Harmony Central Forums
Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

OT: My next door neighbor died needlessly

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse







X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    To me, it's a no brainer.
    Socialized health care is the answer. It isn't worth debating.
    We (U.S.A.) easily have the resources to provide quality health care to all. And quality does not mean cutting edge, absolute top of the line technology. It's not about getting the absolute best it's about getting what you need. Most of the time that is run of the mill health care that is not available to all.
    15% is huge and ugly. It says something about the values in this country. I don't give a rats ass who that offends. I would willingly pay twice the amount of taxes I pay if it would provide for all. In a heart beat.

    Comment


    • #17
      Census info
      <div class="signaturecontainer">GuitarCenter sucks. <br />
      MusiciansFriend sucks. <br />
      This has been a public service message. </div>

      Comment


      • #18
        Major issues that would need to be resolved in order to enact a "national" healthcare system:

        WHO pays for it? Do we just continue to give more of our income towards taxes for yet another mismanaged and fraudulant government-run service?
        Even in the name of helping people, the gov. would be the WORST organization to fund and run a system as diverse and complicated as health care.
        Realize that the U.S. government does little to nothing to generate any income of it's own. The government operates because we give it money to operate.

        WHO is eligible for the service? Does it cover everyone, from Mike's neighbor up to Bill Gates? What is the cut-off point if there is one? Can you opt-in or out as you please according to your income?
        Is there a cap on coverage? Who determines elective vs. necessary surgeries?

        WHAT happens to those who are of sound mind and body and yet desire to smoke/drink/eat junk all to excesses? Do they pay a higher tax? Are they refused coverage? WHat about hereditary health issues?

        National healthcare sounds like a grand idea until you realize that such a titanic undertaking would be run by people who aim at icebergs and spend their lifeboat money on state-funded personal vehicles, personal trips and office furniture.
        <div class="signaturecontainer">&quot;Sarcasm...it's what's for dinner!&quot;<br />
        <a href="http://www.dslextreme.com/users/dwguitar/Licks.html" target="_blank">Dave's tunage and more...</a><br />
        <a href="http://www.cdbaby.com/byfaith" target="_blank">Buy my CD!!!</a><br />
        </div>

        Comment


        • #19
          Excellent post, Wine Red
          <div class="signaturecontainer">GuitarCenter sucks. <br />
          MusiciansFriend sucks. <br />
          This has been a public service message. </div>

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by '82 Wine red
            Major issues that would need to be resolved in order to enact a "national" healthcare system:

            WHO pays for it? Do we just continue to give more of our income towards taxes for yet another mismanaged and fraudulant government-run service?
            Even in the name of helping people, the gov. would be the WORST organization to fund and run a system as diverse and complicated as health care.
            Realize that the U.S. government does little to nothing to generate any income of it's own. The government operates because we give it money to operate.

            WHO is eligible for the service? Does it cover everyone, from Mike's neighbor up to Bill Gates? What is the cut-off point if there is one? Can you opt-in or out as you please according to your income?
            Is there a cap on coverage? Who determines elective vs. necessary surgeries?

            WHAT happens to those who are of sound mind and body and yet desire to smoke/drink/eat junk all to excesses? Do they pay a higher tax? Are they refused coverage? WHat about hereditary health issues?

            National healthcare sounds like a grand idea until you realize that such a titanic undertaking would be run by people who aim at icebergs and spend their lifeboat money on state-funded personal vehicles, personal trips and office furniture.


            So the gist of your post is that government can't do anything right.
            That's simplistic.
            Government does all kinds of things right and adequately.
            You can debate individual circumstances if you want, that is, after all, politics. But it's not a black and white issue.
            Government is neither BAD nor GOOD, it's the best we are capable of collectively making it. And therefore somewhat complicated.
            All the questions that you raise have been addressed and delt with by countries with some form of socialized health care.
            They aren't, of course, perfect systems, no big surprise right?
            They do however provide adequate health care to virtually everyone.
            I'm not going to provide names of countries and details of their plans. I don't know them off the top of my head and if I did I wouldn't take the time to detail them out here. But they exist and I'm sure you are aware of some of them.
            As far as people taking advantage of the system, it's a minor concern. I would never dump Medicaid because some people take advantage of it, I'm far more concerned about the people that it helps.
            I'll write it again, 15% is huge and ugly.

            And here I am debating what I said wasn't debatable.

            Comment


            • #21
              The gist of my post is one of saying that my limited experience in this world with this U.S. government has proved to me that they can not do many things efficiently and honestly.

              It would be a crime to see ANY of the money put forth into a health care system instead go to pay for another government employee's $40,000 SUV or into office redecoration BUT history has shown us that some funds which were destined for good end up doing little to no good except for those who don't deserve it...with little legal repercusions IF caught.

              Sorry to sound jaded but I'm skeptical of the people and motives behind gov.-run programs yet not against the heart of the programs themselves nor the help they could provide.

              And as someone else previously posted, we already have many programs which may even be able to cover much of those 15% which are currently lacking. Why not refine what we already have instead of thinking that a new system is the answer?

              Many people go without help simply because they didn't know that help was available. I don't know if this was the case with Mike's neighbor but it would be sad if it were.
              <div class="signaturecontainer">&quot;Sarcasm...it's what's for dinner!&quot;<br />
              <a href="http://www.dslextreme.com/users/dwguitar/Licks.html" target="_blank">Dave's tunage and more...</a><br />
              <a href="http://www.cdbaby.com/byfaith" target="_blank">Buy my CD!!!</a><br />
              </div>

              Comment


              • #22
                OK -> go to somewhere like finance.yahoo.com

                Look up any major health insurance company.

                Go to the details and look up the remuneration of the executive officers.

                Then ask youself where your money, and your employers money if you are employed and have health insurance, is going?

                Would the government do any worse? I think not -> this is a system out of control. Hey if other folks can make it work, I'm damn sure that we can -> and do it better!

                Meanwhile kids are dying.

                MQTA

                Comment


                • #23
                  The problem with any kind of socialistic program is the enormous potential for abuse. But the propblem with the system as it exists now is that the existing safety net is full of holes that people like my neighbor (who BTW was 53- 4 years younger than me) fall through.

                  We have to decide which is worse. Given the 2 alternatives, I have to opt for socialized medicine. I just hope it will be possible to devise a national health care program that has enough checks and balances to minimize the abuse factor.

                  Terje, please tell us how they do it in Sweden.
                  <div class="signaturecontainer">&quot;When I gave food to the poor, they called me a saint. When I asked why the poor were hungry, they called me a communist.&quot; - Mother Teresa.<br />
                  <br />
                  &quot;If fascism ever comes to America, it will come wrapped in the American flag and carrying the cross of Jesus&quot;- Sinclair Lewis. <br />
                  <br />
                  'Ketchup is a vegetable&quot; - Ronald Reagan.<br />
                  <br />
                  &quot;Let's all hope Olbermann gets put in the hospital for something serious fairly soon&quot; - G.Z. Sound<br />
                  +++++<br />
                  <a href="http://www.perlowinmusic.com" target="_blank">My web site</a></div>

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Stringman
                    The problem with any kind of socialistic program is the enormous potential for abuse.


                    I would say that any capitalistic system carries the same potential. At least.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Norsegod


                      I would say that any capitalistic system carries the same potential. At least.


                      The problem with capitalism is that when it was unchecked, many large businesses abused and exploited their workers, poisoned their neighbors, and cheated their customers. Every law that has ever been passed that limits the power of corporations has been a response to some sort of abuse.

                      But under socialism, where the government owns the principle means of production and distribution of goods and services, the same people control both the goods and services AND the laws governing them.

                      I'm reluctantly in favor of socialized medicine, as a lessor evil that letting people go without medical care. But when it comes to non-essential goods and services, I'd rather see a highly regulated capitalist system, where the government has, and uses, the power to force big business to act within the confines of human decency, than a pure socialist one where those who hold economic power regulate themselves.

                      I'd be more inclined to be pro-socialist if there were enough checks and balances built into it to prevent it from becoming perverted and exploited.
                      <div class="signaturecontainer">&quot;When I gave food to the poor, they called me a saint. When I asked why the poor were hungry, they called me a communist.&quot; - Mother Teresa.<br />
                      <br />
                      &quot;If fascism ever comes to America, it will come wrapped in the American flag and carrying the cross of Jesus&quot;- Sinclair Lewis. <br />
                      <br />
                      'Ketchup is a vegetable&quot; - Ronald Reagan.<br />
                      <br />
                      &quot;Let's all hope Olbermann gets put in the hospital for something serious fairly soon&quot; - G.Z. Sound<br />
                      +++++<br />
                      <a href="http://www.perlowinmusic.com" target="_blank">My web site</a></div>

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I'm not a pure socialist either. That would be silly. I believe in a free market to a certain extent. But laissez-faire capitalism is bull****************.
                        There were three articles in the newspaper today about growing insurance rates and growing numbers of people who are going without.
                        One here in Montana dealt with uninsured children partially subsidized by the state. The carrier raised the rates on the plan and the state says it can't meet its share of the commitment, federal gov. picking up the rest.
                        They say they will have to drop 700 recipients.
                        There is already a waiting list of 1,300.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Hey guys, ever hear of Canada? The U.K. ? Sweden? Denmark? Italy? France? Government run national healthcare IS reality in these & many other countries. It's do-able folks. It's not perfect, but it's a lot better than the for profit system in the USA. All it takes is the political will. Canada did it in the mid-sixties. It's paid for through a combination of employer/employee contributions and taxes. As an employee my portion is about $100/ month which includes basic Dental, semi- private hospital room, & glasses every two years, as well as most medical care & procedures.

                          Our doctors do pretty well, maybe not as well as in the USA, but not bad. Many U.S. companies regard Canada as a good place to locate because of our healthy, well cared for workforce & the fact that they don't have to offer expensive medical benefits to attract good employees, as is often the case in the profit driven American system.

                          It's just a matter of choices. Divert some of those billions from the Military/Industrial Complex & give it to the doctors & hospitals to heal people instead! While you're at it, PLEASE outlaw all those handguns you love so much! They're being smuggled north & causing a lot of grief up here. We don't need them!!! Besides, you'd have a lot fewer people in need of medical care (to get back on topic) if you had no handguns! Peace, Brothers!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Stringman
                            This woman died because she couldn't afford health insurance. I think it's time we instituted some sort of national health care system to make sure that never happens again.


                            Yes, it's about time.

                            Some people will call that socialism.


                            No, it's called being civilized. It takes a lot more before it even comes close to becoming socialism. Trust me on this.
                            <div class="signaturecontainer">Terje Larsson<br />
                            <br />
                            <font size="0"><font color="red">inbox is full, send e-mail instead</font></font><br />
                            <br />
                            Hey, wanna look at <font color="red">my comics</font>? Come here then <a href="http://terjelarssonserier.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://terjelarssonserier.blogspot.com/</a><br />
                            <br />
                            Ah, sorry, it's all in swedish, but you can always <i>look</i>!<br />
                            <br />
                            You can also check out my crazy friend Dan's crazy website where he'll teach you to master the guitar in 8 minutes (or days... or whatever). <br />
                            <br />
                            <a href="http://spytunes.co.uk/" target="_blank">http://spytunes.co.uk/</a></div>

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Stringman


                              The problem with capitalism is...


                              ... they're ****************ing endless.

                              No, the real problem with capitalism is that it's opposed to free market economy. A capitalist market does not stay free for long until the bigger corporations start to control it. We need a bit of socailism to keepthe market free, we need a bit of control to have that freedom.

                              I'd be more inclined to be pro-socialist if there were enough checks and balances built into it to prevent it from becoming perverted and exploited.


                              In Europe socialism has successfully been combined with democracy in all the democratic countries. Can't see the problem actually.
                              <div class="signaturecontainer">Terje Larsson<br />
                              <br />
                              <font size="0"><font color="red">inbox is full, send e-mail instead</font></font><br />
                              <br />
                              Hey, wanna look at <font color="red">my comics</font>? Come here then <a href="http://terjelarssonserier.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://terjelarssonserier.blogspot.com/</a><br />
                              <br />
                              Ah, sorry, it's all in swedish, but you can always <i>look</i>!<br />
                              <br />
                              You can also check out my crazy friend Dan's crazy website where he'll teach you to master the guitar in 8 minutes (or days... or whatever). <br />
                              <br />
                              <a href="http://spytunes.co.uk/" target="_blank">http://spytunes.co.uk/</a></div>

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Stringman
                                I think it's time we instituted some sort of national health care system to make sure that never happens again.
                                I agree.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X