Reply With Quote
Maybe because we have better specialists? Not sure what your point is. You can have socialized medicine in order to provide coverage for all people, while still have specialists paid by private grants and research ins utions.
I wonder why he didn't want to use Canada's great socialized health care?
Maybe the waiting list was too long.
http://cbc.qwapi.com/site?t=xncRD1Eb...2gtohw&sid=cbc
Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams is set to undergo heart surgery this week in the United States.
CBC News confirmed Monday that Williams, 60, left the province earlier in the day and will have surgery later in the week.
The premier's office provided few details, beyond confirming that he would have heart surgery and saying that it was not necessarily a routine procedure.
Deputy Premier Kathy Dunderdale is scheduled to hold a news conference Tuesday morning.
She's expected to provide more details about Williams's condition, as well as how the provincial government will function during his absence.
CBC reporter David Cochrane said Williams appeared to be in good health recently. He described the premier as "fairly active," playing pick-up hockey at least once a week when work permits.
Maybe because we have better specialists? Not sure what your point is. You can have socialized medicine in order to provide coverage for all people, while still have specialists paid by private grants and research ins utions.
Darrin, which single payer system is being set up in the US right now?
Free markets for the elite when they need something useful and socialism when they need someone else to be useful. Regimentation for the little people.
I doubt the Prime-Minister would have a problem with the waiting list. Generally, in countries with socialized health-care, waiting lists are just for the common citizen.
Just another example that the same rich people, or those in power who advocate such medical system,s refuse to use them. Must not trust them very well...
Is this quote just Disingenuous...or an outright lie?
I don't think the problem with health care in this county necessarily has to do with quality. I think the problem is access. I'm sure that when one of the Spurs hurts their knees they get doctors who are tops in their fields helping them with treatment. However, we can't use that as an argument that health care in this country is better for the entire county. Same thing goes for the premier of Canada. The problem in this county is that we rely on insurance to cover every facet of treatment, from routine checkups to more complicated issues. So you have a portion of the population who don't have any access to healthcare because of lack of insurance.
To say people don't have any access to healthcare because of lack of insurance...is also incorrect.
"I don't think the problem with health care in this county necessarily has to do with quality."
no, it has to do primarily with with cost (reduction of which the Repugs are blocking), which directly limits access.
The US "free market" for-profit health care has priced itself out of reach of the 50M people (and the health care business people don't ing care, since "care" is not their priority, but "profits"), while creaming $1000/month off the top of the salaries of middle class employees.
So you're saying that the people with insurance are suckers for purchasing insurance when they could get the same care without it?
This is what you said. This is untrue.
Now you want to talk about whether it's the "same" care as others? Did you just not say they "don't have any access?"...when they could get the same care without it?
"people don't have any access to healthcare because of lack of insurance...is also incorrect"
You Lie
We're excluding the irresponsible people who can but don't afford health insurance. I guess you think these people are some kind of hero? But when they have a medical catastrophe, acute or chronic, you/taxpayer end up paying for their health care.
We are talking about the 10s of millions struggling to house/feed/transport themselves from paycheck to paycheck.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 02-03-2010 at 01:50 PM.
Not so, SF. I require 20k worth of infusion therapy every 6 weeks if I wish to remain mobile and productive. Yesterday, I was just informed that my insurance provider now requires $1500 from me for each visit. This is not out of pocket...this is now co-pay. If I weren't putting kids through college, this extra 13k/yr might not be an issue. It sure as is now.
I have insurance and I have access to doctors, but I cannot access my medication anymore.
the only problem your provider has with you is that you're using your insurance.
be proud of USA medical schools you antiamerican bas
You require almost $175K per year in treatment and medication? Holy !
Yup. My pic is on the insurance company's dartboard.
You have access to healthcare...you just don't have all the access you want, and not the money to pay for it all. But, you do have access to doctors and hospitals. What you require just needs ton's of money...a situation that a lot of people can be in.
But the point is...you do have access, as do we all, which is all I pointed out when Mr. Peabody stated people have NO access.
Your particular situation sounds tuff. I'm not in the healthcare business, so I don't know the particulars of your situation, or what to do about it even if I did. I sincerely hope you find a way... maybe there's less expensive alternatives available? Where's there's a will...there can be a way, always.
duh, everyone has access to healthcare. problem is most can't pay for it cause it's ridiculous expensive
Emergency rooms will treat anyone regardless of ability to pay.
If you need highly specialized service, that will cost. The question then becomes...how do we reduce costs. Socialize it, or privatize it?
My contention has always been...costs have went up, the more govt has gotten involved. It's almost always the case, and in almost every scenerio, including healthcare.
When govt gets involved, costs go up, and quality and availability go down. Healthcare is no exception. Do we forego newer technologies and advancements in health care, so as to give everyone govt run healthcare now? Will the govt even pay for the highly specialized treatments some need now?
The ed up thing about this line of thinking is, without access to proper medication, then one does not have access to healthcare. They have access to doctors. Healtcare and doctors are often the same thing. Sometimes they are not.
I was in the healtcare business for about 11 years...in the pharmaceutical pricing and contracting side of it. That's a whole 'nother can of worms, but suffice it to say, my meds don't cost 20k. But that's what my insurance company pays. Of course they also receive "rebates" from the ers that made the meds, so the true cost is largely unknown.
My Rheumatologist is busy looking at alternative treatment scenario's that my insurance company hasn't ed with.
Exactly. I have access to gold. Paying for it...not so much.
I understand the roots of your contention, but that's just not true. I administered the pharmaceutical contracts for the VA and the DOD for quite awhile. They get the best pricing, period. They get it by playing thermonuclear hardball with the pharmaceutical companies. If one of the companies steps out of line in their pricing commitments, then the VA will pick one of their really expensive drugs and place it on contract for $1 until the drug company corrects itself.
Teysha, you are far more patient and kind with SF in this area than I could ever be. I am sorry that you are in the situation you are in.I understand the roots of your contention, but that's just not true. I administered the pharmaceutical contracts for the VA and the DOD for quite awhile. They get the best pricing, period. They get it by playing thermonuclear hardball with the pharmaceutical companies. If one of the companies steps out of line in their pricing commitments, then the VA will pick one of their really expensive drugs and place it on contract for $1 until the drug company corrects itself.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
