![]() |
State run National Health Systems
Without all the political drama can people give me their view on this.
The National Health Schemes work in most of the Western World, their success is often down to the amount of money they raise. So with so many examples to work from. Why didn't Obama build one State run, as an insurance scheme all working people have to pay into. Then use the money raised to pay hospitals a set amount to treat the patients. Even down to the prescription charges on drugs. The State then controls hospitals and drug companies in the aspect of what they can charge. Only those on a high wage would end up paying more and many would pay less as they can opt out of the private insurance schemes. Those on a higher wage can still pay in and get their private room, doctor, nurse and meals. |
yeah, this is definitely not going to turn into a political drama..
|
I understand the private sector would of lobbied to hell froze over.
It still seems a far better scheme and over time money could be spent to build new hospitals or take over the private run ones if they don't want to continue. The prices the State would pay would be controlled and shave some of the huge profits off. |
Quote:
|
funny, you request that the political drama be left out but you baited with raw meat by saying
Quote:
|
It's about money the health insurers stand to make ... |
Quote:
I understand the mistrust it's from centuries of Americans doing everything on their own and only seeing the successes and based on a model that in reality never worked. As we move into the 21st century some things are obvious. We cannot rely on the private sector to look after us. The hated Nanny State, is the only option. The problem is who will pay for it and how is it going to be shaped so people don't abuse it or get cast aside? What Americans pay for Health Care, which ends the day they stop paying, is absurd. Should Obama of just stood his ground and built a similar model to the others that work and showed who was stopping it? Is he strong enough? |
NHS hospitals here are going bankrupt.
|
Quote:
Plus every fucking UK Government comes in with a new way to run it better. It's by no means a perfect system, can you afford to go private? It's time for a rethink of how the West thinks. When we retire unless we've put a lot of money away for our retirement. You're going to be poor. The private sector will not support you. Private Health Care is expensive. NHS costs a lot, but go live in the US and find out what that costs or the alternatives. Barry is indicating the private sector wouldn't allow a proper public sector Health Care. go figure out why. In the UK Government after Government promised no more taxes. And what happened? They all put them up. In the US it's the same, no more taxes. So they borrow themselves into massive debt. Like the UK and others. We need to realise we're not as rich as we think we are. State hospital goes bankrupt, they find more money. Private hospital goes bankrupt, they kick everyone out to State and bolt the doors. |
Quote:
answering your last question first: No, he is not strong enough. He lacks the drive necessary to push through his agenda and he cannot resist the dollars floating around Washington from big pharma and the insurance lobby. he would also lack support in Congress both from his own party and from an opposition party that has been against anything he is for...even if they proposed it first. The Senate is so lazy and scared that the threat of a filibuster shuts stuff down so it does not come up for a vote. The American political system is broken but broken in favor of incumbent representatives so they have no motivation to fix it any time soon. More over when a party is in the majority they do not want to fix the issues that a minority party can pull to effectively shut down the government because they want to retain that ability for when they are in the minority. the cumulative effect is that no one is working for the best interest of the American public who have been duped into believing there is a difference in the two parties. The only real difference is the flavor of the bat shit extremist on either side :2 cents: for the record and full disclosure... I am a bat shit extremist liberal on a LOT of issues facing the US and a moderate on a few others |
Brits tell me their system is failing and Canadians tell me most of them pay for out-of-pocket additional insurance anyway. I could be misunderstanding either of them, but I'm not jumping at any opportunity to pay higher taxes and still have to pay for my own insurance plus all of my other, high, medical expenses.
"That's where I'm coming from." |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
I don't know what you pay in Health Insurance. But let's say it's $400 a month, would you drop it if the State run insurance plan was covering you and only increased your taxes by $300 a month? Quote:
The good thing is these countries cover people when they're out of work or retired. IMO spazlabz understands it and it will take a lot for American voters to get it. And vote the incumbents out. That's how democracy works. |
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datab...ding-map-world
Quote:
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:59 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc