Re: Re: Oregon's Socialized Medical System Won't Fund Drug; Will Fund Suicide

[Guest guest]

I'll take the bait and say that I respectfully disagree with on this.

Since we have a representative form of government, health insurance provided by

the government would be/is what we make it .. assuming we pay attention and

participate. Assuming we have the resources to pay for it, tho ... and if we

don't then a hard rain's gonna fall, and hard choices will be faced ... no

matter the systems, private or government. It's evident that what we can pay to

treat illness depends on the economy and on how well we can address health

services inefficiencies ... If those who have less are excluded (survival of

the fitest), won't those who have means lose too ? ... will companies invest in

development and testing or provide approved treatment for a few?

Don't know if doom and gloom is warranted yet, but mainly, I don't see it as an

either, or, decision ... can't see why people with means can't purchase

supplemental insurance even if government insurance is available to all. Isn't

that what we have now for folks over 65? What we do now is piecemeal and

woefully inefficient. We end up paying for the uninsured anyway, when they get

sick or have accidents, so every working body should be paying into a system

instead of taking a free ride based on the illusion of immortality.

The unbelievable Oregon " policy " is as ridiculous as it is chilling. But I

don't see how it predicts what government-provided insurance would be, or could

be, in the US.

~ Karl

Re: Oregon's Socialized Medical System Won't Fund Drug;

Will Fund Suicide

I've clipped out the bit at the end of this message from .

What I wanted to ask was - is this political bias against socialised

medicine typical of all Americans, or just ?

Americans would be far better served if they has state funded medicine

for all than they are at present, where only the wealthy get what they

need.

Best wishes

Andy

>

> [Chilling. " Recurring " cancer is increasingly not being covered.

> Since CLL patients ALWAYS relapse, this means YOU.

>

> Rationing of care is an integral part of socialized medicine. Health

> care will compete with other government programs such as schools and

> road construction. There will only be a limited amount of money

> available. This is what America is heading for. Now you know.]

>

>

> Oregon Offers to Pay to Kill, but Not to Treat Cancer Patient

>

>etc. etc. etc................................

[Guest guest]

I normally do not write in these forums, but this one I can not stand by since I

strongly disagree with 's comments and my wife is a nurse who works for the

government in a naval hospital.  I can not speak for all nurses and doctors, but

I know my wife works her tail off. 

 I can honestly say there is fear in the unknown of socialized medicine in the

United States, but also there are real major problems with our healthcare system

as it currently stands. It is broken and must be fixed.  One of the main reasons

healthcare is so expensive in the US compared to other countries is from the

uninsursed.  The rest of us are paying for their emergency room visits.  There

is no reason why a surgery in the US should cost ten fold more than in Australia

for the same surgery.  While I do not want an insurance company or a state

medical system telling me what treatments I can and can not use, it is comming

unless things change.  I do not think it will matter who gets elected this fall,

there will be a slight change in our healthcare system.  The question is, do you

fix something that is broken with a band-aid or do you find what works in other

country's and copy their systems?

Budworth, PhD

 

From: S. <scott_fs@...>

Subject: Re: Oregon's Socialized Medical System Won't Fund Drug;

Will Fund Suicide

Date: Friday, August 1, 2008, 10:44 PM

Kurt:

What you fail to realize is that the purchase of private health care

is often illegal, because it would mean that the 'cream of the crop'

would get the private care, and the sickest (such as NHL patients)

would be forced into the state plan.

I'm surprised you would accept the government telling you how to spend

your money. In Canada, it is illegal to pay for health care on your

own.

The idea is this: No one, no matter how rich, should have better

health care than the most despicable, disgusting drunk in the gutter.

When government is the single payer, then suddenly health care becomes

just another budget item, competing with schools, road maintenance,

national defense, flood control, toy safety and the like for a part of

the budget.

If Obama care passed, choices would immediately be restricted.

Already we are seeing that happen in the few states that have tried

socialized medicine; Oregon and Massachusetts to cite two.

With doctors and nurses being lazy governmental employees, there is no

incentive to work hard, because they will get the same pay no matter

how hard they work, nor how lazy they are.

The politicians and bureaucrats will decide what kind and how much

care you will receive. Rituximab, Campath, and a whole host of other

treatments will suddenly be 'too expensive' for the benefit they

provide. Never mind that some patients will live for many years after

taking those drugs. Too bad!

Do you really want the DMV to give you health care?

The bottom line? I have a fatal disease, and I want the best care I

can get. If I didn't have CLL, maybe I'd take my chances. But I see

the limits on CLL drugs in different countries, and I don't want that

to happen here, to me and my fellow CLL patients in the US.

> >

> > [Chilling. " Recurring " cancer is increasingly not being covered.

> > Since CLL patients ALWAYS relapse, this means YOU.

> >

> > Rationing of care is an integral part of socialized medicine. Health

> > care will compete with other government programs such as schools and

> > road construction. There will only be a limited amount of money

> > available. This is what America is heading for. Now you know.]

> >

> >

> > Oregon Offers to Pay to Kill, but Not to Treat Cancer Patient

> >

> >etc. etc. etc......... ......... ......... .....

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I don't contribute very often either and I don't know if is correct or not

but if socialized medicine is so good, can you explain the following?:

 

-private medical insurance is the most desired benefit in company benefit's

packages in England and has become the most often used enticement to move high

level employees to another employer.

 

-One of the greatest revenue generating " businesses " in New York is heart

surgeries and other medical treatments for Canadians...

 

-Massachusettes is at year 1 with socialized medicine.  At the outset,

Massachusettes had a monetary surplus which would pay for thier new medical

endeavor for 10 years.  After 1 year Massachusettes is close to broke.

 

-While bicycling in Europe, I started asking folks about their socalized

medicine.  Most young folks thought is was good.  Older folks would tell

me, that they had the greatest medical insurance in the world: a plane ticket to

the United States...

 

-Medical treatment in Nova Scotia had become so " thin " that one physician began

treating patients for a very nominal fee and attempted to operate outside of

government's health plan.  The physicain was arrested and brought to court and

the case made its way to the high court which ruled that health care provided by

a " random drawing " wasn't a health plan at all and found in favor of the

physician. 

 

, based on the above I'm not sure what you mean by " works for other

countries " .  

Mark

 

 

 

 

From: S. <scott_fs (DOT) com>

Subject: Re: Oregon's Socialized Medical System Won't Fund Drug;

Will Fund Suicide

Date: Friday, August 1, 2008, 10:44 PM

Kurt:

What you fail to realize is that the purchase of private health care

is often illegal, because it would mean that the 'cream of the crop'

would get the private care, and the sickest (such as NHL patients)

would be forced into the state plan.

I'm surprised you would accept the government telling you how to spend

your money. In Canada, it is illegal to pay for health care on your

own.

The idea is this: No one, no matter how rich, should have better

health care than the most despicable, disgusting drunk in the gutter.

When government is the single payer, then suddenly health care becomes

just another budget item, competing with schools, road maintenance,

national defense, flood control, toy safety and the like for a part of

the budget.

If Obama care passed, choices would immediately be restricted.

Already we are seeing that happen in the few states that have tried

socialized medicine; Oregon and Massachusetts to cite two.

With doctors and nurses being lazy governmental employees, there is no

incentive to work hard, because they will get the same pay no matter

how hard they work, nor how lazy they are.

The politicians and bureaucrats will decide what kind and how much

care you will receive. Rituximab, Campath, and a whole host of other

treatments will suddenly be 'too expensive' for the benefit they

provide. Never mind that some patients will live for many years after

taking those drugs. Too bad!

Do you really want the DMV to give you health care?

The bottom line? I have a fatal disease, and I want the best care I

can get. If I didn't have CLL, maybe I'd take my chances. But I see

the limits on CLL drugs in different countries, and I don't want that

to happen here, to me and my fellow CLL patients in the US.

> >

> > [Chilling. " Recurring " cancer is increasingly not being covered.

> > Since CLL patients ALWAYS relapse, this means YOU.

> >

> > Rationing of care is an integral part of socialized medicine. Health

> > care will compete with other government programs such as schools and

> > road construction. There will only be a limited amount of money

> > available. This is what America is heading for. Now you know.]

> >

> >

> > Oregon Offers to Pay to Kill, but Not to Treat Cancer Patient

> >

> >etc. etc. etc......... ......... ......... .....

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Oregon's physician assisted suicide law - which I certainly wouldn't call

government subsidized - has been an unqualified success. Contrary to the dire

predictions of the religious right, very few people availed themselves of the

opportunity to end their lives and those who did, saved themselves a great deal

of unnecessary agony.

The success of the Oregon law has prompted voters in Washington state to put a

similar initiative on the ballot. The campaign is led by former Washington

governor, Booth Gardner, and I hope it will become law come November.

Andy Gach

Re: Oregon's Socialized Medical System Won't Fund Drug;

Will Fund Suicide

Well put, Karl!

It's important to note in the article, that mostly the references to

physician assisted suicide being paid for simply said the person

was " eligible " , not that the Health Service offered to pay for it

contemporaneously with the denial of the service. I seriously doubt

that actually happens -- this would be one for Snopes.com.

Some deaths can be excruciatingly painful, so I am glad that Oregon

has shown leadership in area of physician assisted suicide. The last

I heard civilization had not collapsed there.

Toby

Portland, ME

SLL/CLL (07/99)

> >

> > [Chilling. " Recurring " cancer is increasingly not being

covered.

> > Since CLL patients ALWAYS relapse, this means YOU.

> >

> > Rationing of care is an integral part of socialized medicine.

Health

> > care will compete with other government programs such as

schools and

> > road construction. There will only be a limited amount of money

> > available. This is what America is heading for. Now you know.]

> >

> >

> > Oregon Offers to Pay to Kill, but Not to Treat Cancer Patient

> >

> >etc. etc. etc................................

>

>

>

>

>

>