Curse

Fril Estelin · Aug 17, 2009, 07:57 AM // 07:57

So, in a world of people working to pay for private/industrial medecine, what happens when treating your sickness is no longer rentable for the pharmaceutical and medical companies? Because some people are born with weaker immune system than others, does it mean they'll have to work harder?

zwei2stein · Aug 17, 2009, 08:52 AM // 08:52

Just like people who have naturally lower intelligence, or weaker physique or are from bad neighborhood do not expect support ... They too have to work harder. It is just how things are.

As far as rentability goes, yes, there are issues. Curing life threatening conditions should be subsidized if necesary, no doubt. I would be wary of this thou, companies are quite quick to abuse government funding.

But without eye for profit, i wonder if actually cure would be researched in socialist medicine ... because for sure, there was not much research going on in eastern block, i can tell you, there is just no drive to improve in socialist system. I'd rather have cure that i can not afford than cure that does not exist anyway.

Medicine is pretty much always profitable so i would not wonder about it, as you have guaranteed customers. I would not see problems other than price range out of reach, and well, it is bad for business when people can not afford what you sell.

Tullzinski · Aug 17, 2009, 06:01 PM // 18:01

1961 Ronald Reagan on Socialized Medicine...
Funny how history repeats itself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiyfG4WMxA0

Eskimoz · Aug 17, 2009, 09:45 PM // 21:45

http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-epi...rachel-mcadams

I find the first story entertaining.

Medi Lena · Aug 17, 2009, 10:27 PM // 22:27

source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8201711.stm

Maybe the USA's system needs some tweaking.

Yipsy · Aug 17, 2009, 11:04 PM // 23:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winterclaw

I've got a question pertaining to Obama's Health Care / Death Scare... Don't we already have a failed government run medical system in the us, aka the VA? You know, the group that had that veterans hospital that had all that mold and was crawling with rats and roaches. I just googled VA horror stories and got about 3 million results.

Who said the current government health systems have failed? Actually they work fine. They are simply systemically underfunded by those * cough cough * conservatives who wish to see said system fail.

Basically you create a system but make sure to underfund it so it dosen't work. Then when it isn't working perfectly you point to it not working perfectly as proof it dosen't work. And ignore the fact that it wasn't funded properly in the first place.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winterclaw

Even if you support government run health care (insurance), shouldn't we fix medicare, medicaid, and the VA before we even consider taking on any more burdens? Last I heard the US was running a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit for this year. It's not like we have the money to burn anyways.

Actually having all of these spread out systems is part of the problem. One universal system would be better.

Master Fuhon · Aug 18, 2009, 03:23 AM // 03:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yipsy

Who said the current government health systems have failed? Actually they work fine. They are simply systemically underfunded by those * cough cough * conservatives who wish to see said system fail.

Said funding to be used for these programs is underfunded by 'liberals'.

Both sides typically play a role in sabotaging the programs of the other. But the truth is that the liberal expectations of wealth increase for citizens are inconsistent with providing funding for the programs that cause said 'wealth' increases. They make ambitious programs to create wealth that end up taking more wealth away because they run everything under inefficiencies.

Government has no liberals or conservatives; but is filled with raving anti-liberals and anti-conservatives.

Yipsy · Aug 18, 2009, 01:50 PM // 13:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Master Fuhon

Said funding to be used for these programs is underfunded by 'liberals'.

Both sides typically play a role in sabotaging the programs of the other. But the truth is that the liberal expectations of wealth increase for citizens are inconsistent with providing funding for the programs that cause said 'wealth' increases. They make ambitious programs to create wealth that end up taking more wealth away because they run everything under inefficiencies.

Government has no liberals or conservatives; but is filled with raving anti-liberals and anti-conservatives.

That's a nice bipartisan take but isn't in touch with reality.

Specifically the idea of "conservative" government programs for which they don't believe in. They specifically in this country have billed themselves as against "Gubment on our backs!!11!1eleven!!" and being the champions of the private sector. Defending it even when it's foolishness to do so.

And you simply fall into the trap that was set visa-ve said programs. Believing said programs are inefficacy by some intrinsic nature instead of by nature of direct sabotage and systemic assault by those seeking to make said programs not work for ideological reasons. In other first world countries things like UHC work at much less cost and with much greater results then ours yet ours is defended and the better system is decried as "OMFG SOCIALIZMZZZ!!1!!!111".

Shursh · Aug 18, 2009, 04:12 PM // 16:12

^ could you explain yourself a bit more? I'm genuinely interested in how you came to those conclusions.

Rocky Raccoon · Aug 18, 2009, 06:15 PM // 18:15

Here is a fine piece of work:

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cf...y-000003192388

Tullzinski · Aug 18, 2009, 07:01 PM // 19:01

This is why this whole thing stinks to high heaven:

"The deal with the administration Boehner was referring to was struck in June. The drug industry offered some $80 billion in concessions over a decade as part of their contribution to reducing health care costs. In return, the White House agreed not to pursue sharp price reductions under Medicare from the drug makers."

Here is an example of an industry paying off the administration to keep from taking it up the shorts. This is blackmail. Here the administration says pay us or we will reduce the prices medicare is paying you.

Why is this even needed if the administation is looking out for our health care/costs. No concessions are needed the administation should just pursue price reductions period and cut cost REGARDLESS of what drug industry does. Is this not the same pharmacutical companies that was so evil a few years ago?

In my opinion this proves that this administration has absolutely no concern for us and this is all about money for washington lawmakers and political parties. All about money and power. I have to go vomit now.......

EinherjarMx · Aug 18, 2009, 07:49 PM // 19:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

Doctors charge so much because of the dangers of malpractice litigation - it's absurd how easy it is to sue a doctor. This shouldn't exist. Medication costs a lot because the pharmaceutical companies are granted a quasi monopoly on their products, mainly due to quasi-protectionist FDA measures against foreign-developed medications (with good reason). Competition between pharmaceuticals should be higher, lowering costs. I could go on, but medical costs are artificially high.

this

Quote:

Originally Posted by unienaule

As I said, the United States is where the vast majority of the world's drugs come from for a reason, and that reason is that they are able to fund it here. I can't prove that it's a cause and effect, but I'd say it's pretty darn likely. Read John Stossel's report on drugs and drug companies if you're interested.

Yeah but you forget that the US are not the only market for those products, and you're not even taking into account patent royalties, licensing and foreign government agreements.

You're being a little naive if you think that even asthma inhalers are that expensive.

Painbringer · Aug 18, 2009, 07:58 PM // 19:58

My personal opinion is to standardized costs on procedures and drugs should be instated. Hospitals are run for profit and its just wrong… why should a c-section cost 7k in one hospital and 13k in a hospital down the road, it is just wrong. People paying cash for procedures are charged higher then people that are insured? Does it make sense? Insurance is a fiasco right now and it is spiraling out of all of our reach. Less people insured me higher principles which intern means less people can afford it its revolving around its self.

Yipsy · Aug 18, 2009, 11:29 PM // 23:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shursh

^ could you explain yourself a bit more? I'm genuinely interested in how you came to those conclusions.

I pay attention?

Grover Norquist did say he wanted "government so small you can drown it in a bath tub".

This sentiment can be heard echoing throughout the modern conservative movement. Look at who is backing the "Town hall protesters". The same guys who want all government disbanded save for that wing that makes bullets and bombs and attacks their enemies.

Government programs work very well in other countries. Why is that? It's probably because other countries use a Parliamentary system instead of our system. Our system has to great a demand for "Bi-partisanship" which in the end leads to compromises the fundamentally ruin perfectly good legislation.

Snow Bunny · Aug 18, 2009, 11:39 PM // 23:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yipsy

Government programs work very well in other countries. Why is that?

because they're socialist

Shursh · Aug 19, 2009, 12:41 AM // 00:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yipsy

I pay attention?

Grover Norquist did say he wanted "government so small you can drown it in a bath tub".

This sentiment can be heard echoing throughout the modern conservative movement. Look at who is backing the "Town hall protesters". The same guys who want all government disbanded save for that wing that makes bullets and bombs and attacks their enemies.

Government programs work very well in other countries. Why is that? It's probably because other countries use a Parliamentary system instead of our system. Our system has to great a demand for "Bi-partisanship" which in the end leads to compromises the fundamentally ruin perfectly good legislation.

so how did you come to the conclusion that it's conservatives who "underfund" (whatever that means...are you saying they don't pay their taxes?) our current healthcare system?

i can't believe i'm getting pulled back into this thread, but i really would like to read your explanation.

Fritzl · Aug 19, 2009, 02:18 AM // 02:18

Before this thread, I was confused about the health-reform issue. And, now, after reading it, I can safely say that I'm against Barack Obama's reform.

Yipsy · Aug 19, 2009, 02:45 AM // 02:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shursh

so how did you come to the conclusion that it's conservatives who "underfund" (whatever that means...are you saying they don't pay their taxes?) our current healthcare system?

i can't believe i'm getting pulled back into this thread, but i really would like to read your explanation.

I am talking about politicians who voted for spending cuts or block tax increases in order to prevent proper funding. Politicians who happen to adhere to conservatism.

Also I am talking about government programs which the poster characterized as "Failed" which they aren't. Actually they are having trouble because of a decrease in funding.

Lord Sojar · Aug 19, 2009, 02:48 AM // 02:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

Oh please.

Left wingers are allowed to protest whatever they want - protest wars, corporations, rallies, you name it, they'll protest it.

People don't want socialized medicine and the left goes, "OH MAN OH GOD THEY'RE PROTESTING THIS IS SO UNCALLED FOR."

Seriously. Millions of Americans do not want socialized medicine. We as a nation DO NOT OWE 1/6 OF OUR COUNTRY SOCIALIZED MEDICINE. Nowhere in the Bill of Rights is "healthcare" a provision, nor is it even mentioned. Gun ownership is, but that won't stop the left from trying to quash it eh?

EH?

Hypocrites.

The amount of hypocrisy on both sides is absolutely overwhelming. Don't try to bring one side down and bring another up. Both sides are idiots and hypocritical fools.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risky Ranger

I agree, give people a choice of plans. The problem is that many people have no choice as the system is set up now. Those who say they are happy as it is now are only thinking of themselves.

The funny thing is, those with insurance that are happy with their current plan... fine, keep it. No one is forcing anyone to change anything. There will just be a new option for those without medical coverage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shrush

I don't understand why people have such a hard time understanding why this won't work in America.

Because it didn't work in other capitalist nations right? Oh wait...

Stop being fear mongers regarding socialistic practices. It is the evolution of society, and you are blocking it. Not all socialistic practices are bad.

Oh, and keep bad mouthing Medicare as a US citizen. When you come of age to be eligible, don't you dare use it though... don't you dare. Hypocrisy from people is even more surprising than hypocrisy from political parties.

Oh, and as many horror stories there are about the VA, there are 100x the amount of success stories. The majority of veterans are extremely happy with the VA system, and Obama is giving the single largest increase in funding to the VA system in history because he "hates veterans." Laughable and naive...

Get more information about the bill and then post, instead of being uninformed rant creating twits.

The majority of "Americans" are blundering, uneducated, backwater idiots who wouldn't know what was a good thing for them if it punched them in the face. If you want to fix healthcare, etc, first you must educate the masses to not be redneck, backwards talking trailer trash that think they know something when they know next to nothing. I'm an educated American, and damn proud of it. More than I can say for a lot of other people (which includes my redneck parents)

Shursh · Aug 19, 2009, 04:09 AM // 04:09

Quote:

Both sides are idiots and hypocritical fools.

^ Agreed.

But while I get more information about the bill, how about you get more information about the "blundering, uneducatd, backwater idiots", especially the ones who

A. don't pay taxes
B. are illegal immigrants
C. force everyone else to put into the system while they reap the rewards

If this is your idea of the evolution of society, I think I'd rather off myself right now.

Now I'm really out of this thread. You guys astound me so, I don't know whether to laugh or cry.