Federally funded universal healthcare: 10 more good reasons

Kimberly Learnard's picture

The top 10 reasons why universal healthcare is America’s future, including high comparative costs, overall poor health of our nation in comparison to other industrialized countries, the fact that our politicians enjoy taxpayer-funded healthcare even as they tell us, their benefactors, that we wouldn’t like it, and the fact that every industrialized nation in the world except the U.S. enjoys a universal healthcare system, were presented last time. And now, the next 10 reasons:

In America, the cost of healthcare is a large portion of the cost of goods produced here. For example, General Motors estimated that $1,525 of every car they built was needed for employee healthcare costs. This is a cost burden GM’s competitors do not bear.

Healthcare costs are now considered by most CEOs to be the single largest threat to the U.S. economy in today’s global competitive market.

Employers often avoid hiring full-time workers because they cannot bear the burden of the employees’ healthcare costs (which averaged $9,600 per worker in 2008). Universal healthcare means leveling the hiring playing field, strengthening small businesses, and reducing joblessness.

In 2008, 2 million Americans declared bankruptcy, with the majority of them citing medical bills as the primary reason. Most of them also had private health insurance. A universal healthcare system will mean stronger families, a stronger middle class, and an economically stronger America.

Every industrialized nation in the world has universal healthcare, with the exception of the U.S. Debate continues as to whether citizens in these other countries are happy with their medical system or not. To be honest, I don’t know yet. I think it depends on who you talk to and what their specific medical situation is.

I have heard of long waits for organ transplants, for example, but I have not personally been able to find anyone who can tell me first-hand of that experience. (Internet stories abound, but we need to be responsible about finding the facts.)

Based on personal experience only: I have several friends who originate from Canada and they were all grateful for their universal healthcare when: 1) a mom wasted away due to pancreatic cancer, requiring increasing levels of in-home care over a period of three years; 2) a sister required nursing home care for nearly 25 years due to Huntington’s disease; and 3) a friend suffered multiple fractures in a car accident and needed surgeries, hospitalizations, and physical therapy. Also, 4) my cousin broke her arm in Norway.

I know these are anecdotal and not statistically significant examples, but in all of these instances, my friends/family were very happy with the healthcare they received. I just don’t see throngs of people in countries with universal healthcare taking to the streets in protest. And I certainly don’t see any of them making demands of their policy makers for managed care options.

To thoroughly research a healthcare cost comparison among industrialized nations, I had to go back to 2002 data: The U.S. spent $5,267 per capita on healthcare in 2002, more than any other country. Switzerland was second, spending $3,445, or 35 percent less than the U.S., per capita on healthcare, and everyone was covered. Norway spent $3,083 and everyone was covered. Canada spent $2,931. Germany spent $2,817. Iceland spent $2,807. Everyone was covered.

And every one of these countries is a healthier nation, measured in life expectancy, infant mortality, access to care, and good health outcomes, than the U.S.

An important question under any universal healthcare scenario is, why should I pay for healthcare for illegal immigrants? That is a great question, and it was one of my main concerns until I did the research.

Currently, illegal immigrants receive the majority of their healthcare in hospital emergency rooms. This care is 10 times the cost of regular doctor visits and is paid by those of us with health insurance policies, in the form of higher premiums.

America’s current health system ignores the cost benefits of prevention-oriented medical care. Strange but true, it is cheaper to provide care for illegal aliens with programs that include prevention and wellness, than it is to treat them when they are desperately sick and visiting the emergency rooms.

Universal healthcare will also mean emergency rooms can be used for their intended purpose.

Universal healthcare means no co-pays, no family deductibles, no individual deductibles, no limited percentage of coverage after deductible has been met, no “catastrophic only” and no maximum out of pocket. Think about that for a minute.

Large purchasing power in a national program means we can return to true competition in the form of affordable and competitive doctor visits, treatments, medical procedures, and prescription drugs.

Imagine our nation with universal healthcare. Now imagine you would still like to purchase private pay health insurance. Like private schools that are available for the cost of tuition above and beyond the tax dollars spent to provide a public school system for all, private pay policies would still be available for those who want it.

Insurance companies will be more than happy to oblige. Private health insurance plans will be like private school tuition: If you want it, you can still buy it.

While huge numbers are being tossed around predicting the price of universal healthcare would be in the stratosphere, remember the cost of not having universal healthcare is already in the stratosphere. Our current healthcare system is really a non-system.

America’s healthcare burden is already bringing down small businesses, bankrupting families, devastating industries that try to compete globally, and devastating our economy as a whole. We are not a healthy nation. Put a price on that.

Last year, my husband’s lifetime addiction to contact sports caught up with him, and he required scheduled surgery to correct a problem with his Achilles tendon. The operation went perfectly. He spent one hour in surgery and two hours in recovery before I brought him home.

Four days later, I received a bill in the mail for $11,000. This was for the hospital facility only – it did not include doctor, anesthesiologist, drugs, supplies, or physical therapy charges.

At what point do we step back, take a hard look, and decide once and for all that our current system is out of control? I think we’re there.

[Kimberly Learnard is an electrical engineer who holds a master’s degree in education from the University of Georgia. A Fayette County mother of three, she teaches adults through a state training program.]

login to post comments | Kimberly Learnard's blog

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Fri, 07/17/2009 - 4:46pm.

The CBO chief minced no words: “The curve is being raised.” The Democratic health plan would only make the long-term deficit much worse and send our nation’s finances off the fiscal cliff.

WSJ Opinion

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


Submitted by KVScott on Wed, 07/08/2009 - 10:15pm.

I am always open for a well thought out debate, but your comments citing great reasons for Universal Healthcare are not only misguided, you used incorrect facts. You noted that "In 2008, 2 million Americans declared bankruptcy, with the majority of them citing medical bills as the primary reason." In fact, there were just under 1.1 million bankruptcy filings in 2008 according the the Automated Access to Court Electronic Records (AACER). The Harvard Study that Obama is using was done in 2001! The claims half of all bankruptcies occurred because of medical bills is misleading. Half cited "medical causes" not medical bills. Illness led to lost time at work, no money coming in, etc. Here is the study. http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/full/hlthaff.w5.63/DC1

You further stated that "Employers often avoid hiring full-time workers because they cannot bear the burden of the employees’ healthcare costs (which averaged $9,600 per worker in 2008)." According to the the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) the annual premium for single coverage averaged over $4,700.

You may be interested to know that uncompensated costs for the uninsured totaled $56 billion according to KFF. Obama's plan as stated by the Congressional Budget Office will not only cost nearly double that over $111 billion per year, but we as tax payers will now carry all that burden.

If you think your husband's operation was expensive at $11,000 just for the hospital, wait until it's “free” under the Obama plan.

Submitted by Life in the bubble on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 4:53pm.

I do not understand Kim's premise:
1) We need Universal Health Care because other countries have it? That is ridiculous. Read the current English papers about a woman dying because she was wait listed too long for an appt to check out a lump. She received care too late. 2) To help bring down costs? Obama's plan tells you he will be spending MORE than we already do on uncompensated people.
3) GM's biggest problem is providing healthcare?? Not their pension plans, or union issues??
4) The funniest of all "Universal healthcare means no co-pays, no deductibles, no out of pocket etc. Does she really believe we are not ultimately paying a price through taxes?? How stupid!

Does she really believe that costs will go down and quality will improve with the government taking over. Nonsense. We need to make changes to the current system absolutely leaving it up to our gvt to make it better, never going to happen!!

NUK_1's picture
Submitted by NUK_1 on Thu, 07/09/2009 - 8:18am.

While I'm against universal health care as proposed by the Obama administration, I'm pretty sure I could write a couple of columns in favor of the concept that would be much better than what has appeared in The Citizen. Both articles make statements that are easily proven to be incorrect and facts are mangled to the point that the reader has doubts that anything stated in the column may be accurate.

It's a typical over-sell job of the writer believing in something so much that facts become meaningless and claims just thrown out on paper without any thought to accuracy. It's a cheerleading piece like you would see on a TV talk show where participants spout a lot of bursts of info that they hope no one will verify or even consider for too long. When it's in writing, it becomes too easy to dissect.


Submitted by seandoc on Wed, 07/08/2009 - 3:58pm.

To this writer:
How about this Idea: your pay for your healthcare and I pay for mine. I don't want you to use the power of government to steal money from me to pay for the comfort and longevity of others who may be lazy, irresponsible, or just not interested in their health. I am tired of people who want to give charity to the poor and the sick at the cost of other people.

After all the huff and puff, and the arguments in this draconian article, you have one point. That point is you want others to pay for the healthcare of those who don't pay. The poor already get medicaid, go to county hospitals, and federal community clinics. the uninsured in this country can buy insurance for as little as 70 a month on websites like ehealthinsurance.com . a few states like New York are expensive for no other reason than too much gov intrusion. Local governments could perhaps help those with pre-existing conditions. Otherwise go the hell away.

Submitted by AtHomeGym on Wed, 07/08/2009 - 7:49am.

Sounds like you don't have health insurance! Glad he's OK.

S. Lindsey's picture
Submitted by S. Lindsey on Tue, 07/07/2009 - 9:47pm.

Is the reason.. Well everyone else is doing it really good enough???
Obviously you have not tried very hard to find that firsthand account you say you seek.. I work with two.. One is Canadian the other is English.. I have heard over and over the horror stories.. FIRST HAND mind you that they suffered through and their families still do.. The WAITS.. the Rationed care... you name it..
You want info..

Federally Funded Health sCare

Use it in good health.. Cause God help you if we get Bureaucrats making Medical decisions for you..well look at our Government in action.

Ever vigilant we must be to protect the Constitution.. For if we do not it will slip quietly away and FREEDOM will be forever lost to us..

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine


black flag's picture
Submitted by black flag on Tue, 07/07/2009 - 10:28pm.

You are correct in saying that the Canadian system is subpar, in fact it is getting worse. So, you've got a buddy that is disenchanted with the system in Canada? I would challenge you to take a trip up there and ask around if they'd trade for ours. I think you would be suprised to find that while they realize it has issues, they will tell you it has it's merits and won't be trading anytime soon. Either way, I'm not convinced that is the system our gov't is trying to emulate. By the way, we have socialized medicine now that costs you and I in our taxes and is very inefficient and doesn't cover the people that could pay into it and support it if there was some type of system. My guess based on data I have seen shows that about 35-40% of average joes actually have insurance and get their bills paid. So....the remainder ends up as a write off, healthcare organizations have to eat it, and guess what, you pay more. Just like fat people that have all kinds of health issues, smokers,alcoholics, etc...it's a free country so people do what they want but we all pay for it via increased insurance premiums or decreased available services.
There's a big smokescreen that is being deployed to distract you from the reality that our system, while one of the best in the world, could be managed better. Sowell's column is a good example of the propaganda the right is eaten up with. He states that "costs" are the driving factor. It's more about availability. We need to lead the way in the world by having the best type of system that is not controlled by insurance companies making decisions about who is covered and what is covered. Right now, no solutions are offered from the right, just fear mongering. Why is there no real or rational discussion from the right?


S. Lindsey's picture
Submitted by S. Lindsey on Wed, 07/08/2009 - 7:40am.

Flag.."Right now, no solutions are offered from the right, just fear mongering. Why is there no real or rational discussion from the right?"

Answer.. YOU DON'T LISTEN.. MSM has been reduced to promoting instead of reporting.. so to get info you must go outside the Mainstream Media run Propaganda or "propaGUNDA" as some here like to call it..

There are a multitude of plans the link below contains 16 of them.. A comparison between the "PLANS"
Hows that for solutions from the RIGHT???

Health sCare Plans

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine


black flag's picture
Submitted by black flag on Wed, 07/08/2009 - 10:01pm.

thanks for the link, however getting info from the 'heritage foundation' is much like getting your info from MSNBC or FOX depending on what you want to hear that makes you feel better. It's interesting that many of those so called conservative plans fail to address mental health and are described as 'consumer driven'. Everyone needs some level of healthcare, preventative being most important because it reduces cost down the road. 'consumer driven' doesn't sound too proactive.

So yes, I am willing to LISTEN but the majority of the 'claptrap' I see and hear still revolves around nothing but pure noise.


S. Lindsey's picture
Submitted by S. Lindsey on Thu, 07/09/2009 - 10:27am.

We see it here all the time.. you don't like the source so instead of actually reviewing the data you dismiss out of hand any info contained within.

1st.. Please show me where Conservatives for Patients Rights is a "heritage foundation" site.. Linked below is their bio..

CP Rights BIO

It is possible they might have some affiliation I have not found, but that does not detract from the fair comparisons of the plans presented.

"MENTAL HEALTH" now we have to pay for some numbnuts to go to a Pysch to talk about how their mommy didn't hug them enough???
Get real Flag.. this is exactly the problem.. IT IS NEVER ENDING.. WELL IF YOU ARE GOING TO COVER HEALTH, THEN YOU GOT TO COVER MENTAL HEALTH.. THEN COMES SEXUAL HEALTH.. YOU'RE FAT SO WE HAVE TO PAY FOR YOUR DIET PLANS, YOU SMOKE WE HAVE TO PAY FOR YOU TO QUIT, YOU STAND ON THE JOB.. WE HAVE TO PAY FOR LEG MESSAGES..It never ends.. Once the Gravy Train starts rolling everyone wants on.. The problem Flag is the bridge which the Gravy Train passes over can only hold so much weight before it collapses..

Flag.. When does it end.. Who pays for all this.. What's next..
Universal College Education is on the Horizon.. When did it become the responcibility of the Government to force this on the taxpayers.. Show me in the Constitution where it says any of this is the Governments Responcibilty or where they have the arthority to do it..

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine


black flag's picture
Submitted by black flag on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 10:47am.

but you didn't read my response obviously. I did review your website, it was lacking with lots of "not available" info with the 2 points I mentioned to be the most curious to me. As far as the source, let me break it down for you....
when you are in the market and want to buy a car, do you believe and research only data and hype provided by the manufacturer, or do you go to a neutral objective source that evaluates and reports?

AS FOR YOUR LACK OF DEPTH IN UNDERSTANDING HEALTH CARE *ahem* just wanted to make sure you noticed this part, since you like yelling in ALL CAPS frequently. I like the gravy train and bridge collapsing piece, very funny. The problem is you have a certain segment of society that can't care for themselves for whatever reason, it isn't just that easy that they "need to start pulling their own weight" but alas, that's the black and white simplicity that both you and lefty extremes resort to, sort of a "lowest common denominator" type tactic to reason and appeal with those you wish to polarize. This idea that preventative care serves to strengthen a slacker nation of pansy liberal types that want a handout.
If you were truly a conservative you would want to keep your head out of the sand and the "this is not my problem, I've got mine, you figure out yours" mantra. As much as we both hate it, paying a little up front to educate the public or provide incentives goes a long way in the future to save us taxpayers and legit policy holders unbelievable amounts of money.
Both segements of left and right are identical. They expect that they can do whatever they want but if it gets away from them, then they expect the gov't or their insurance company to bail them out, and it costs us in some way.

I don't really want a gov't run heathcare system as much as I want people to be accountable and responsible to themselves where possible.

To simplify: we do need gov't to make some rules here, like, molesting children is illegal, and so should be, being obeiss and smoking and refusing to have health insurance so when the inevitable heart disease comes around and astronomical medical bills happen I DON'T HAVE TO PAY FOR IT THROUGH INCREASED TAXATION!!!!

As for mental health, companies lose millions of dollars a year through employees missing work because of mental health issues. Many times these issues can be allieviated through prevention - theraputic and mental health therapies. Most companies already have their own wellness programs as they realize the benefit and savings on their own.

These are common and pervasive issues that affect all of society that end up costing us. With no mechanism to deal with it is where it GOES ON AND ON AND ON.


S. Lindsey's picture
Submitted by S. Lindsey on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 1:14pm.

but you will.. if the Government run Health sCare is enacted..
I get it.. You're a Liberal.. It would be all nice and such if we are all taken care of by big daddy from Cradel to Grave.. Well it cannot happen.. The weight of the "ZERO LIABILTIY" class will just grow and grow..
"As for mental health, companies lose millions of dollars a year through employees missing work because of mental health issues."
Show me the stats on that one.. It's easy to throw out numbers to support claims but backing them up???
As to your assertion that "Most companies already have their own wellness programs as they realize the benefit and savings on their own." you are quiet correct so what will happen once the Government offers a program to do the same thing.. These very same people will then be pushed onto the Government dole because smaller business and Industry alike will discontinue their programs to pay for the increased taxes due to Cap and Trade.. You see it's a vicious circle.. It's called the LAW OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUIENCES..(now that's yelled)

You say "I don't really want a gov't run healthcare system as much as I want people to be accountable and responsible to themselves where possible." but your whole diatribe is based on Government making decisions and at least partially take over the Healthcare Industry.. Being Accountable and Responsible to themselves and having Government Bureaucrats making medical decisions are diametrically opposed at best..

Flag.. Get ready here comes the yelling..WE CAN NOT PAY FOR ALL THE PROGRAMS, MASSIVE DEBT AND FISCAL IRRESPONCIBILITY IN OUR GOVERNEMTNT and pay for everyone's healthcare too..
I will support the program once I have seen we can pay for it without borrowing the money or PRINTING it.. until then I and many others like me will fight it as long as we can..

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine


black flag's picture
Submitted by black flag on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 3:03pm.

So now I'm a Liberal?!?....you must categorize that which you don't understand, no problem but I must warn you I'm probably more conservative that you, but not in the Republican way... In that I believe in hard work, morals and ethics, family, fiscal conservatism you know,...the stuff you don't see in politics.

I think you need to read the post again, and think about this......you have to buy auto insurance, but the gov't doesn't run that industry. Think about how many people wouldn't have it if they weren't made to?

I hate to say this but I think we both want the same thing: We don't want to be responsible for other people who choose not to insure themselves or take care of themselves.

The difference is that you don't realize that one way or another we are going to get jammed into paying for this through increased premiums or taxes...

you are probably not aware of this but over 50% of the people out there that get scraped off the road from accidents, heart attacks, whatever and brought into hospitals don't have insurance...that doesn't do well for private industry either. If these KOOKS had to buy some type of insurance then us working stiffs would have lower costs.
Either that or they could tattoo on their arm "Please don't transport me in your ambulance or take me to any hospital becuase I refuse to buy insurance, just let me suffer and die by my decision" of course then when you walked your kids to school you'd have to step over them on the sidewalk and shoo the buzzards away, but hey..... it's a free country!


S. Lindsey's picture
Submitted by S. Lindsey on Mon, 07/13/2009 - 8:32am.

"over 50% of the people out there that get scraped off the road from accidents, heart attacks, whatever and brought into hospitals don't have insurance.."

Factcheck please... Both my spouse amd myself have worked ERs for years.. My life experience does not agree with your factoid.. So just where do you get your facts?
As for being more conservative???? Let's see.. Who in this room wants more Government control over their life and control of Private Industies??

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine


NUK_1's picture
Submitted by NUK_1 on Thu, 07/09/2009 - 11:41am.

Just to play devil's advocate, the insured already are paying for the uninsured under the present system. Group health plans spread the risk around, and the entire health and insurance industries operates on that same principle. At the end, the risk is spread among everyone, insured or uninsured, so the insured are paying the freight. Same with social welfare programs.

One of the key provisions of most liberals' view on universal health care is MANDATORY coverage for everyone, private or public. No opt-out and you must prove you are insured. This is supposed to magically lower costs since there are no more uninsured rushing to the ER for routine doctor visits. I don't buy theory at all. People with insurance have a tendency to over-use it because it takes the costs of the actual care out of the equation as far as their own pocketbook.

Until Americans change their view of what health care is supposed to be and the health care industry modernizes past the 1950's, no plan is going to work. The buzzword of "prevention" to many people means "I ought to go to the DR more and get more pills" and encourages doctors to invent more maladies to make their patients happier than telling them "You know, you'd feel better if you lost 50 pounds, got off the couch every now and then, and quit drinking like a fish." drives the cost of health care up further.

The MENTAL HEALTH issue includes everything from depression to substance abuse. I don't see any point in stigmatizing that aspect of health care when the costs associated with some areas of mental health become large and have effects that ripple through society on a daily basis. Telling alkies and drug addicts to suck it up and just stop doing that stuff has a terrible track record of success. We pay for them to, especially in the prison system where most untreated addicts wind up. Then they have a rap sheet and aren't gainfully employable. Lose-lose all around.


S. Lindsey's picture
Submitted by S. Lindsey on Thu, 07/09/2009 - 3:20pm.

plan to Nationalize 1/5 of our Economy is exemplified in your response..
"The MENTAL HEALTH issue includes everything from depression to substance abuse. I don't see any point in stigmatizing that aspect of health care when the costs associated with some areas of mental health become large and have effects that ripple through society on a daily basis. Telling alkies and drug addicts to suck it up and just stop doing that stuff has a terrible track record of success. We pay for them to, especially in the prison system where most untreated addicts wind up. Then they have a rap sheet and aren't gainfully employable. Lose-lose all around."

Life is about CHOICE.. We choose the path, for the most part, on which we walk..
I still don't see why I have to PAY for someone’s poor choice.. You want to shoot Heroin fine.. You want to drink a fifth of Jack a day go for it.. Just don't expect me to pay for your poor health as a result of your piss poor choices.
Once we start down that road Nuk it will never end.. The Government and/or certain groups would think they have a right to legislate certain behaviors. After all if your past time, Hobby, Sport etc.. results in an injury and the tax payers are paying for your care then what's to stop them..
What’s to stop them from banning the selling of fast foods to fat people.. after all Obesity is a health hazard.. it jeopardizes the tax payers money and taxes the system..
I know this is all hypothetical BUT could it happen..

Banning fast food in poor neighborhoods.

IT ALREADY HAS

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine


NUK_1's picture
Submitted by NUK_1 on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 4:23pm.

Like I said, I am NOT for Obamacare or nationalized/socialized health care, but we DO already pay for others poor choices in out insurance rates and through the social welfare system. The "healthy" subsidize the "unhealthy" in insurance already.

The government already legislates morality and behaviors like drugs, prostitution, gambling, and a whole list of victimless crimes due to Americans enjoying telling others what to do/not do all the time. As I mentioned, I was using a devil's advocate argument about how we're already paying for everyone's choices right NOW, so how would it be that much different with socialized medicine?


Submitted by lion on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 5:15pm.

I imagine it is fruitless to state the obvious to many on this site but I am going to try.

Obama and the Democrats are not proposing "socialized medicine" or "nationalizing health care." No one in Congress or the Administration is doing this. No one is proposing that the Federal Government take over hospitals, clinics, and other medical facilities in this country. No one is suggesting that doctors and other medical providers should become Federal employees.

What is proposed is that every American should have health insurance and thus access to medical care. Most Americans would probably choose to keep their private health insurance. Others could purchase insurance through a government insurance option.

Everyone would be able to choose their own doctors and medical facilities as they do now.

Not really very radical is it?

We have to figure out how to fund universal health care. I do not know the complete answer to that but it probably will require some sacrifice (i.e. tax increase) by some or all Americans. I think universal health care for all Americans is worth some sacrifice.

NUK_1's picture
Submitted by NUK_1 on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 6:09pm.

When health care is paid through public money, even if it is performed by mostly private practitioners,that is called "socialized medicine." The Canadian system is a prime example. Proponents of universal health care try to avoid that terminology because "socialization" is considered negative these days, but oh well. Sort of like "pro-choice rights" instead of "pro-abortion rights."

What Obama and the Dems are proposing is.....well, who knows at this point? They have some basic ideas that are in a state of flux right now. One of the big components of Obamacare is "comparative effectiveness" where the GOVERNMENT works with doctors to "determine what the best care is." That is what is scaring a lot of people more than costs/taxes.

Obama ripped McCain a new one for proposing to tax health care benefits employees receive, and now he's flip-flopping. Obama said it would all be done without adding to the deficit and after all the howls of laughter stopped, reality said otherwise. So, what is being "proposed" at this point is not clear beyond basics of:

a) government involved in patient health care decisions
b) private insurers competing against a government agency or agencies
c) it's going to cost a ton no matter what the final proposal looks like.

"We" don't have to figure out how to fund universal health care. The "we" isn't convinced that universal health care is any kind of a "right" at this point nor is it doable in the fashion that Clinton wanted or Obamacare.


Submitted by lion on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 6:36pm.

Let me try again.

Obama and the Democrats are not proposing "socialized medicine."

Of course "socialism" in any form is considered "negative" today. That is why Republicans and other critics of health care reform label the proposals as "socialism." They are not. You are just using scare tactics and such lies, unfortunately, tend to appeal to the ignorant.

Any government involvement in health care decisions would not be any different than those decision today for those under Medicare. Or decisions today by private heath insurance companies.

And let us all shed crocodile tears for the private insurance companies who would have to compete against a government option. Poor babies. Competition!!! How un-American.

72% of "we" in a recent poll wanted a public insurance option. Those "We" are convinced.

NUK_1's picture
Submitted by NUK_1 on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 7:02pm.

Were people in this not cited poll also asked how much would they be willing to pay for the public option health care? I'm pretty sure most people would answer "yes" to any question that doesn't involve any hit to their wallets or affects only "those rich people."

Socialized medicine is exactly what Obamacare is proposing. I'm not sympathetic to private insurers but having them trying to compete with a government whose idea of "running a business" is gigantic losses that everyone in the future has to pay for in the future is ridiculous. While proponents hate the term, look it up, it is what it is. The elements of nationalization of health care are part of Obamacare also when you start talking about "comparative effectiveness" and the government being involved in what health care patients receive or not.


Submitted by lion on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 7:32pm.

It is pointless to argue with anyone who thinks the Obama proposals are "socialized medicine."

We need universal health care in the United States. It will cost some money. It is the just and decent thing to do. And worth some sacrifice.

NUK_1's picture
Submitted by NUK_1 on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 10:37pm.

I don't plan on it myself because I'm confident it's going down in flames just like the Hillary plan. Fortunately, there is a difference of opinion between reasonable people on what constitutes "just" or "decent."


Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 5:47pm.

and that my friend is the problem. Even moderate democrats in the Senate have allied with the "evil party" and both are having a hard time with the potential cost, who's going to pay and, the increased in taxes. I do seem to remember one campaign promise of not increasing taxes for the middle class. Oh well,perhaps a "Bindenism" can be applied here "we miss read it".

I'm curious, are your referring to "Americans" as those of us that are citizens?
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


S. Lindsey's picture
Submitted by S. Lindsey on Wed, 07/08/2009 - 10:11am.

We spend approx 500 BILLION or 1/2 TRILLION per YEAR
on Foreign oil.. We have the resources here to 100% completely replace these sources..The funds now being shipped overseas to fund Governments not Friendly to the USA can be used to help fund Healthcare Reform.. The jobs created and industries reborn would increase revenues to the Government and add additional resources for funding the program..

I will support Government run Healthcare when we drill for our own resources here in the USA.

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine


DarthDubious's picture
Submitted by DarthDubious on Wed, 07/08/2009 - 1:07pm.

a talk by your namesake, sort of:

The Energy Non-Crisis by Lindsey Williams

The drilling is done, THEY just won't let us have it!!! Happy viewing!!!

In Liberty,

DarthDubious


Submitted by AtHomeGym on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 7:03pm.

While Williams insists that a CIA/State Dept employee named Abner Detrey (unusual marriage to begin with) was dispatched to Iraq to inform Saddam that we would not intervene if he invaded Kuwait, official State Dept records clearly reveal that the US Ambassador at the time (April Glaspie) was the one who relayed Sec Baker's message that "It was not in US interests). That brings into question the entire validity of the Williams story. Logically, it doesn't sense to dispatch someone to deliver such a msg--THAT'S WHAT AMBASSADORS DO!

DarthDubious's picture
Submitted by DarthDubious on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 7:37pm.

the main thrust of this talk is the fact that there is a pool of oil in Prudo Bay(spelling may be wrong), Alaska, known about since the early 1970's, that the US government won't tell us about, or let us use.

CIA and State Dept. an unusual partnership? You've got to be kidding me! It has been common knowledge for a long while that the CIA uses US embassies along with the ambassadors who are usually CIA station chiefs to get their job done(whatever that is), Especially in countries who pose a "threat" of some kind.

Now you'll deny that the US helped Saddam against Iran. Oh, yeah we were good buddies with Bin Laden too, when we gave him and the muhajadeen(al quaeda) training and weapons to fight against the Soviets.

Puhlease, you ain't foolin' nobody AHG.

In Liberty,

DarthDubious


Submitted by AtHomeGym on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 8:50pm.

DD you don't dispute my posting that it was the US Ambassador, April Glaspie, who conveyed that message to Saddam, so where is the disinfo? I know why-you can't do it. And you're very mistaken that Ambassadors are CIA Station Chiefs--simply not true and you can't provide any facts to support your false statement. More BS. Oh, I don't deny that we provided certain support to Iraq in their war against Iran. And I'm not trying to fool anybody, just my attempt to put the truth as I know it out there. Also, I would just tell you that my many yrs in the intelligence community has given me just a little more insight than most folks into who does what in both domestic and foreign intelligence relationships and activities.

S. Lindsey's picture
Submitted by S. Lindsey on Wed, 07/08/2009 - 1:24pm.

We are to Shale oil what the Saudis are to oil fields.. We have more Oil/Gas right here then they do or ever did.. They "just" discovered a Natural Gas dome in the Fl panhandle that would supply the USA for a Generation.. BUT.. it is in a no drill zone.. I wonder WHY???
We can convert oil shale to liquid fuel cheaper then the current price of oil.. Germany has been doing it for years.. we can't WHY?
Forget wind/Sun power right now that tech has not been developed enough to supply our needs BUT shale oil and Natural Gas can.. TODAY RIGHT NOW.. do it..BUT we can't get it.. WHY???

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine


DarthDubious's picture
Submitted by DarthDubious on Wed, 07/08/2009 - 1:41pm.

the OPEC nations service a large part of our national debt out of their profits fron crude oil. Its as simple as that:

If we (big oil corps) don't buy their oil, then WE (the american taxpayer) must pay off more interest on the cash borrowed from the FED than we already do with our income taxes. Where would that money come from? Higher gas prices!

Ugly ain't it?

In Liberty,

DarthDubious


Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Tue, 07/07/2009 - 6:36pm.

policies, in the form of higher premiums."

Yep, this explains Grady's precarious financial condition. (Eyes rolling).

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


black flag's picture
Submitted by black flag on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 9:07pm.

it's definately part of the problem. Grady's problem is something different...first, the last few CEO's were complete clowns...the new guy hopefully will get it turned around. Second and probably most important is that the 'other' hospitals are dumping all the uninsured on Grady and not taking their share of indigent people. It's hard to do well if that's the case.


Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 10:36pm.

I'm curious, how much should other hospitals "share"?

BTW, here's a little factiod. Since 2001, 11 hospitals have closed in the Los Angeles area. Here are some primary reasons:

Government and its inadequate Medicare and Medi-Cal payments.
Unfunded mandates (e.g. seismic safety, nurse staffing, etc.)
Labor shortages and out-of-control labor costs.
Spiraling construction costs.
Uninsured and underinsured Californians - Lots of illegals.
Unbridled demand for services.

Of those items mentioned, which ones will "universal healthcare" not solve?

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


black flag's picture
Submitted by black flag on Sun, 07/12/2009 - 10:43pm.

With where you are going here. No easy answers but we need to act like some other countries that not only protect their borders better than we do but also don't have a free for all immigration policy. I know this is supposed to be a melting pot and that's what made us great but the pot is overflowing. This whole amnesty deal will certainly worsen the issue of uninsured.
The epidemic of hospitals going under due to mass uninsured and little reimbursement if any isn't limited to Cali, AZ has big problems and so does TX. I know of several hospitals in FL that are on the verge of closing because they are deep in red. Lookout, we're next.
so, how much do they share? I don't know really, if I was the CEO of Atlanta Medical Center, say, enough that would keep Grady afloat so I don't end up with all of them.


Submitted by MYTMITE on Sun, 07/12/2009 - 11:22pm.

become the pot of gold for everyone who comes into this country including many who come in legally. We welcome them all in if they are from countries we have done battle with, are doing battle with, are in a civil war in their country or are just needy. All of them get aid when they come in and they come in by the thousands. And the illegals--all you have to do is come across the border pregnant and drop that child and it is automatically a citizen. Then momma becomes a citizen, daddy becomes a citizen plus brothers and sisters and then they send for all their family back in the home country. And they come into Georgia just like you and I would come from Florida or Alabama, and they travel back and forth constantly. They all know where to go north of Atlanta to get phony driver's licenses and ID's. We have a don't ask policy at our hospitals and emergency rooms where they are concerned. Because they do not have money for insurance they do not go to regular doctors but to the emergency room for everything. Yet many natural born citizens who have worked all their lives cannot get the health care they need. Until we change these rules it will only get worse. We are going to let political correctness and bleeding hearts send us down the tubes. It can happen even though many believe it won't to this country. Just study history and see the great nations who fell by the wayside. It is scary.

suggarfoot's picture
Submitted by suggarfoot on Mon, 07/13/2009 - 6:02am.

Not only do they become citizens, the child gets a disability check because it can't take care of itself. The parents both get checks to stay and take care of it along with housing asst etc. Things that the average taxpayers can't get. We are the last, if not one of the last, countries, to close this loophole.

As far as the medical, they clog the emergency rooms so you can't go if you need to, but your taxes pay for it. Car insurance, they don't have it, but you need to carry uninsured motorist to cover ...THEM...

I don't have anything against them personally, but they are stealing from everyone that pays taxes in this country.

But if you look at the big picture, it is the hugh corporations like Dole, Hunts, or the chicken processing companies in north ga., that push and lobby to get things as they are. For these companies to hire them so cheap, you, the taxpayers, are subsidising them with free health care, car insurance, housing, etc.

You might as well look at the truth, you are subsidising these big corporations!

People don't look at it for what it is....who do you think pays for the lobbyist, and whines to their high powered friends like Bush and Chaney that they can't keep cheap help if they tighten the laws?

You are really subsidising the millionaires that make the money off hiring them so cheap. People don't get it.


suggarfoot's picture
Submitted by suggarfoot on Mon, 07/13/2009 - 6:02am.

Not only do they become citizens, the child gets a disability check because it can't take care of itself. The parents both get checks to stay and take care of it along with housing asst etc. Things that the average taxpayers can't get. We are the last, if not one of the last, countries, to close this loophole.

As far as the medical, they clog the emergency rooms so you can't go if you need to, but your taxes pay for it. Car insurance, they don't have it, but you need to carry uninsured motorist to cover ...THEM...

I don't have anything against them personally, but they are stealing from everyone that pays taxes in this country.

But if you look at the big picture, it is the hugh corporations like Dole, Hunts, or the chicken processing companies in north ga., that push and lobby to get things as they are. For these companies to hire them so cheap, you, the taxpayers, are subsidising them with free health care, car insurance, housing, etc.

You might as well look at the truth, you are subsidising these big corporations!

People don't look at it for what it is....who do you think pays for the lobbyist, and whines to their high powered friends like Bush and Chaney that they can't keep cheap help if they tighten the laws?

You are really subsidising the millionaires that make the money off hiring them so cheap. People don't get it.


suggarfoot's picture
Submitted by suggarfoot on Mon, 07/13/2009 - 6:08am.

there would be no need for a wall. I bet Bush and Chancey and their frieds at Dole, etc., are laughing till they pee on themselves at the average taxpayers stupidity.

It really isn't stupidity though. We the taxpayers, are so busy, running to work, taking care of the kids, etc., we don't have the time to pay attention to what the governemnt is doing. These people know that, that is why the big corporations have their lobbyist in there taking advantage.

The American people are to some degree, modern slaves.


Submitted by Bonkers on Mon, 07/13/2009 - 5:53am.

I do see a lot of them ferigners with their pots of gold walking round. A shame.
We have dun battle what wif most everone alive, I think. Be hard to git any immigrants wifout that! (Germany, Italy, China, Russia, Korea, Viet Nam, England, Ireland, Mexico, Panama, Haiti, Several Island nations, Japan, Hong Kong, Puerto Rica, Cuba, and others.

I spect all 30 million of them Mexs have got "aid" as yhou say. A bunch of em ennyway!
Droppin them thar babies ought to be illegal jest as it is in south Atlanta, Grady, Harlem, and Arkansas, and Detroit. Alabama also.
I also think we ned to stop them thar Alabamians, Floridans, and Yankees, frum comin. They jest want whut we got.
Stop em frum travelin back and forth too, also.
What air them free drivers licenses north of Atlanta? I want one.
I also wish they would quit goin to mergency room fer sickness! I don't want to sel em enny health insurance---they won't pay fer it.
They should jest be sick long side uf the rode. They don't haf no hospitals in Mexico fer poor people neither.

Them bleedin hearts and PCs need to go. Where? Mexico I think. Im plumb tard uf them. They haf took a lot uf my fortun!
Yes, chang the rules about illegals---jest say we cant haf none.

Yeah many countries and civilizations haf fell long the wayside. Greed, selfishness, money hoggers, torturers (Inquisition),Abu-Ghraib, conquerers, power mongers, color haters, ignorant people who were often burned, and so on.

We aint never dun none of thet haf we?

Snatch it all up into yr mattress and in coffe kans buried in yard fer they is a comin to git it and GUNS.

Submitted by Brittanicus on Tue, 07/07/2009 - 4:22pm.

With Al Franklin being sworn the oath of office, which for a majority in either party the oath means absolutely nothing? Be assured the Democratic Libertarian leadership has a perfect storm and with a 60 member majority the other side cannot filibuster any new laws to being enacted. My major concern is an illegal immigrant the--OVERPOPULATION--invasion. Unless--THE AMERICAN PEOPLE--don't exert pressure on their Senators, Representatives, they are--SURE--to pass another AMNESTY. With no restraints it means 13 to 20 million plus, foreign workers and their large families will get a path to citizenship, even though they broke our laws. In stark addition to this, millions more will appear in America after sweeping across our border, after being advised that AMNESTY is going to be enacted.

OVERPOPULATION--will over the next 40 years propel the amount of people, living, working here to around 430 million? That's federal government statistics?

Our country is already being swamped by foreign nations who cannot speak or write English and unable to comprehend road warning signs. Amongst the impoverished, the sick and others carry contagious diseases, comes the gang members, rapists, murders and other criminal elements. Those caught have already compromised our overcrowded penal system. Each day there is carnage on the highways to American family members. The Heritage foundation has already stated that the costs could reach $2.5 TRILLION DOLLARS, just in retirement benefits.

I don't think their are any words to describe the financial impact on taxpayers, as these poor, unschooled and large extended families cannot find work, in a near 11.0 percent jobless rate for AMERICANS. There is huge unknown financial amount of money to support the illegal worker, followed by a wife and then--CHAIN MIGRATION--of sisters, brothers who are sure to come?

There is a danger to our economy so unbelievable, it cannot be emphasized enough--THAT THE PUBLIC MUST PRESSURE THEIR RELUCTANT PUBLIC SERVANTS IN WASHINGTON--NOT TO ALLOW ANY KIND OF AMNESTY? The full weight of this massive expenditure will fall on the U.S. TAXPAYER--NOT THE PARASITE EMPLOYER WHO DOES THE HIRING? A prime example at this time is payments of illegal alien households around the country. Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation calculated the average low-skilled immigrant household received $30,160 in direct benefits, education, medical care and other services from all levels of government in 2004. Those same low-skilled immigrant households paid only $10,573 in taxes that year, meaning the average low-skill household had a fiscal deficit of $19,588.

The ultimate question is can Americans afford to support all these low income nationals, while the nations economy is stagnant? With millions of the US population searching for a job, with a slender possibility of passing Universal health care? We must have a uniform immigration enforcement program, that our politicians have cowardly moved away from, except for a brave few.

We need immediate transformation of E-Verification to a permanent, none voluntary for--ALL--workers, within the United States. Whether you have five employees or 50.000 everybody must be verified as legal. IT SHOULD START WITH EVERY GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR WITHOUT ANY EXCEPTION? THEN EVERY US FEDERAL WORKER SHOULD BE VETTED, OR HAVE THE US GOVERNMENT GOT SOMETHING TO HIDE? BEING THAT FORMER PRESIDENT BUSH, IMPLEMENTED THE PILOT PROGRAM, THE GOVERNMENT MUST SET AN EXAMPLE INSTEAD OF ALL THE DELAYS?

suggarfoot's picture
Submitted by suggarfoot on Tue, 07/07/2009 - 5:40pm.

Did you know that if an illegal comes across the border and squatts and has a baby...that baby is now a US citizen and that our governemnt then pays BOTH parents to stay and take care of it? that is the law! Did you know that baby gets a disability check because it can't take care of itself? Did you know these people then get foodstamps, welfare, free medical, and free housing?!!! Guess who is footing this bill for this welcome wagon? What is really a crime is the American women that leave their kids in daycare everyday to go an eack out an honest living, while these people are living off the taxes that these woman, and their children suffer to pay!


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.