Guest guest Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 If its anything like Medicare, perhaps there are a great many chiropractors who would rather not be in the game at all. The problem: Health Insurance is too expensive and has risen in cost beyond inflation or normal economic fluxuations. Reducing the cost of health insurance while maintaining the quality of care is the solution. I would presume however, that despite affordable rates there will be those who still cannot afford it. Those circumstances such as now should be dealt with on the federal level. The problem today is that we have people that aren't poor enough for those benefits, but don't make enough to cover their family either. Even folks who make good coin are paying too much for health insurance and are being fleeced or choose not to purchase it and pay as they go as it were. Both have a negative effect on the economy. Look, everyone deserves (i know you right wingers love that word) a base level of care. With the amount of Taxes we pay, we should all have some sort of base level of care. Addendums to this could be purchased from private insurance companies who have prices regulated by the Man to assure against price gouging. CEO's of Health insurance companies are some of the richest people in the world. Is that ethical given the state of the union on this issue? Perhaps we don't need Government health care as much as we need Government intervention to LOWER PRICES. ph Medlin D.C.Spine Tree Chiropracticwww.spinetreepdx.com RE: National Health Care Hi All, Oh, I don't look forward to Government run programs! They do fulfill Mark Twain's statement that "Every time man tries to improve things all he does is mess up the premises." Whether we want national health care or BillaryCare or British (stiff upper lip) health care is not an issue. Something is coming. I've been monitoring several groups from Archimedes run by our ex-gov to a national group called Physicians for a National Health Program www.pnhp.org. Everyone on that board is an MD or a M.P.H. (there's even one deceased member!). They are leading the charge from the medical side. We must be proactive and positive rather than drag our heels. National Health Care is going to happen and if we are not represented, we won't be in the game. Just like Vern always recommends, stop complaining, roll up your sleeves and get to work to include us in the dialogue. IMHO Christian Mathisen, DC 3654 S Pacific Hwy Medford, OR cmathdcjeffnet (DOT) org Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 1. “... we need Government intervention to LOWER PRICES” Answer: Jimmy pr0ice caps on gas caused massive lines at the pumps. When Reagan removed the price caps the lines went away. Economists understand why, we rarely do. Part of the reason is that gas companies were less motivated to make and sell gas here. Mean, self serving turds that they are. Of course when American’s got some reprieve on prices, they quit conserving. Lazy self absorbed turds that they are. The price cap on Medicare payment has caused many of us to refuse to participate. In the big picture, this would cause lines at the doctor if they all used chiropractic. 2. “... everyone deserves deserve a base level of health care.” I had 4 roommates in college. One of them was always “over extended”. When we would go to the river, he never had any money for snacks or beer. We always had to feed him for the same reason: “everyone deserves a base level of food and beer”. After our last trip, his body floated up a few days later. Just kidding. ( E. Abrahamson, D.C.) Chiropractic physician Lake Oswego Chiropractic Clinic 315 Second Street Lake Oswego, OR 97034 503-635-6246 Website: http://www.lakeoswegochiro.com From: joe medlin <spinetree@...> Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 09:53:44 -0800 Oregon Chiropractors < >, Christian Mathisen <cmathdc@...> Subject: Re: RE: National Health Care If its anything like Medicare, perhaps there are a great many chiropractors who would rather not be in the game at all. The problem: Health Insurance is too expensive and has risen in cost beyond inflation or normal economic fluxuations. Reducing the cost of health insurance while maintaining the quality of care is the solution. I would presume however, that despite affordable rates there will be those who still cannot afford it. Those circumstances such as now should be dealt with on the federal level. The problem today is that we have people that aren't poor enough for those benefits, but don't make enough to cover their family either. Even folks who make good coin are paying too much for health insurance and are being fleeced or choose not to purchase it and pay as they go as it were. Both have a negative effect on the economy. Look, everyone deserves (i know you right wingers love that word) a base level of care. With the amount of Taxes we pay, we should all have some sort of base level of care. Addendums to this could be purchased from private insurance companies who have prices regulated by the Man to assure against price gouging. CEO's of Health insurance companies are some of the richest people in the world. Is that ethical given the state of the union on this issue? Perhaps we don't need Government health care as much as we need Government intervention to LOWER PRICES. ph Medlin D.C. Spine Tree Chiropractic www.spinetreepdx.com <http://www.spinetreepdx.com> RE: National Health Care Hi All, Oh, I don't look forward to Government run programs! They do fulfill Mark Twain's statement that " Every time man tries to improve things all he does is mess up the premises. " Whether we want national health care or BillaryCare or British (stiff upper lip) health care is not an issue. Something is coming. I've been monitoring several groups from Archimedes run by our ex-gov to a national group called Physicians for a National Health Program www.pnhp.org <http://www.pnhp.org> . Everyone on that board is an MD or a M.P.H. (there's even one deceased member!). They are leading the charge from the medical side. We must be proactive and positive rather than drag our heels. National Health Care is going to happen and if we are not represented, we won't be in the game. Just like Vern always recommends, stop complaining, roll up your sleeves and get to work to include us in the dialogue. IMHO Christian Mathisen, DC 3654 S Pacific Hwy Medford, OR cmathdc@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 First, allow me to commend your humane gesture of not allowing a mate to go without brew at the river. Secondly, i'd welcome a line. Not sure that we can correlate these caps to those of Gas. Thats another mother. Price cap on Medicare payment is also different than limiting profits of health ins. corps and limiting price gouging. In San Francisco we had rent control. Seemed to work awesome. Landlords of course couldnt raise rates to their liking, but there are things more important than his immediate wealth. ph Medlin D.C.Spine Tree Chiropracticwww.spinetreepdx.com RE: National Health Care Hi All, Oh, I don't look forward to Government run programs! They do fulfill Mark Twain's statement that "Every time man tries to improve things all he does is mess up the premises." Whether we want national health care or BillaryCare or British (stiff upper lip) health care is not an issue. Something is coming. I've been monitoring several groups from Archimedes run by our ex-gov to a national group called Physicians for a National Health Program www.pnhp.org <http://www.pnhp.org> . Everyone on that board is an MD or a M.P.H. (there's even one deceased member!). They are leading the charge from the medical side. We must be proactive and positive rather than drag our heels. National Health Care is going to happen and if we are not represented, we won't be in the game. Just like Vern always recommends, stop complaining, roll up your sleeves and get to work to include us in the dialogue. IMHO Christian Mathisen, DC3654 S Pacific HwyMedford, ORcmathdc@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Thanks for the heads up. I read an article by the CEO of Regence Group (4 non-profit Blue Cross/Blueshild plans). http://www.brainstormnw.com/inthisissue.html Healing Health Care Only a culture shift can cure the crisis By Mark Ganz The guy was desperately trying to make a logical argument for a “cultural shift to cure the Health Care Crisis”. The article didn’t address health but tried to find new ways of looking at sickness, an assumed inevitable condition. He made excellent points about how government’s answer to the problem is more controls (rationing care, controlling outcome data, price capping, etc.), pointing out that controls are what consumers won’t accept in all other areas of their economic lives. They are launching The Aspen Health Stewardship Project. It will be populated by people who were born and raised inside the medical box. It’s as if they are trying to find better ways of sending information without knowledge of the internet. They don’t know what they don’t know; and we can assume that more drugs for more Americans is a given. We must become educated and spread the word about wellness and true health. Most healthcare discussions begin with premises that are questionable (wrong). 1. Because it’s such a big project, it is the government’s job to fix health care being the only entity large enough to fix it. Balderdash. The free market is more powerful and smarter than the government. Not because it gives a dang about ethics or efficiency, but because it has built in checks and balances which force it to be efficient and effective. Not so with government because government gets paid whether it succeeds or fails. 2. We need to help health care because it can’t afford to do it privately. “It” is doing it wrong. Getting a bigger motor to power us up the wrong river is not a good thing. Health care in America is sick care and every year for the last 50 years we have had more drugs and surgery per capita and we are GETTING SICKER. Are we slow learners? We need to change the paradigm to wellness and it is about a 2 year process to even understand if you are studying it. Imagine if you are resisting it. Have you ever tried to explain sexism to someone who didn’t want to quit being sexist? My paradigm shift was completed by attending Chestnut’s wellness certification seminars. It is a scientific approach to understanding wellness and how chiropractic is perfectly suited to deliver it. It caused me to quit managed care and to be inspired to help patients way beyond pain and injuries. I always wanted the passion and certainty to offer aggressive treatment plans to patients regardless of their insurance coverage. I never had the intellectual backup that I needed to sell it to myself. Chestnut’s compilation of information from current scientific research did the trick. The old saying goes, “When the student is ready, the teacher arrives.” He arrived for me and I will be ever grateful. I hope everyone here considers attending. https://www.thewellnesspractice.com/wellnesscertification.cfm Portland, Oregon Module 1 - Mar 8-9 - Dr Chestnut Module 2 - May 31--Jun 1 - Dr Chestnut Module 3 - Sept 13-14 - Dr. Baxter Module 4 - Oct 18-19 - Dr. Baxter ( E. Abrahamson, D.C.) Chiropractic physician Lake Oswego Chiropractic Clinic 315 Second Street Lake Oswego, OR 97034 503-635-6246 Website: http://www.lakeoswegochiro.com From: Christian Mathisen <cmathdc@...> Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 08:29:47 -0800 Oregon Chiropractors < > Subject: RE: National Health Care Hi All, Oh, I don't look forward to Government run programs! They do fulfill Mark Twain's statement that " Every time man tries to improve things all he does is mess up the premises. " Whether we want national health care or BillaryCare or British (stiff upper lip) health care is not an issue. Something is coming. I've been monitoring several groups from Archimedes run by our ex-gov to a national group called Physicians for a National Health Program www.pnhp.org <http://www.pnhp.org> . Everyone on that board is an MD or a M.P.H. (there's even one deceased member!). They are leading the charge from the medical side. We must be proactive and positive rather than drag our heels. National Health Care is going to happen and if we are not represented, we won't be in the game. Just like Vern always recommends, stop complaining, roll up your sleeves and get to work to include us in the dialogue. IMHO Christian Mathisen, DC 3654 S Pacific Hwy Medford, OR cmathdc@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 If people are going to ride on society's dime then it should be the choice of last resort not the first. Go sit outside a welfare office and watch the cars that come in. I've seen some decent autos with nice fancy rims more than once. People are fools with their money and when all of their money runs out, they want someone else's. I would gladly give every hard luck case assistance provided the iPhone, TiVo, jacked up truck or tricked out car with rims, and plasma TV need to go first. The line between basic necessities and wants is far too blurry. , DC, DABCO > > If its anything like Medicare, perhaps there are a great many chiropractors who would rather not be in the game at all. > > The problem: Health Insurance is too expensive and has risen in cost beyond inflation or normal economic fluxuations. Reducing the cost of health insurance while maintaining the quality of care is the solution. > I would presume however, that despite affordable rates there will be those who still cannot afford it. Those circumstances such as now should be dealt with on the federal level. The problem today is that we have people that aren't poor enough for those benefits, but don't make enough to cover their family either. Even folks who make good coin are paying too much for health insurance and are being fleeced or choose not to purchase it and pay as they go as it were. Both have a negative effect on the economy. > > Look, everyone deserves (i know you right wingers love that word) a base level of care. With the amount of Taxes we pay, we should all have some sort of base level of care. Addendums to this could be purchased from private insurance companies who have prices regulated by the Man to assure against price gouging. > > CEO's of Health insurance companies are some of the richest people in the world. Is that ethical given the state of the union on this issue? Perhaps we don't need Government health care as much as we need Government intervention to LOWER PRICES. > > > ph Medlin D.C. > Spine Tree Chiropractic > www.spinetreepdx.com > RE: National Health Care > > > > Hi All, > > Oh, I don't look forward to Government run programs! They do fulfill Mark Twain's statement that " Every time man tries to improve things all he does is mess up the premises. " > > Whether we want national health care or BillaryCare or British (stiff upper lip) health care is not an issue. Something is coming. I've been monitoring several groups from Archimedes run by our ex-gov to a national group called Physicians for a National Health Program www.pnhp.org. Everyone on that board is an MD or a M.P.H. (there's even one deceased member!). They are leading the charge from the medical side. > > We must be proactive and positive rather than drag our heels. National Health Care is going to happen and if we are not represented, we won't be in the game. Just like Vern always recommends, stop complaining, roll up your sleeves and get to work to include us in the dialogue. > > IMHO > > Christian Mathisen, DC > 3654 S Pacific Hwy > Medford, OR > cmathdc@... > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2008 Report Share Posted February 21, 2008 Hi Geoff, >In order for >nationalized health care, also know as single-payer health care, to >work, it is necessary to outlaw private health care, meaning you >give up your freedom to step outside the national system. Actually, this isn't entirely true. As a dual national, I've lived in both UK and Canada and having a nationalized health care system doesn't preclude the right to also take out private health insurance, if one wishes. In UK, BUPA, for instance, is one such option. http://www.bupa.co.uk/ I've lived in UK, Canada and the US. If I were to compare systems, I'd have to say I prefer nationalised health care in spite of its warts. Although taxes are higher (people adjust and are accustomed to different living standards - gas prices are also twice as expensive in the UK, too, but people still own cars - they are just compact cars), the hospitals aren't as shiny, equipment may be thin on the ground and there are wait-lists for elective surgery...however, no one is left without skilled, adequate healthcare or has to worry about how to afford their medications - no one is refused emergency treatment. The stories one hears here in the US of people who can't afford treatment or are refused treatment by their carriers when they are seriously ill is just unfathomable. Dolores - when you had your UTI, you should have flown to the UK! As a visitor, you'd be treated immediately at no cost to you. Peace, Maz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2008 Report Share Posted February 21, 2008 hi group...I vote with Ute as if we get into political discussions, no one is going to change anyone else's mind and it's more beneficial if we stick to our " health issues " and help each other. Judy **************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/ 2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2008 Report Share Posted February 21, 2008 Thank you Geoff for educating us on the National Health Care. I personally am very scared of the agenda set forth by 2 polititions. I will not get into politics, however, we all need to read and educate ourselves so we do not become a socialist country. I want to be able to choose my doctor and see her/him as fast as possible. Again, thanks Geoff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2008 Report Share Posted February 21, 2008 Hi Friends, Can we take the political discussion to another forum? Discussions about politics, and religion for that matter, always are divisive here and people start flaming each other and bitter feelings are generated. Let's stick with AP and respect our differences. Take care, Ute Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2008 Report Share Posted February 21, 2008 I lived in Germany under the nationalized health care system. One could choose any licensed doctor. There was usually a waiting line for the " socialized " insured but patients with private co-insurance were treated preferentially. The system isn't perfect but is definitely better than our setup in the US. If you have money, as usually, your are first class but anybody else at least had a safety net. What bothered me more, was that too many patients would run to the doctor for every little bit since it did not cost extra. Most of the prescribed medicine of those patients was used very little and thrown away, as with most free things. Since there are so many aspects for and against socialized medicine, it is hard to come up with a desicion. momazmat@... wrote: > > Hi Geoff, > > >In order for > >nationalized health care, also know as single-payer health care, to > >work, it is necessary to outlaw private health care, meaning you > >give up your freedom to step outside the national system. > > Actually, this isn't entirely true. As a dual national, I've lived in > both UK > and Canada and having a nationalized health care system doesn't > preclude the > right to also take out private health insurance, if one wishes. In UK, > BUPA, > for instance, is one such option. > > http://www.bupa.co.uk/ <http://www.bupa.co.uk/> > > I've lived in UK, Canada and the US. If I were to compare systems, I'd > have > to say I prefer nationalised health care in spite of its warts. > Although taxes > are higher (people adjust and are accustomed to different living > standards - > gas prices are also twice as expensive in the UK, too, but people > still own > cars - they are just compact cars), the hospitals aren't as shiny, > equipment may > be thin on the ground and there are wait-lists for elective > surgery...however, > no one is left without skilled, adequate healthcare or has to worry > about how > to afford their medications - no one is refused emergency treatment. The > stories one hears here in the US of people who can't afford treatment > or are > refused treatment by their carriers when they are seriously ill is just > unfathomable. > > Dolores - when you had your UTI, you should have flown to the UK! As a > visitor, you'd be treated immediately at no cost to you. > > Peace, Maz > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2008 Report Share Posted February 21, 2008 Thank you for saying so, Ute. I totally agree, and am disappointed in the original email, and the view that national healthcare represents a socialist society. Not even close. Amy Ute wrote: > > Hi Friends, > Can we take the political discussion to another forum? Discussions about > politics, and religion for that matter, always are divisive here and > people > start flaming each other and bitter feelings are generated. Let's stick > with AP and respect our differences. > Take care, > Ute > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2008 Report Share Posted February 21, 2008 Hi Maz, Thanks, If only I had known.---Dolores momazmat@... wrote: Hi Geoff, >In order for >nationalized health care, also know as single-payer health care, to >work, it is necessary to outlaw private health care, meaning you >give up your freedom to step outside the national system. Actually, this isn't entirely true. As a dual national, I've lived in both UK and Canada and having a nationalized health care system doesn't preclude the right to also take out private health insurance, if one wishes. In UK, BUPA, for instance, is one such option. http://www.bupa.co.uk/ I've lived in UK, Canada and the US. If I were to compare systems, I'd have to say I prefer nationalised health care in spite of its warts. Although taxes are higher (people adjust and are accustomed to different living standards - gas prices are also twice as expensive in the UK, too, but people still own cars - they are just compact cars), the hospitals aren't as shiny, equipment may be thin on the ground and there are wait-lists for elective surgery...however, no one is left without skilled, adequate healthcare or has to worry about how to afford their medications - no one is refused emergency treatment. The stories one hears here in the US of people who can't afford treatment or are refused treatment by their carriers when they are seriously ill is just unfathomable. Dolores - when you had your UTI, you should have flown to the UK! As a visitor, you'd be treated immediately at no cost to you. Peace, Maz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2008 Report Share Posted February 21, 2008 Isn't there another forum for political commentary? IMO this isn't the place for it. Sue rheumatic National Health Care Isn't it terrible how we have lost unions. You would think that people would get it that pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies are about raking in obscene amounts of money, IMO. > You can thank our unions for one person digging the hole and the rest > watching. > > Sue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2008 Report Share Posted February 21, 2008 I agree with the list member who said that this IS an appropriate topic because it is about health. My doctor (Not Whitman but the one I saw before him) told me that he was now for single payer because he had seen too many people with RA or other diseases who had insurance but not enough insurance to continue seeing him or go to a specialist or pay for the medications they needed. You know, of all the many countries that have not-for-profit national health insurance the UK is one of the few that is actually " socialized medicine " since that term means that doctors work for the state, hospitals are owned by the state, etc. In France, Japan, Italy, Germany, etc., healthcare is for the most part publicly funded and it is privately delivered (which means the patient goes to any doctor he chooses). And from what I gather some of these systems are much better than others. Some have a lot of technology, some have no waits, in some you can also buy private insurance and in some you can't, etc. According to the World Health Organization, France is #1m Italy is #2, Japan, Norway, and Austria are in the top ten, the UK is 17th and Canada 30th. The UK and Canada have slipped from years past because they are underfunded. I don't remember where Australia Is, but most are ranked higher than ours--the US is #37 (just above Cuba) though it spends on average twice as much per patient.) With so many health problems, I am terrified of not being able to afford drs and meds. I am on Medicare now (and fortunately can afford the premiums), but my meds, which I get through my pension, are shaky. That is, we keeping hearing we could lose them. I know I could probably afford Minocin from Canada, but certainly it would be hard to have to buy it here in the states. And friends on Plan D tell me that it is horrible, so they must try to get everything from Canada. On Feb 21, 2008, at 5:57 PM, Wiesboeck wrote: > I lived in Germany under the nationalized health care system. One > could > choose any licensed doctor. There was usually > a waiting line for the " socialized " insured but patients with private > co-insurance were treated preferentially. > The system isn't perfect but is definitely better than our setup in > the > US. If you have money, as usually, your are first class > but anybody else at least had a safety net. > What bothered me more, was that too many patients would run to the > doctor for every little bit since it did not cost extra. > Most of the prescribed medicine of those patients was used very little > and thrown away, as with most free things. > > Since there are so many aspects for and against socialized > medicine, it > is hard to come up with a desicion. > > > momazmat@... wrote: > > > > Hi Geoff, > > > > >In order for > > >nationalized health care, also know as single-payer health care, to > > >work, it is necessary to outlaw private health care, meaning you > > >give up your freedom to step outside the national system. > > > > Actually, this isn't entirely true. As a dual national, I've > lived in > > both UK > > and Canada and having a nationalized health care system doesn't > > preclude the > > right to also take out private health insurance, if one wishes. > In UK, > > BUPA, > > for instance, is one such option. > > > > http://www.bupa.co.uk/ <http://www.bupa.co.uk/> > > > > I've lived in UK, Canada and the US. If I were to compare > systems, I'd > > have > > to say I prefer nationalised health care in spite of its warts. > > Although taxes > > are higher (people adjust and are accustomed to different living > > standards - > > gas prices are also twice as expensive in the UK, too, but people > > still own > > cars - they are just compact cars), the hospitals aren't as shiny, > > equipment may > > be thin on the ground and there are wait-lists for elective > > surgery...however, > > no one is left without skilled, adequate healthcare or has to worry > > about how > > to afford their medications - no one is refused emergency > treatment. The > > stories one hears here in the US of people who can't afford > treatment > > or are > > refused treatment by their carriers when they are seriously ill > is just > > unfathomable. > > > > Dolores - when you had your UTI, you should have flown to the UK! > As a > > visitor, you'd be treated immediately at no cost to you. > > > > Peace, Maz > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Sad stories......all worthy of much compassion, including my own, but not including my hard earned dollars. Certainly not more for those who clearly cannot manage them. Bottom line is.....my family's my priority and as long as voters (like me) who have some satisfaction with their family's health insurance arrangement far outnumber those who lack any satisfaction, Congress will not be impelled to thwart those groups that profit financially from the current arrangement. rheumatic From: martysfolks2004@... Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 20:42:54 -0800 Subject: Re: rheumatic National Health Care Hi , You can replace a car! What about a child? If one dies, do you just go make another one? Have we, as a nation become that calloused? If so, we really are in trouble! Not only is our health care system broken, but so is our spirit! Dolores Beckman <beckman5@...> wrote: Instead of arguing with Jeff's figures, I will talk about the insured. Anyone that has seen " Sicko " (whatever excesses that movie has, it's really good on its main message) knows that insurance companies make money when they turn people down, so people are denied coverage for tests they need, procedures deemed too " experimental, " and often have policies that their buyers don't understand the consequences of when they get it. My son in law had to fight for a year with his insurance company because he had a heart attack in Boston and received heart surgery there, but his insurance company, an HMO, thought he should have had that surgery in New York City, where he was to go to only certain doctors and hospitals. My own son and his wife had to have their baby induced because he insurance, which she had as a graduate student, was ending when she got her M.A., yet the baby was due a week later. As mentioned earlier, my doctor told me of a woman who bought insurance didn't realize it would not cover all her medical needs and found it didn't cover the expenses involved in treating her RA. I hear from a friend that her son who has Obsessive Compulsive Disorder has no insurance so has had to get off his meds, so she is looking for a job at 70 since her social security check is not enough to cover his medications. We need not just National Health Insurance but an excellent, well-funded system that would meet our needs. It would be good for business too, since we can't compete with other countries whose employers don't have to pay health benefits. On Feb 22, 2008, at 10:33 AM, Jeffery wrote: > > Broken??? My car's broken, but it get's me back and forth, does > what I > need it to do, so I maintain realistic expectations and don't spend my > money on a new one, or at least until AAA gets wise to me. > > The number of uninsured in the US that is consistently quoted is 47 > million (the Census Bureau report �Income, Poverty, and Health > Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2005,� puts the initial > number of uninsured people > living in the country at 46.577 million). The same report notes that > 9.487 mil are non-citizens; 8.3 mil earn between 50 - 75K annually > (median income is $46,326); 8.74 mil earn >75,000K. So, that's > about 17 mil that with responsible budgeting should be able to afford > SOME health care insurance. Another 4 mil are between the ages 17 and > 22, and either receive basic health care on campus through their > college tuition enrollment or they are still on their parents plan > because they live at home and attend school. That leaves about 16 mil > or about 6% of the population who earn <50K and may have trouble > buying insurance. Also in the same report.....45% if those w/o > insurance are w/o for <4 months (i.e. between jobs, budget tight, > etc.). 60% of those w/o report being in very good or excellent > health. > Crisis??? > > rheumatic > From: martysfolks2004@... > Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 21:28:57 -0800 > Subject: Re: rheumatic National Health Care > The heading says " National Health Care " not Political > Commentaries. Fortunately, we are supposed to be a Democracy where > the people rule. Let's get together as a nation of people who > would like to see our " Health Care System Fixed " It's broken. > Don't allow politics or religion to blur the importance of our > message here. It is " National Health Care " . Dolores > Sue Emrick wrote: Isn't there another > forum for political commentary? > > IMO this isn't the place for it. > Sue > > rheumatic National Health Care >Isn't it terrible how we have lost unions. You would think that people > would get it that pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies > are about >raking in obscene amounts of money, IMO. > > You can thank our unions for one person digging the hole and the rest >watching. >Sue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2008 Report Share Posted February 23, 2008 I have not seen " Sicko, " but I am so frustrated with our medical system and chronic illness and people turning a blind eye to everything around them. The trend of thought in Western culture is to ignore the negative, and chronic illness is negative. And doctors need to turn a profit, and they have to shuffle more and more people through the surgery/medical gates in order to make the same money they did before. I try to figure it out in my mind, but I can't. My latest horror has been looking at factory farms, and the cruelty is despicable. Once again, however, people turn a blind eye because everyone thinks, " What can I, as one person, do about it? " And, the factory farmers squeeze more and more animals into despicable, nasty conditions, because they need nore money to turn a profit. Then our food source becomes bloated with hormones and sickness and antibiotics. Our food is sick, we are sick, and everyone is trying to make more money. Excuse me for ranting. I just want the world to be a kinder, gentler place, and it isn't. I just guess, since we all know that life is short, we all look at everything through colored glasses. We keep " our separate worlds " as clean and rosy as our self-imposed ignorance will allow. **************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/ 2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2008 Report Share Posted February 23, 2008 It's kinda surprising that one who belongs to the rheumatic group has this view. Our disease is degenerative & disabling... will kill us. It's those who get very sick who have the biggest risk, even with the best insurance plans. Then, we must have big funds to go outside of insurance plans, or must go along with death sentences of some of the mainstream doctors who throw up their hands. Many of the specialty doctors will not work with insurance providers. I get the feeling you've not had this experience. Should you become disabled, unable to work (incl retired), then your income & doctor choices are locked. There are a LOT of people in this category. I know you don't care, & this is your prerogative. But you should know that these scenarios are very real, are frequent, because I see them in my job, and in my personal life. Amy Jeffery wrote: > > > Sad stories......all worthy of much compassion, including my own, but > not including my hard earned dollars. Certainly not more for those who > clearly cannot manage them. Bottom line is.....my family's my priority > and as long as voters (like me) who have some satisfaction with their > family's health insurance arrangement far outnumber those who lack any > satisfaction, Congress will not be impelled to thwart those groups > that profit financially from the current arrangement. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2008 Report Share Posted February 23, 2008 Also, did you realize that with most jobs as soon as you get sick and go on disability, you lose your health benefits? Sure you can get COBRA for a while, but you now have a preexisting conditions and no income. **************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/ 2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2008 Report Share Posted February 23, 2008 As someone who is very ill and has awful insurance I just don't want to go from bad to worse. In my view the government doesn't get much right, why would one assume they could do a better job with health care? My fear is that without profit, options and alternatives would be non-existent. Sue Re: rheumatic National Health Care It's kinda surprising that one who belongs to the rheumatic group has this view. Our disease is degenerative & disabling... will kill us. It's those who get very sick who have the biggest risk, even with the best insurance plans. Then, we must have big funds to go outside of insurance plans, or must go along with death sentences of some of the mainstream doctors who throw up their hands. Many of the specialty doctors will not work with insurance providers. I get the feeling you've not had this experience. Should you become disabled, unable to work (incl retired), then your income & doctor choices are locked. There are a LOT of people in this category. I know you don't care, & this is your prerogative. But you should know that these scenarios are very real, are frequent, because I see them in my job, and in my personal life. Amy Jeffery wrote: > > > Sad stories......all worthy of much compassion, including my own, but > not including my hard earned dollars. Certainly not more for those who > clearly cannot manage them. Bottom line is.....my family's my priority > and as long as voters (like me) who have some satisfaction with their > family's health insurance arrangement far outnumber those who lack any > satisfaction, Congress will not be impelled to thwart those groups > that profit financially from the current arrangement. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2008 Report Share Posted February 23, 2008 I wouldn't argue with your point about the government not doing a better job with health care. Also, I don't know that a government health plan will help people like us! I'm not interested in the healthy. I'm interested in the poor and the sick. Poor & sick are truly are the ones who need help the most. We are a minority, and as Jeff suggests, will probably not get that help. Incidentally, one thought is that a government mandate or health coverage doesn't mean that the government will be the providers directly. The other thought I have is if I could consider the government as my own pocket book, I would rather spend the money on health and education, rather the huge spending choices made by the government in recent years. Amy Sue Emrick wrote: > > As someone who is very ill and has awful insurance I just don't want > to go from bad to worse. In my view the government doesn't get much > right, why would one assume they could do a better job with health > care? My fear is that without profit, options and alternatives would > be non-existent. > > Sue > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2008 Report Share Posted February 23, 2008 Amy, A government health system is for everyone, so especially for the poor and the sick. The well-to-do are fine in America in terms of healthcare. If we had national health care, it would be like Medicare for All, but paid for by taxes, not premiums. It would not involve insurance companies at all. There has been a bill in Congress calling for single payer healthcare for all Americans since 2005--stalled. It was sponsored by Rep. Conyers from Illinois, and if you read it, you'll think it promises heaven on earth. Only the funding would change (and the struggle of patients to pay)--we would still choose our own doctors. Physicians would NOT work for the state (they do in the UK, but not in Canada or most countries that have such a system). Since this is earth, I am sure we'd have to struggle to make sure it was good--well funded and so on--but you've seen what the list members from Canada, Australia, and UK think of their systems. They all like them! Every advanced country in the world has one, except us, and we spend twice as much on health care than any other country. Yet when the World Health Organization ranked the healthcare offered in every country in terms of quality (in 2000) by such measures as average age at which people die, infant mortality, maternal mortality, etc., the United States was 37th! France was first. On Feb 23, 2008, at 7:25 PM, Amy wrote: > I wouldn't argue with your point about the government not doing a > better > job with health care. Also, I don't know that a government health plan > will help people like us! I'm not interested in the healthy. I'm > interested in the poor and the sick. Poor & sick are truly are the > ones > who need help the most. We are a minority, and as Jeff suggests, will > probably not get that help. > > Incidentally, one thought is that a government mandate or health > coverage doesn't mean that the government will be the providers > directly. The other thought I have is if I could consider the > government as my own pocket book, I would rather spend the money on > health and education, rather the huge spending choices made by the > government in recent years. > > Amy > > Sue Emrick wrote: > > > > As someone who is very ill and has awful insurance I just don't want > > to go from bad to worse. In my view the government doesn't get much > > right, why would one assume they could do a better job with health > > care? My fear is that without profit, options and alternatives would > > be non-existent. > > > > Sue > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 Out of curiosity, it seems you have traveled extensively, what is keeping you here? Sue Re: rheumatic Re: National Health Care Bah! Humbug! We are approaching third world status. Would I exchange? Yes, and there are many ex-pat's who agree. Dolores Judkeels@... wrote: The US is without doubt the greatest nation in the world. Our success is based on principles exemplified by the constitution and, of course, individual ability to be self expressing. We are the richest of all nations and share wealth with our citizens by providing food stamps, free health care to indigents, programs dedicated to support child care, the handicapped, seniors and a numerous host of other welfare, most of which are also offered free or at little cost. In our society everyone has the potential for success if they are willing to do what it takes to become so. Unfortunately, there are those who are unwilling to choose this path and feel that government has the responsibility to provide the platform for more and more " free lunches " . Taking this approach surely will put us on the road to socialism/communism. All for one and one for all in theory may sound good, but it just doesn't work. Taking everything into consideration, would anyone change our US standard of living for any other country's standard of living? I don't think so. As I said last week, none of us will change another's individual convictions, so why don't we stick with our health issues? Judy and **************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/ 2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 How many times have you written to say that we should drop this subject? Amy Sue Emrick wrote: > > Out of curiosity, it seems you have traveled extensively, what is > keeping you here? > > Sue > ----- Origi > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 I haven't kept count, have you? Sue Re: rheumatic Re: National Health Care How many times have you written to say that we should drop this subject? Amy Sue Emrick wrote: > > Out of curiosity, it seems you have traveled extensively, what is > keeping you here? > > Sue > ----- Origi > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 Nope. Just wondering if you mean what you say. I still have plenty to say. But I think Ute is right that we should end the subject. Amy Sue Emrick wrote: > > I haven't kept count, have you? > > Sue > Re: rheumatic Re: National Health Care > > How many times have you written to say that we should drop this subject? > Amy > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.