Should the US have a national health service?

Misbehaving soldiers? Nothing is a clearer indicator of the state of a country's military than the disipline of it's members.

Our soldiers misbehave themselves??

Yes, there are a few instances of that. But only a few.

And that is not why the U.S. gets crap from other countries.

The U.S. gets crap from other countries that accuse us of sticking our nose in where it doesn't belong. We got crap for going into Bosnia and Somalia. Where was Canada when we were trying to get rid of Hitler II, Milosevic?

same place the states were, just not raping the civvies

Ian speaks the truth. Canada was involved with that. The American media just doens't tell you. Wants America to take all the glory. Canadian peackeepers are still there.

In fact, Canada invented peacekeeping. Former (then current) Canadian Prime Minister Lester Pearson organized, debated with the UN, and instigated the first peacekeeping operation ever, during the Suez Crisis. Since then, Canada has been involved in EVERY UN peacekeeping operation to ever take place.

We're not doing our part?

On September 11, when the US, who was there? Almost every country in the world expressed sympathies, but only 3 countries actually assisted in the war against terrorism. They are Canada, Britain, and Australia. Of those 3, Canada assisted the most. This wasn't our war, yet we were there. Why weren't you there for us when we supported the European Allies against Nazi Germany, even though that wasn't our war either?

And don't say we were obligated to because of our ties to Britain. By that time, we were completely independant. Nobody made that choice for us.

to get back on target...

I (an american) would be all for socialised health care? why? Because I am a temp, I have temped at one company for 2 years and they won't hire me because they don't want to pay the taxes or the copay on health insurance. Thus my constant interviewing for new jobs.
And from what I can remember from HMO's around here, I still had to wait for doctor approval for specialist visits, and sometimes would have to wait to get an MRI. All systems have red tape..but the system that helps the most people on the lower budget, is the model to go by.

General Warning

1. Stay on topic.
2. Do not post antagonistic statements.
3. The World War II discussion thread is elsewhere.

Sorry, Bane. We all realized we were getting off topic, but emotions were running pretty high in here. It won't happen again.

As an idea, the NHS is a wonderful concept. It gives the average person a safeguard and promise that he/she will recieve treatement without the unnecessary added worry of having the correct insurance and/or having bills to pay.

There are problems involved though. From a British NHS POV, Non essential operations have waiting lists and can be cancelled and granted, if you pay for private healthcare you will be seen quicker. There is also the problem that the population is getting older which in turn will bring added stress to an already overloaded service that is struggling to cope. It only takes a flu epidemic and it is nigh on impossible to get a bed in NHS hospitals - resulting in operation cancellations etc etc....

For all that is wrong with our NHS I still beleive in it with all my heart and think I am lucky to live in a country that offers the service and gives me the choice.

The US should, IMHO, try to have some form of National Health Service available to it's people.

Quite probably. What the heck is the use of private health insurance if a citizen can't afford it? We have public health care in Australia, paid for by taxes, and for the most part, it works well. Certainly, you hear occasional stories of year-long waiting lists and people dying because no beds are available, but that is why public health care peacefully co-exists with private health care. If you can't afford private health cover, you have the public system to fall back on. If you have the money, you can go and get your health care immediately. Oh, and before anyone raises the argument, the waiting lists are only for non-life threatening conditions and transplants due to necessity.

No. Imagine the consequences if the US government became corrupt. Their power would be incredible.

Imagine the consequences if the US government became corrupt.

Too late. The federal government has been corrupt since the times of Andrew Jackson.

--Mr. P

The difference between insurance and public service is that one is a poll tax and one is a fair tax.

Money to pay for hospitals does get taken from the wage-earners, but it is done through income bands, percentages etc to work out how much tax each person has to pay in proportion to their income. There are other types of tax too, I know, and while not as fair as income tax, they are still proportional to the money you spend, or the house you earn, or other criteria. Health insurance, on the other hand, amounts to a poll tax - a flat rate for everyone, irrespective of their ability to pay it.

Here in the UK, everyone who has an illness or an accident is entitled to full medical care in a hospital. In the US, they are entitled to nothing if they have no insurance. They might as well go off and commit suicide, because they damn well won't get treated if they haven't paid the premium (which, incidentally, includes a profit margin for shareholders).

It sickens me that the basic human right to healthcare is denied in the US. In the UK, I would like to see it extended further - I would make personal accident cover a public service so that everyone who has an accident gets financial as well as medical support. There are problems with our health service, no denying it, but in this country if you are seriously ailed you will be seen to. In the US, you had better have money otherwise you're stuck in a rather unpleasant corner. In the UK system, you can still go private if you want to - but the public system ensures decent care and security for everyone.

No. Imagine the consequences if the US government became corrupt. Their power would be incredible.
So you are ok with companies being corrupt?

Corruption is just another aspect of life, like crime, love, and taxes we should just try to have enough checks and balances to minimize the bad and enjoy the good.

I think Ben is worried about the governemnt secretly planting the mark of the beast on peo0le.

What the heck has a government being corrupt got to do with public health care? The argument could made that forcing people to pay for health care or go without violates the constitutional rights of citizens life, liberty and all the other baloney. I'mnot about to go into, but I've raised the point, so you're all free argue.

A corrupt government is better than rule by businesses. The World Trade Organisation wishes to police the new trade protocols with a commission made up entirely of business executives with the power to arbitrarily fine governments. If business executives having the power to take taxpayers money away in financial penalties isn't disgraceful, I don't know what is.

Britain was about to be over-run be the Germans. The British troops were almost surrounded by the Germans when the U.S. came in and saved them.

I know this is off-topic, but do you remember a little something called the Battle of Britain? The U.K. had air superiority over the Germans long before America entered WWII.

As for the healthcare issue, America has a great system if you're rich or have insurance, but not so great if you don't.
Or, as Homer said:

"America's public health system is second only to Canada, Sweeden, Great Britain . . . well pretty much all of Europe."

I hate America's medical system, but it will never change because there's too much money changing hands, and citizens aren't benefitting only businesses. Did any of you know that a lot of the prescription medication Americans help create through the tax dollars for research ends up in many other countries selling for sometimes 1/3 of the price they sell it here in the good 'ol USofA?

I've lived without health care for a very long time now. I have asthma, and I really should see a doctor, but I can't get health insurance, so I have a relative who owns a free clinic send me the inhalers I need. If you get insurance through an employer, your premiums and copay are often much less, but the price is tripled if you try to get health coverage independently. It's insane.

On the other side of the coin, my mother is from Newfoundland, and her siblings were discussing their health care system the last time I was there. Not a single one of them has had to wait for emergency surgery, or longer than an hour to see a doctor. They never have any problem getting what they need, and the doctors always listen to what my family says and take time. The last time I saw a doctor that wasn't working out of a free clinic, he couldn't get me out of the office quickly enough, and didn't care what I had, he just gave me what he thought I had asked for.

One final point: I come from a family chock full of medical professionals: they all think a socialized system is the way to go, which is why my aunt opened her own clinic.

EDIT: just for the record, my mother's family is in Newfoundland, and my father's family contains the medical professionals, they all live in the US.

All the best,
JediLeiaSolo

I have a friend whose mother is dying of cancer. Why is she dying of cancer? Because she cannot afford the opperation. I also have a friend who has had untreated diabetes for years because he cannot afford to see doctors, or get insulin. The American health system is terrible, and I am speaking as an American. If you are rich, that is fine. If you have insurance...hell, I had to to the hospital early last year and I am still having trouble paying it off. And with unemployment at the highest it has been in a long time, how are people suppose to afford insurance or doctor's visits? We have insurance companies, accountants! telling doctors what they can or cannot do for their patients. We have people never seeing dentists because they cannot afford it.

How can you say that our health care system is fine? Its not. Its terrible!

Lil Wookie and Jedi Leia Solo both made excellent posts in favour of a socialised system, and they have convinced me even further that my point of view is right.

I support a national healthcare system... but not in America. It would be unamerican to have one.

That is why, if I don't achieve my "American dream" of becoming a Hollywood writer by the time I turn 26, I will move to a country that has socialized medicine. If I can't succeed in America's dog-eat-dog world, I'll move to a world that makes more sense to me.

Great Emuboy! Go! Please do it! In fact I can help you possibly? you can sign up for Norword, a norwegian mailing list. Of course they have the most socialized (with the possible exception of Sweden) government of the Western World.

You can look forward to paying 4 dollars for a coca cola and 10 dollars for ice cream. Things are expensive, and your taxes are higher.

I think most people would be more patriotic if they would actually travel overseas. As interesting as Europe is, there is no other place I would rather live than the good old US of A.

Lykke til bor i Norge, Emuboy!

--Joey

I am perfectly happy with payng +50% of my income to the government with secure knowledge that my cancer is paid for. Happiness in life is not found in 40 cent Sam's Cola and McDonalds.

I think most people would be more patriotic if they would actually travel overseas. As interesting as Europe is, there is no other place I would rather live than the good old US of A.

I have. I've lived in Austria and France, and have experienced the health industries in all three nations. In my professional opinion, as a Ph.D. candidate in Health Care Ethics, and as the Ethicist-in-residence in Psychiatry at my hospital, our system sucks.

You are confusing patriotism and nationalism. A nationalist would suggest that living abroad would make one appreciate his/her native land more, and would argue that his/her way of doing things is better. Patriotism is being proud of where one comes from, but also recognizing areas in which it needs to improve, and working to affect that change. As a patriot, I appreciate many of the privileges I enjoy living in the United States, but I also recognize that we have many shortcomings which need to be addressed.

First, a multi-tier system of access to health care is problematic for many reasons, political and philosophical. We give lip service to the idea of equality, and yet we perpetuate a system which fosters inequality. Those who cannot afford health insurance use the ER as their PCP (Primary Care Provider, for those not in our system). This is significantly more expensive than a private practitioner, and it also takes time away from individuals who truly need emergent care. As such, the costs of health care spiral upward, which perpetuates the system.

Second, even if you have a job, there is no guarantee that you will have insurance (even full-time employees). As a previous poster demonstrated, temp employees are often in a lurch, due to the cost of health care. When I worked at Kinko's, I could not afford the deduction for health insurance and simultaneously pay the rent. When I worked at the ad company, I was able to pay for insurance from my gross pay (which comes out cheaper than if it were taken out of my net), but I was still paying $90/month. When I was laid off, I was given the option of using COBRA to extend my insurance for another few months. Only now I would have to pay $240/month, and I was on unemployment, which only gave me 80% of my payrate from before. So health insurance wasn't an option. I would gladly have paid $16/month for health insurance.

Third, there is an ideological problem. As a nation, we have an obligation to provide a system in which students must be educated until the age of 16 (whether public, private, parochial, or proper home schooling). That is, we have an obligation to make sure that they are educated until the age of 16. We have no such provision for health care. It is incongruous to suggest that we have an obligation to make our children smart, but not keep them healthy.

Fourth, our system is a double-edged sword. While it is good that our system allows for competition, which tends to foster innovation more than cooperation, it also rewards the victor far too much. Drug companies make a killing - their cries of R&D costs and materials fall on deaf ears, as their profit margins dictate that they are not in the dire straits they claim. The new standard of care for treating severe sepsis and MODS (Multiple Organ Distress Syndrome - very severe sepsis (blood poisoning)) is a drug which costs $6500/cycle (round of treatment; three days). $6500 for every round of treatment (which necessarily means that there are multiple rounds of treatment). I could not afford to pay for this, which means I could not afford the standard of care. Which means that I could not afford to keep myself alive, in the event that I get an infection which leads to sepsis. The only means by which I could do so is if the hospital is willing to eat the cost. The only problem is, all of the hospitals in my area are experiencing financial woes (to the tune of some hospitals closing branches and folding). For them to provide this drug to me, they would need to make sacrifices elsewhere, either in personnel, equipment