dc_dux

Nope,,,,you cant opt out, but you have mulitiple choices of private providers.

Thats life

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

aceventura3

In the interest of clarity can you explain how that works? I have not found an explanation. How do you force people to buy the coverage? What happens if they don't? For example with social security people pay social security taxes based on income, but if they have no income or if they earn income from things like interest/dividends/insurance proceeds/etc. they don't take social security taxes on those forms of income. The point is that the issue can be a bit more complex than you imply in your response.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

dc_dux

The plan is as an "individual mandate" plan that requires you to have health insurance comparable to a requirement to have auto insurance.

The devil is in the detail and I really dont know the enforcement mechanism. I do know it provides many options for individuals to select the plan that best suits their needs.

Of course its more complex than I implied, but its equally simplistic to characterization it as "socialized medicine" as others (not you) have suggested.

And now I am done here too.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

samcol

I like the smug response. Do you get off on making other people's lives miserable?

I eat organic and work out and rarely have to go to the doctor. Yet you still want me to buy insulin for some obese idiot who can't figure out high fructose corn syrup is killing him, or the smoker with lung cancer, or anyone else who has no regard for their health. I guess that's perfectly acceptable in your world.

Forcing me to participate in this BULLSHIT is so uneverving. It's as bad as forcing religion on someone.

Healthcare is not about being healthy or getting well, it's about a continuing dependecy on the system. Socialized healthcare will just make this worse. I won't be visiting your Mengele offices or hospitals. No thanks.

There's two types of people, those who want to be left alone and those who won't leave them alone. I think we both know where we stand.

__________________
It's time for the president to hand over his nobel peace prize.

dc_dux

Yep....that explains it.

Each man (or woman) left to himself (herself) and fuck everybody else. It a shame you can't see how this attitude will ultimately will come around to affect you anyway, in either your pocketbook, your workplace or other social interactions.

I think even your man Ron Paul, with all his libertarian leanings, understands that much.

WTF is that....talk about smug.

Now I will leave you alone

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

samcol

You promote a system that benefits from people getting sick and staying sick. That is the attitude that is fucking everyone. Try telling people their food supply is poison and their medicine is killing them if you really want to help.

Ron Paul ran a doctors office with an external payment drop box and never accepted medicare/medicaid. If someone couldn't afford to pay no questions were asked. The reason he stopped his practice and ran for congress is because governmental intrutions made it increasingly difficult to run his practice how he saw fit.

The sponsors of this bill do not have the outstanding character of Ron Paul, but they do have the payoffs from big pharm. I'm sure Hillary will get elected and you'll have all the healthcare you want.

__________________
It's time for the president to hand over his nobel peace prize.

Willravel

Hillary is bought and paid for. I doubt we'll see single payer health care under her. We'll probably get something better than we have now, but that's not saying much.

As I understand it, the wait times are due to there not being enough doctors, but graduates in medicine in Canada and Western Europe have steadily been on the rise for the past two years. If the trend continues, waiting times will become less and less of a problem.

As for paying for someone else, no man is an island. Sometimes we need to lean on people for help, and sometimes they need to lean on us. That's what society means. All of us, collectively, are interdependent. We have to do our best to make sure the health care system won't make people complacent and dependent, but to deny someone health care because they might not have 100% healthy habits is deeply cruel and inhuman. Universal healthcare is about equality and sympathy, two ideals I hold in very high regard.

To Samcol, is it bullshit that you pay for roads or police? Would you opt out of them and simply not use them? I see medical care as being just as necessary if not more so than any other governmental system or program be it as big as military or as small as regulating for safe baby food. It's alright to admit that sometimes corporations can't get the job done because they're too profit driven.

highthief

How about this for a healthplan:

All you fat, smoking, drinking buggers get no insurance or healthcare, period. If you don't get at least 3 hours of exercise a week, no doctor for you. You die (hopefully failing to propogate) leaving the rest of the universe with affordable health coverage, provided either by the state or privately?

Probably would save about a trillion dollars or so ...

__________________
Si vis pacem parabellum.

Willravel

That'd be nice, but if people were asked to be responsible, they'd revolt. Saying "you have to go out and exercise, or else" would lead to revolution.

dc_dux

We could give the Repubs a Hillary punching bag.

BTW, I'm all for single payer, but I dont see how we get from here to there without something in between.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

samcol

Exactly, and that's where we are headed with health care. No smoking, no fast food, you must exercise etc. Employers are already fining people on their health policy for smoking and such. Socialized healthcare is leading down the wrong road.

By your own admition it's a failed program it seems. A: We pay more money to support the healthcare of these unhealthy individuals or B: We begin outlawing anything perceived by masses as unhealty. Both are bad, people should be able to smoke or be fat and lazy if they want, but I shouldn't have to pay for it.

I just don't understand why people won't let me make my own decisions about something as critical as my health. It's mind boggling.

Let's not forget the government will get to decide what is or isn't covered. You want the same government that sends us to needless war and destroys civil liberties to take care of us. You can't possible believe they won't royally fuck healthcare up too.


p.s.
And no, I don't believe healthcare falls in the same category as roads and police, especially at a federal level.

__________________
It's time for the president to hand over his nobel peace prize.

Willravel

I don't really understand how trying to stop people from smoking is such a horrible thing. Smoking is a form of suicide and it's addictive. People who smoke should have to pay more. People who refuse to exercise should pay more. People who eat at McDonald's every day should pay more. That hardly negates the whole thing, though.
I must have missed my admission about how it's a failed program. We pay more in private healthcare than any country pays in socialized or partially socialized medicine, and we still have 45,000,000 people who aren't even covered. Imagine how much more we'd pay if those 45m could afford it. Even if we had the same tax level for everyone, be they healthy or not, we'd all be paying a lot less. Insurance and malpractice are extremely high drains on the whole process. Without them, and without the drive for profit and to appease investors, the system becomes substantially cheaper.
It's not a 'decision' not to have health coverage. It's just ignorance. It amazes me that people discuss healthcare as being a decision to make, as if your deciding on what color of car you want. Without healthcare, you're in deep shit. Something "as critical as [your] health" should be important enough for you to be covered. That's the whole idea.
Military is in the process of being privatized. Private contracts, mercenaries on the ground, and bought and paid for politicians. Socialized medicine flies in the face of that trend. Socialization is about moving the control from the hands of the proven irresponsible corporations and private interests.
It doesn't yet, but it would under socialization. My point is that I don't see anyone complaining about the government controling things like roads and police. I don't see anyone calling for privatized police (imagine paying $200 a month in case you need to call the police and if you don't pay... no one will protect you) or privatized roads (don't pay your transportation insurance? Good luck getting to work...).

samcol

It's not bad to try and pursuade someone from smoking, but if someone wants to that's their choice and who are you to outlaw it. I guess won't be able to drive my motorcyle either since they are more dangerous than cars. I do a high risk job, should I pay more too? Seriously, that slope never ends.
So...I can't sue for malpractice when the doctor screws me up with a system I didn't even want in the first place. That's outstanding. Don't you believe in redress of grievances?
It is a decision, not everyone feels the way you do. This nationalized healthcare garbage is just like Roman Catholic church of years ago. Everyone must follow the king's religion, no freedom.

The other huge problem that we aren't even talking about is how bad the actual 'care' is. The FDA allows horrible things to pass (GMOs, pesticides, fertalizers, antibiotics, growth hormones all in the food supply that makes us sick so we can buy their cool new pill) while trying to ban natural cures. This is the system you are supporting and now you want to force me to participate. It's bad.
Yes, the same politians who are bought and paid for by the mercs are likewise bought and paid for by pharma. They surely will save us all with their healthcare. I expect great things.
hmm...$200 a month for police? I think ill pocket that cash and just keep my revolver handy. Come to think of it, if I never had to deal with harrasment from a police officer while I was minding my own business that would be fine too.

__________________
It's time for the president to hand over his nobel peace prize.

Willravel

Prohibition of ciggys is a good idea. I've suspected for years that's the direction California is heading. I guess we'll have to wait and see. BTW, cigarettes aren't transportation. They only have a simple function: they're a method of taking in addictive drugs. While tobacco is actually a decent product and can be used to make useful things, cigarettes have no positive health value whatsoever. At least McDonald's hamburgers have protein.
I believe in reasonable reparations. Suing for $35m is a gross misuse of the justice system. I believe that if a doctor screws up, he should have to be forced into school and relearn how to be a doctor, and that the person who was wronged should be made well if possible. If the doctor slips and cuts the wrong thing? They fix it and provide coverage for that.
What about no equality? What about the $12,000 you'd have to pay to get your finger put back on? That's a magnificent drain. What about the freedom to not have to be sick or injured because you're poor? There's your loss of freedom: poverty.
And what makes you think that any universal health care will run like the FDA? Because some governmental agencies aren't working, none can work? Slippery slope.
Pharma is declawed under socialized medicine. Insurance companies go out of business, and thus can't affoed to have politicians in back pockets.
So you can hold an investigation when a loved one is murdered when you're at work? Do you have access to databases with fingerprints? Do you have access to criminal records? Don't follow in suit with DK in thinking you could be your own police officer just because you have a gun. Being a police officer is a lot more than being a marksman.

Cynthetiq

Again, so because people CHOOSE to harm themselves or be in higher risk, I get to assume that risk. The people you say should be charged more are some of the same people that cannot afford it in the first place.

So that heart you have in your body, what dollar value to you give it? your legs? what do you do if the doctor accidentally cuts off your leg or arm? He goes back to school, they give you a prostetic and pat you on the head and send you on your way? WTF is that?

Because so far I have not in my lifetime ever seen a government agency in the United States work to my advantage. Understand what I said, work to my advantage. As an aside the deregulation of utilities has lead to more money out of my pockets than ever before for the same electricity and telephone. So I also don't see corporations being the end all either. A blend of the two I'm happy to live with in some capacity to prevent things like Enron, Tyco, MCI.

Insurance companies going out of business? So then where is my choice you touted I would have if I didn't want to get the Universal coverage? Where's the choice? If Insurance companies don't exist then where is the competition?
You are now touting a monopoly by the government, when earlier you suggested that people will still have choices.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

dksuddeth

Then with this view, you're saying that socialism isn't about personal freedom and liberty at all, but about a government body making rules and laws on how you will live your life because they know whats best for you, right?

name one program that the federal government has built that runs efficiently....on its own.

do you truly think that the government, through OUR taxes, is going to be able to foot the bill for ALL medical care? Will, you are much smarter than that.

I believe he's simply referring to having the ability to prevent violent crimes upon your own person, not investigating crimes that have already happened.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

Willravel

You know what's best for yourself, but that doesn't stop you doing it. People should be responsible for themselves. It has nothing to do with freedom and everything to do with responsibility.
How about I name 10?
ACHP
Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigations Board
Federal Maritime Commission
Merit Systems Protection Board
National Archives and Records Administration
National Council on Disability
National Endowment for the Arts
National Endowment for the Humanities
National Institute of Mental Health
National Park Service

I can name a lot more.
I am pretty smart. I'm smart enough to do my homework on the issue. How much would we be paying per person if we had the same system as the UK, in taxes? I know the answer to this question. How much do we pay in our current system?
So the police don't investigate crimes? We were talking about the police, not separating out specific functions of the police. Of their full list of responsibilities, that which you'd have to pay for if it was privatized, includes investigation of crimes.

Oy vey. For the millionth time, a public system of health is always cheaper than a private system. And not just in health. Look at prisons. Look at military. Look at anything. It's always cheaper when it's public. So even if people are asked to pay a bit more because they smoke or don' exercise, they're still pay a lot less than they would be paying into a private medical service.
What if a doctor accidentally cuts off my arm? Seriously? That's going to be your argument? Give me a break. Most malpractice suits are about mistakes. A sutcher is left in place, a vein is nicked, or some gauze is left in the body. Most of those cases can be resolved 100%. In the rare cases that's not true, other arrangements can be made. If, for some ludicrous reason, someone were to cut off your leg (wtf?), then that person shouldn't be practicing medicine. He should be a butcher or something.

Really, though, I was expecting a better argument than that. Jeez.
Lol... so when was the last time you ate a can of tuna and died from mercury poisoning? Or is death an advantage? More hyperbole, exaggeration, and appeals to ignorance.
Only a freshman economy student thinks that competition is always necessary. And only someone who's too stubborn to admit he or she is wrong would stick to an argument like "freedom is always 100% right". Freedom is not only subjective, but it's relative. There's no freedom for me to have 100% free healthcare. There's no freedom for people who are broke to get any health care. What about their freedom?
The government is not a corporate entity, and it's not profit driven.

dksuddeth

yet you feel that the government should outlaw smoking, maybe drinking, or at least anything else that you feel is bad for people? are you confused maybe?

we still have chem spills, hazardous material issues, pirates and boating accidents, the presidents brain is missing, handicapped people still get dismissed, what arts, what humanities, how many thousands of mentally ill people go without medical care, and the park service? what a mess. nice try though.

I repeat, the gov is NOT going to foot the entire bill for medical care as it rises because more people will abuse the 'free' universal health care and go to doctors for having a cold or a rash instead of being sensible. They WILL utilize a select group of health insurance companies, most likely the ones that contributed to the campaign funds of those who supported universal health care, who will then raise rates to cover costs so they make a huge profit off of the gov, who will raise OUR taxes to cover what they pay to insurance companies. It's a mad, mad, mad circle I tell ya.

you're obfuscating the issue by saying that everyone pays for and utilizes ALL police functions because they can't fend for themselves, yet no police department has ever been held liable for failure to protect an american citizen. What is it we're paying for again?


You know not what you speak of. I had military health and dental care and 16 years AFTER, I still have the holes they drilled in my molars that they just didn't fill. Military medicine sucks ass. Prison medical care is better because a wacko liberal group decried the prison system for letting violent criminals waste away in their cells. Medicare and Medicaid, public health systems BTW, continue to drop their coverages while raising their rates and fees. Stop looking through the beer bottles at universal health care.


Will said doctors be getting malpractice insurance through the gov? If they do, you won't see a dime if something were to happen to you.

The ONLY thing that keeps costs down is competition in the market and that is NOT just a freshman view. ALL of history shows that whenever you have a monopoly, or a select few providing said service, prices go up because they can demand AND expect it, for where else will you obtain such service?

In this you are right, however, the government isn't interested in profit, they are only interested in spending humongous amounts of money that they take from US. It has been that way throughout history, still.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

samcol

No, it's a horrible idea. Prohibition on alcohol and drugs have been great success. Everyone knows cigs are bad, that's not the issue. It's about having the freedom to smoke or not.

It's not the federal governments job to give welfare or healthcare to the poor. It's not even a federal issue. Why can't we leave some things to states like it's supposed to be.

Uh, healthcare and the FDA and pharma are all directly related. How will the crap the FDA allows not be in universal heatlhcare? I mean it's already there, but with universal care I'll have to use it.

Pharma declawed? Not sure how you made that huge leap. The FDA and Pharma are still making the drugs and poisoned food for you to eat and lobbying the proponents of this healthcare package.

The executive branch has the authority to enforce the law.

You're coming up with some pretty crazy 'what ifs' and conclusions that have no evidence to support them (like pharma being declawed ).

__________________
It's time for the president to hand over his nobel peace prize.

Willravel

I don't remember naming alcohol. Cigarettes are addictive, therefore those who smoke them are by definition entrapped, or NOT FREE. If you smoke, you're not free. If you don't smoke you are free. See? Simple.
You're right! Those completely unsubstantiated claims negate the effiency and effectiveness of all of the federal organizations I named!

Nice try, indeed.
Go down to the police station and ask them. Ask them how many of their fellow officers died trying to protect someone. Go down there and ask how many criminals they've helped to apprehend. Go down and ask how many crimes they could have prevented because they were able to stop a criminal from striking again.

That's what we pay for, and as someone who lives in the safest large city in the whole country, I know this.
You know not what you read. I was not talking about military or prison health care. Please reread what I said. Privatization of the military (google Blackwater) and privatization of prison systems has led to massive corruption and is tremendously expensive.
You're right. Some people actually graduate having actually only taken econ 101. It's sad. The point is that they didn't do any work outside of that one class on the subject. The idea that everything is black and white in economics is actually something one might think before econ 101. The market is a living thing, and the nuances are amazingly complex. In this case, it's a waste of time to just say, "Competition is great! Go team free market!" It's no where near that simple.
Some members of the government are interested in spending a lot (Republicans in the white house) and some aren't (Democratic Senators). We live in strange times.

dksuddeth

ah, so nobody CHOOSES to have a cigarette, they are simply addicted and can't function correctly anymore, so we MUST help them, cause it's bad, mmkay? please.

are you trying to say we've NEVER had a chem or hazardous material incident? is NOT JFK's brain missing from the archives?



yes yes yes, of course they will TRY, but it's NOT their job to protect YOU as an individual. If you think it is, you might read 'Castle Rock v. Gonzalez' and prepare for an eye opener.

Then you better tell Bloomberg he's a liar, because he's said that NYC is the safest large city in the country.

my bad, I did indeed misread your statement, but to even further prove my point, these 'privatized' orgs are getting paid BY THE GOV, so I'm still right. Things run by the gov or paid by the gov, simply suck ass and money.

If the market is a 'living' thing, then why on earth would you want to take the life out of it by regulating it to death?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA, dems aren't big spenders? BWAHAHAHAHA

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

Willravel

Addiction is the opposite of freedom. Would you want someone to have the freedom to go to prison?
I was ther when you found that case like a year ago, no need to lecture. It doesn't change the fact that they do protect.
Please
Murder rate per 1,000 residents:
San Jose - 0.0285
NYC - 0.0664
violent crimes rate per 1,000 residents:
San Jose - 3.8351
NTC - 6.7305
They are run privately.
I don't want to be mean, but that's the worst argument I've ever read.
They were 7 or 8 years ago. Not so much now, compared to $500 billion for a war. Sorry to have to break it to you. The Republicans are the spenders now.

Cynthetiq

really quickly before i head home...

My statement isn't to evoke hyperbole but to state, malpractice happens, people don't do 100% great jobs all the time. Mistakes happen. You're for fix it right up and send them on their way.

Really? Then why the warnings about pregnant women not eating fish??? Becuase there is some risk there... Again, I'm comfortable with some regulations that govern how the business is allowed to run, that's not being ignorant and exaggeration. It's simple facts. Cal OSHA makes sure you have a safe plae to work right?
Really? Then we shouldn't have deregulated airlines, utilities, charter school systems because the government should know better and performs better.

I think you don't realize that most cities and counties are incorporated. They are corporate entities, they may not be profit driven, but they are still corporate entitities.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

dksuddeth

But where does there money come from? hence the reason I said those run by or paid by the gov.

yet, so very true. What you are wanting to do with universal health care is remove health care completely from a free market environment, placing it in the hands of a government agency for the sole purpose of regulating prices, which will regulate treatment, which will stifle new discoveries in medicine, which will drive med professionals who WANT to make money, out of the trade, thereby regulating the health industry in to a slow agonizing death.

schumer, kennedy, biden, clinton, and pelosi/feinstein have never met a spending bill they didn't like, unless it was thought up by republicans. THEN the only reason they opposed it was they wouldn't get credit for it.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

Willravel

Yes Malpractice happens. Massive settlements also happen. Those are what I take issue with. If there was policy to guide malpractice instead of litigation, the whole thing would become cheaper.

As for the fish, yes, there is could be a small amount, but it's only dangerous to a fetus. It's not going to kill you. That's because of the FDA.

Some cities are incorporated, but not the Federal government.

Discoveries in medicine happen at the same rate in the UK and France as they do in the US, therefore socialization does not stifle progress.

How much have the Dems spent in the past 15 years? Now how much has the GOP spent? The GOP spends more.

dc_dux

Hillary and Barak proposed a "policy guide to malpractice" in 2005 and its also included in Hillary's plan.

Its called the Medical Error Disclosure and Compensation (MEDiC) Act. Its explained pretty well in this article by Clinton and Obama in the New England Journal of Medicine.

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/354/21/2205

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

abaya

Cyn--what's your opinion of the Icelandic health care system?

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

Cynthetiq

I've not spent much time paying attention to it. I can only say what little I know is based on the small demographic that it has to encompass. Since the entire population of Iceland is just over 300,000 it is an unfair model to compare since it may not scale very well into the millions.

Taxes are quite high based on what I read an know. I'm not sure how much of that gets redirected to healthcare coverage, but the $104 paid into the Eldery Construction Fund doesn't appear to include the healthcare costs, but just the construction and operation of the facility.

I do have a pair of friends in Aukureryi who work in hospitals and I don't recall ever having a conversation about the healthcare system itself. We've discussed the technology and logistics of the hospitals, but not how the system pays for itself.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

behindalens

What is great about a free market enviornment for health care, as seen today? The way it has stagnated has left with prices beyond their reach. Similarly while those with coverage, are alarmingly finding their prices out of reach and being unfairly denied. Healthcare is a bit too tricky for free market economics to work. There is an unfair balance of information within the system. It is not something where information about prices is disclosed easily. A consumer cannot simply choose which will be "cheaper" for him very easily as he does not know what ailments he will have down the line, and which provider option will help him out the most. Competition, as many people see in a free market works best to help the consumer when price information is easily found and transparent, thus leading to actual choices. The way the current health care works, has very little practical information for a consumer to make a choice, hiding many details in the fine print while luring people with clever marketing. Competition is great, when it is transparent, not inherently obscure as it is with health care.

Cynthetiq

I just found something I recall reading the other day

in the Iceland Review:
euro.who.int
Please note the LAST words here, opting out is not possible. You MUST contribute to the fund. I also see that one pays about 60%+ in taxes to the state contribution.

One of the links that I read puts Icelandic healthcare as 40% of the national budget.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

dksuddeth

The problem here is that todays healthcare system isn't based on free market. It's based on insurance rates of profit and loss. Theres absolutely no medical thought put in to the process and with the insurance industry 'controlling' costs, prices rise due to the limited venue in which medical care can be obtained.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

abaya

Thanks for the info, Cyn. The question is, would you live here, given what you know about the Icelandic health care system and how much of your income would be going to fund it? Personally, based on the health care system alone, I'd rather live here than in the US... and I wouldn't mind seeing something like the Scandinavian system implemented in the US, either. Yes, Iceland is small, but the other Nordic countries are not so small, and they do manage their health care just as well (in my opinion). Just a thought.

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

Cynthetiq

I'd love to live in Iceland, not based on the healthcare system available and not because of the promiscuous hot Icelandic women. It is strictly because of the locale.

As an American citizen the problem with living in another country (expatriation) is that I am liable to pay US taxes and the taxes of the expatriating country. So it is a double tax hit.

My choices for living places are based more on my ability to have quality of life and disposable income. Healthcare is only a factor if I'm not gainfully employed by a company that provides healthcare benefits to their employees, that is a slim to none proposition. I'm quite selfish when it comes to spending the money that I earn. I'm happy to give it to friends and family as needed with no expectation of reciprocity, but strangers on the other hand, I'm not so fast in giving it out.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

DJ Happy

I know this is off topic, but expatriate US citizens only have to pay tax in the US if they earn over a certain amount (I believe this year it is $85,000), and if they do they only pay tax on the excess.

highthief

You might want to reconsider that statement!

__________________
Si vis pacem parabellum.

Cynthetiq

More on Iceland's healthcare system from today's Iceland Review: "people who suffer from long-term diseases often have difficulties paying for medicine, even though the disease isn’t fatal.” It may not be a perfect system but it doesn't seem like it's "cheap" either.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

host

Cynthetiq....the results are in.....and your politics seem to contribute to conditions that benefit the few, to the detriment of the many....Denmark's stats are on the right....and they seem to indicate that....when government defers to free markets to "sort out" the distribution of wealth....wealth simply buys sufficient power and influence to control the government and the "free" market.

The UK, US, and Mexico, end up being much harsher places to live than in Denmark or in France....it doesn't have to be that way....but the wealthiest won't permit the status quo to be any other way....in the case of attempts by government to more equitably distribute health care....or any other "wealth", it is the controlling group who have the money to produce and distribute the "Harry and Louise" ads...... which work to undermine the effort.


https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat.../da.html#Intro
Because of high GDP per capita, welfare benefits, a low Gini index, and political stability, the Danish living standards are among the highest in the world. A major long-term issue will be the sharp decline in the ratio of workers to retirees.

<b>Denmark's stats are on the right</b>
GDP - per capita (PPP):
$37,100 (2006 est.) France =$31,200 (2006 est.) United Kingdom = $31,800 (2006 est.) USA= $43,800 (2006 est.) Mexico= $10,700 (2006 est.)

Unemployment rate:

3.8% (2006 est.) France =8.7% (December 2006 est.) United Kingdom = 2.9% (2006 est.) USA= 4.8% (2006 est.) Mexico= 3.2% plus underemployment of perhaps 25%

Population below poverty line
N/A .......... France = 6.2% (2004) United Kingdom = 17% (2002 est.) USA= 12% (2004 est.) Mexico= 40% (2003 est.)

Household income or consumption by percentage share:

lowest 10%: 2% France = 3% United Kingdom = lowest 10%: 2.1% USA= lowest 10%: 1.8% Mexico= lowest 10%: 1.6%

highest 10%: 24% (2000 est.) France =24.8% (2004) United Kingdom = 28.5% (1999) USA= highest 10%: 30.5% (1997) Mexico= highest 10%: 35.6% (2002)

Distribution of family income - Gini index:
23.2 (2002) France =26.7 (2002) United Kingdom = 36.8 (1999) USA= 45 (2004) Mexico= 54.6 (2000)
Inflation rate (consumer prices):
1.8% (2006 est.) France = 1.5% (2006 est.) United Kingdom = 3% (2006 est.) USA= 2.5% (2006 est.) Mexico= 3.4% (2006 est.)

Investment (gross fixed):
22.2% of GDP (2006 est.) France =20% of GDP (2006 est.) United Kingdom = 17.2% of GDP (2006 est.) USA= 16.6% of GDP (2006 est.) Mexico= 20% of GDP (2006 est.)

Public debt:

28.1% of GDP (2006 est.) France =64.7% of GDP (2006 est.) United Kingdom = 42.2% of GDP (2006 est.) USA= 64.7% of GDP (2005 est.) Mexico= 20.7% of GDP (2006 est.)

Current account balance:
+$4.941 billion (2006 est.) France = -$38 billion (2006 est.) United Kingdom = -$57.68 billion (2006 est.) USA= -$862.3 billion (2006 est.) Mexico= -$400.1 million (2006 est.)

Exports:
$93.93 billion f.o.b. (2006 est.) France =$490 billion f.o.b. (2006 est.) United Kingdom = $468.8 billion f.o.b. (2006 est.) USA= $1.024 trillion f.o.b. (2006 est.) Mexico= $248.8 billion f.o.b. (2006 est.)

Imports:
$89.32 billion f.o.b. (2006 est.) France =$529.1 billion f.o.b. (2006 est.) United Kingdom = $603 billion f.o.b. (2006 est.) USA= $1.869 trillion f.o.b. (2006 est.) Mexico= $253.1 billion f.o.b. (2006 est.)

Willravel

It's good to have you back.

Cynthetiq

Denmark's taxes are some of the highest in the world. A ceiling put in place to not exceed 59% of income. So for each $1 I earn I get taxed $.59??? Fuck that and the rest of the people.

Put this into dollars and cents and look at how many hours you have to work in order to purchase something. I look at things like American Tax Freedom day where every year we work MORE days to pay our taxes than less. In 1990 23-Apr was Tax Freedom day with taxes at 30.80%. In 2007 30-Apr is the day with taxes at 32.69%. A whopping WEEK extra I have to work for a 2% increase.

Sorry, no thank you. As I continue to raise my standard of living by increasing my wages, I don't want some asshole who sits at home playing Xbox because he doesn't feel like working to benefit more from it.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

ASU2003

I would think that more vaccines and cures would come out of a government run system that wasn't driven on keeping people dependant on their patented medicines.

Both parties are big spenders. And I don't like the idea of high taxes to pay for healthcare either.

But everyone needs some level of healthcare, even if it is the catostrphic type. It shouldn't cost too much (under $10/month, free if you are poor), and most people would never use it. But if they get into a car crash, get shot, or cut off a finger, then they would be protected from the multi-thousand dollar hospital bill. You never know when it will happen or who it will happen to, and nobody would want it to happen to them. If you work or have some money, then you could get better coverage.

But I doubt a universal health insurance policy would include different tiers for people to choose which level of care they need. I can choose which level of car insurance I have, but I am required to carry it to protect the other guy at a minimum. I don't see why it would be different with healthcare, you can't choose to be healthy or not. If you could then no one would be in the hospital.