you have now
and a federally mandated, unconstitutional, federally run health
system, there is nothing more that can be discussed.

They manage to
consume 20% of the money they take in for administrative overhead, at
least
several times what it costs in other industrialized nations.
Competition is supposed to drive down prices for consumers, yet the
health insurance industry has achieved the exact opposite. *Did you
know the health care industry shifts about a tenth of what you pay
for health insurance to cover
their costs in treating uninsured patients? *Did you know that
despite spending the most on health care of the 13 wealthiest
nations that life expectancy in America is the lowest of those 13
nations, while infant mortality is the highest?

*Did you know that survival rates from cancer are the highest in the
United States compared to other countries, especially those with
socialized medicine? *That is a much better measure of health system
success than life expectancy since that is driven strongly by
genetics and thus demographics in some of those countries that are
very homogeneous compared to the US. As far as infant mortality, you
also have to examine the definitions that other nations use.

So who, other than the govt., is supposed to do
something about this?

*I'd feel a whole lot better if the government were doing a bang-up
job on the health care programs it already runs. *VA? *Medicare?
Indian Health Service? *Not exactly glowing testimonials. *But if we
give them the whole sector, they'll make it work. *Yeah, I'm
convinced.

Excellent retort. In sum, we spend more per capita than other countries
BECAUSE WE CAN. Other countries spend less than we for a lot of reasons,
chief among them is they don't have the wealth to do so.

A consequence of this deficiency is lowered expectations. Here in the U.S..,
I EXPECT a tooth extraction to involve anesthesia - not so in Britain. Here
I EXPECT an MRI, and possibly surgery, for a torn knee ligament within a few
days* - it's months in other industrialized countries.

----------
* In some, admittedly rare, cases, the MRI diagnosis takes place within
MINUTES of the injury (think professional football). The entire concept of a
portable MRI machine in the locker room, or just down the street, of a
British soccer stadium is so patently absurd as to be laughable.

I will leave you to your illusions and lies while I continue to live a
longer and healthier life without fear of not being able to afford
health care, and while my compatriots get jobs that move out from the
States because employers also can't afford health care.

Luigi