NursingLink

I thought so.

MaggyC says ...

i have heard a few times in these posts about people who buy cars, houses, cell phones instead of insurance.  So, in other words, if for various reasons you can't afford insurance, your job doesn't offer it, it is too expensive for you to afford eventhough you are working full time, you shouldn't have a house, a car or a cellphone.  Is that what some are saying?  For instance and sorry to those of you who have heard this from me before)  Blue Cross/ Blue shield quoted me a rate of approx. $3150.00 per month for guaranteed rate coverage.  I have a pre-existing condition.  I have a cellphone = $49.00/ month.  I drive a 1999 Grand Prix= paid for.  Every 6 weeks Clairol=10.00.  I meet my daughter and her new baby for lunch, once or twice a week at Wendy's or McDonald's and I usually pay=10.00/per visit.  Other frivolities, i.e. a mall visit for clothes, say 50.00 a month (I don't shop monthly).  I am in Home Health so I buy gas for car=100.00 per month.  My husband pays the big bills like mortgage, car insurance etc.  My monthly expenditures+ approx. $300.00 per month.  I'll even up that to $500.00 a month because I sometimes will buy my grandkids an outfit or 2 during the month.  If I stopped doing all these things and put that $500.00 to my insurance premium of 3150.00, I'd still be SOL.  I think it's kind of bizarre and a little extreme to say that if you can't afford healthcare, you shouldn't have a house, a cellphone or a TV, don't you?                   

The point isn't that if you can't buy health insurance you shouldn't buy a house, car or cell phone, it is a matter of where people put their priorities. We have an instant gratification takes too long society, and at 20 far too many think about a big house, a flashy car, or the newest whiz-bang cell phone rather than how they are going to afford care when they develop Alzheimer's. The prevailing attitude is live for today and if TSHTF, the government will take care of me. How many people do you know that think they will be able to comfortably retire on Social Security alone?

Look at the rate of savings in this country vs. the rest of the world and I rest my case.

i also heard that this proposal exempts congress from having to sign up for it!!! HA  that is classic .  Man they must think we are stupider than we look.  its their crazy idea but they want US to try it first!!!Hey i know lets have the politicians test run this beast first!!!Let's see how high their cancer survival rate is on this obamaplan maybe if we can get rid of enough of them with socialized medicene we can get a few decent honest individuals to run the show!!!!!

Universal healthcare is going to be the ruination of our career. There will be more nursing and doctor shortages than there are now, This plan will put our system into shock and create a pandamonium that will continue for a life time. We need some reform, but this is not the answer!!!!   Jillyan208****

I totally agree with Jillyan208.  This is not the answer.  I caught a part of a show while I was on break the other day and it was explaining the care that Canada resident get and it didn't sound that great.  People die wating for approval to get treated.  I agree that something needs to be done because the premiums that we pay for health care is crazy.  How many  people pay those premiums for years and never use the health care.  I wish I would have thought of it when I was young and put that money each  month in a savings account and then used it for medical care when I needed it.  I can not imagine how much money I would have had saved by now. 

I don't want  the government to give me a free ride but I do think that the insurance companies have gone mad with what they charge.  They need to be regulated and not have so much control over how the care is administered.  The hospitals alot of times have their hands tied as to what they can do for patients because of the insurance companies and how can some person sitting in an offie somewhere 300 miles away determine what can and will be done for a patient. 

You know there you go showing your lack of knowledge again.  John Edwards may have extra marital dalliances but he and his wife are huge champions for excellent healthcare for all.  They have always said that she gets the best of care because they can afford it and how everyone should have the access to the same care she does.  They have travelled far and wide to talk about this and advocate for poor and underserved peoples who need health care.  She especially is concerned about people with pre-existing conditions and champions for them to be covered.

Why I am against a Universal (Single-Payer) Health Insurance

Problems With Single-Payer Health Insurance

Although Americans soundly rejected "socialized medicine" back in 1993, when the Clinton administration proposed wholesale changes in the health care industry, former Delaware Gov. Pete du Pont says self-appointed health care advocates are pushing incremental steps toward national health insurance.

National health insurance is socialized medicine -- but proponents are using a less threatening term: "single-payer system." In theory, a single-payer system would reduce the number of different organizations with which physicians and hospitals must file claims. Many public health advocates assume the administrative savings would be sufficient to fund coverage for the uninsured. Likewise, consumer groups would like to pocket any savings in the form of lower premiums. Yet the truth is there will be no "savings" to fight over.

In all single-payer systems, consumers are insulated from the direct cost of health care because it is paid for through taxation. Consequently, they tend to consume more. Single-payer systems employ several tactics to artificially reduce consumption, including outright rationing of care, shortchanging capital investment, and reducing the number of physicians.

• To adopt a single-payer system with resource allocation similar to Canada, for instance, the U.S. would have to fire around 171,000 physicians.


• The remaining doctors would have to see, on average, 921 additional patients per year to match the average number of patients seen by Canadian physicians -- likely reducing the length of time physicians spend with patients.


• Furthermore, long waits would be required -- in 1999, for example, the median wait for a CT scan and an MRI across Canada was five weeks and 12 weeks, respectively.

Finally, as a monopoly, a single-payer system can reduce funding for particular services or refuse to cover services deemed too expensive. Consumers would have to accept whatever costs and benefits were offered.

Source: Pete du Pont (NCPA policy chairman), "Single-Payer Health Care By Any Other Name Is Still A Monopoly," April 2, 2002.

I am disgusted and embarassed that my "peers" support a single payor system. I know of no nurses that support this, so why is the union going down this road? This is going to lower the quality of care and increase our costs as consumers. And there will still be uninsured people. Socialized medicine has NEVER worked. The horror stories from Canada and Europe abound, but you just don't hear about 90 year olds being refused chemo or pacemakers here in the USA because they are not worth the cost. No matter who you are here, you get the treatment you need - so why do we want to fix this? We're being sold a bill of goods all wrapped in a pretty package, but it's a Pandora's box waiting to be opened. Bad stuff, folks. Bad stuff. Go to http://www.freeourhealthcarenow.com and sign the petition to stop this before we are in a position to regret it

I know that there are plenty of people who do the best that they can and end up with problems and not being able to pay for their healthcare but I have worked in major public hospitals as well as medium sized and small hospitals.  There are too many people who expect that just because they exist feel that they are entitled to free healthcare.  They are noncompliant, come into the emergency room for "colds", high blood pressure or even to get a pregnancy test.  They think that it is free to them because they have no money or intention to pay the bill and so they government has to bail out the hospitals by paying for them.  I work full time, buy insurance and cannot afford to pay for the co-pays for any tests, medications or treatment.  I have high cholesterol, allergeries, and sleep apnea and I cannot afford the co-pay for my medications or for the C-PAP that I need to get adequate rest.  But all of these are "given" to people who go on having children that they can't afford, who are not compliant with their treatments and get sicker.  Granted there are people out there who genuinely need the assistance from the government.  My sister is one of them.  She is disabled due leg and wrist injuries.  She is applying for Medicaid to help pay for her needed surgery and, guess what?, at age 52, she is going back to college under the economic stimulus package to get a Bachelor's Degree after only getting a GED to finish high school.  There are too many people laying back and relaxing because the government is taking care of them (ie-us, the taxpayers).

kellyj says ...

i also heard that this proposal exempts congress from having to sign up for it!!! HA  that is classic .  Man they must think we are stupider than we look.  its their crazy idea but they want US to try it first!!!Hey i know lets have the politicians test run this beast first!!!Let's see how high their cancer survival rate is on this obamaplan maybe if we can get rid of enough of them with socialized medicene we can get a few decent honest individuals to run the show!!!!!

Even if we get an entire Congress of George Washingtons, we'll still be stuck with whatever health care "reform" they pass. As Ronald Reagan once observed; "The nearest thing to eternal life we'll see on earth is a govt program."

THe healthcare reform issue is far too important to rush into with Congress again passing a law they haven't even read. We have to live with their mistakes.

kellyj says ...

i also heard that this proposal exempts congress from having to sign up for it!!! HA  that is classic .  Man they must think we are stupider than we look.  its their crazy idea but they want US to try it first!!!Hey i know lets have the politicians test run this beast first!!!Let's see how high their cancer survival rate is on this obamaplan maybe if we can get rid of enough of them with socialized medicene we can get a few decent honest individuals to run the show!!!!!

THat's not at all unusual -- look at Social Security. They needed to be strongly reminded that one of the main reasons we seceeded from the British Empire was the concept of one law for the ruling class and another for the peons.

valery23 says ...

Just a simple question..... Im indifferent about universal healthcare, but if everyone is so against it and everyone agrees that the system in place now is broken, then why not come up with a suggestion/solution then complain how bad it is.... Because the people who are wanting to implement it are thinking of a solution and not complaining. Before we whine about it, try to fix it.

Valery

at my hospital, as with all hospital er's. no person is turned away, even if they state they cannot pay.

there are proposals on the table but you wouldn't know about them unless you really go past the headlines and sounbites.  The president believes in what he is doing, he is sincere, but he is very misquided and a a product of his Harvard Education. The very state he went to school in has had universl healthcare within it.  If you look, Massachusetts's system is crumbling. That's the state of Sen. Ted Kennedy.  He's helped push that sytem through and has been touting it for years. 

That's why Obama and his followers in Congress want to ram the federal bill through.  If they wait and the Mass. system completely fall apartt, which it will, they will lose political momentum.  Oh, did you also know that the very people in congress who will pass this bill are the only ones who will not have to have it?  Yes, congress has its own health plan.  It has all the bells and whistles you could imagine....at tax payer cost.  Do you think they will be denied life saving and expensive care in the future? no that fate is for the commoners which is how they think of us.

By the way, at my hospital, as with all hospital er's. noone is turned away, even if they state they cannot pay.

I too disagree withUniversal Healthcare.  The issue here is the media is not out there expressing why this is not a good idea.  I have been writing to my respresentatives and telling my co-workers (many of whom are ignorant) and my friends not to support this new proposal.  We need to get the word out and get the media involved to stop Obama from pushing this through so fast that no one will read the whole bill.  THe media backs whatever Obama says and is very liberal.  Look at who owns the media and who gave him big political contributions!!  Actions need to speak right now. 

kellyj says ...

to clarify ...a single payor system ie socialized care will be substandard and offer incomplete solutions to a permanent problem. Yesterday my daughter had a cast put on her arm..We went to the ER and waited 6 hours .  We spent the day with people who were also waiting for care many if not most had no insurance.  We were all treated the same and waited together peacefully.  Healthcare is the hallmark of a civilized society.  Without it we are doomed.  There is nothing wrong with the system other than it does not offer the gov a big enough piece of the pie and obviously that is pissing them off!! I would venture to guess that those of you who see no problem going to this kind of care are obviously recieving it already and see no reason why we all can't accept it.  Well i will tell you why because we have seen the other side and it is BETTER much much BETTER. Being offered 3 different kinds of casts to put on my dtr's arm was amazing!!! If you were able to pay cash you could have the best cast!! fiberglass and waterproof. That is the way it should be!! the other casts were pretty good but the best one cost the most money !!With single payor we will get one kind and you can bet it will be the CHEAPEST one availible.  Do not be fooled the single payor system will degrade ALL the care that is availible today .  That is not to say the ones who cannot pay do not have access to the best its just that the ones who can pay WILL get the best.  Its capitalism and it WORKS!

Well said Kellyj. 

As Thomas Sowell pointed out  in a recent column --

A cynic is said to be someone who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. If so, then it is political cynicism to point to other countries that spend less on medical care, including some countries where there is "universal health care" provided "free" by their governments.

Just as medical care, houses and cars were all cheaper when they lacked things that they have today, so medical care in other countries is cheaper when they lack many things that are more readily available in the United States.

SEE: http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell063009.php3

Nausea, that is what this causes me. I an a RN and work in the Industry of travel. I am ER based. I have seen what what happen with nationalized, goverment run health care. People will be put on a waiting list. And yes this already happens when hospitals are overcome with large amounts of pts with needs and are in the public system already. The are givin 3 months worth of pain med and put on a waiting list for gallbladder surgeries- ect. I do sincerely believe that Nationalized health care with be the exact equal to Selective Genocide. Think my thoughts are radical. well yes reform need done but there are better ways to start, but warming up instead of jumping into the frying pan. The medicare, medicaide system is already severely flawed. So if that is not fixed then why would a gov payer and run system work."It wont". All will be wonderful if your children have a runny nose, or need a routine checkup, or you need regular medicines like insulin. But wait- Don't you or any of your family member even think about needing certain procedures that the goverment would deem experience and not nessasary, like a MRI or even a heart cath. Selective Genocide is exactly what it will be.

i am surprised that those of us telling others about the dangers of a healthcare system run by politicians would be open to such negative comments!!! thank goodness we are still allowed to say outloud what a crapshoot it will become! if one thinks that this is a political agenda than one needs to look a bit further. this is a human  agenda and amoritizing crappiness across the board is not going to make the problem of the uninsured better but by far it will become much much worse!