By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Obama Health care plan.

just a quick question to you americans! why are so many people so anti free health care? the nhs been a massive success in the uk even if some people moan about it, it still has been 99.9% good for the countries health as a whole. so why are so many americans scared of an american nhs?





SKEEZER AND NINTENDO FAN GIRL ARE MY NEMESIS

YES TO BEER

Around the Network

Read my post above yours. Now combine that with our tax and debt problem and you'll see why we don't want them involved.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Everyone knows that what works in one country must always work in America.



 

 

i love xbox360 said:
just a quick question to you americans! why are so many people so anti free health care? the nhs been a massive success in the uk even if some people moan about it, it still has been 99.9% good for the countries health as a whole. so why are so many americans scared of an american nhs?

Because no healthcare is free. In any system, prices are paid to render healthcare. For example, NHS costs 110 billion pounds a year to your tax payers.

In the US, we have 'free' healthcare. Its called Medicare. It costs $8,000 per person per year. Comparatively, the cost of NHS per person is roughly $5500 per year, which is a bit less.

The reason we are 'anti free healthcare' is that the current plans to provide government healthcare to 100% of the population will still cost about $8,000 a person. We simply cannot afford that. We need solutions that lower the cost of healthcare, then look into how to ensure everyone is covered.

The problem with America, as Viper said, is that there are certain issues we have that ensure that medical care is far more costly than it should be.

For example:

  • Our doctors get paid far more than NHS doctors do. It isn't simply because they demand more money in the US, but because it costs a whole lot more to become a doctor in the US than it does in the UK. It takes ~8 years to become a doctor in England, and ~12 in the US. Those extra years of schooling cost money, and are transfered directly onto costs of healthcare.
  • Insurance companies are uncompetitive. Viper covered this one. Since companies cannot actually...You know....Offer competitive plans, they cannot fight for our benefit. It creates stagnation and problems in terms of prices.
  • Insurance plans are simply too bloated. Most people want 'free everything' on their insurance. The thing about insurance is that insurance is a hedge against needing certain services. The more services you demand, the more it costs. For example, does an auto plan include oil changes, tires, and car washes? If not, why are we demanding the same level of products from our insurance plans? It adds to the cost.


Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

highwaystar101 said:

National healthcare is a good thing if it works, like it does in many European countries... But the USA's government couldn't organise an piss up in a brewery (without it costing $1.2 trillion anyway).

So true... Sad, but true.



Around the Network
The Ghost of RubangB said:
oldschoolfool said:
highwaystar101 said:

National healthcare is a good thing if it works, like it does in many European countries... But the USA's government couldn't organise an piss up in a brewery (without it costing $1.2 trillion anyway).


I've heard different things about national healthcare in Europe. Long waiting lines,people dying before they can get an appointment. Out of control budget in Europe. That's just what I've seen on the news. Samething in Canada.

Let me guess... you heard that from Americans.

We (USA) pay more per person on health care than pretty much the rest of the industrialized world... but they all live longer.  So our current system costs too much and doesn't help enough.  It needs fixing no matter how you slice it.  The "how to fix it" is the argument here.

But hey, I live in San Francisco, and here THE CITY gives me free health care.  There are really annoying long lines, but only when it's not a life-or-death situation.

Yes and no.


We pay more per person on healthcare... but they don't all live longer... at least not when considering what actual medical care provides.  In the US the surivial rates for diseases are higher then pretty much any other country out there.

Our life expectancy is lower, hoever that's because we have a much higher crime rate, obesisty rate, high stress culture and report infant mortality differently from the rest of the world.

 

We actually have some of the best healthcare in the world... it's we're GREATLY overpaying for a slight increase in survial rates.



There is no heath care plan. The us has the best healthcare in the world, by far... if you can afford it.

Nothing in the bill points to how the US will have better healthcare, just better access.

The US does not limit access based on race, age, or sex. It's not a civil rights issue. The only issue with access, is cost.

It's a health cost bill. You could in fact, remove healthcare from the equation all together, and just say there is this thing out there that everyone wants/needs, but it's expensive. So, we are looking to government to make it less expensive.

It's a money problem. Do we really want our federal government solving a money problem by taking over a program, and running it themselves?

Let that sink in, and you will know why all of us are against THIS bill.



TheRealMafoo said:

There is no heath care plan. The us has the best healthcare in the world, by far... if you can afford it.

Nothing in the bill points to how the US will have better healthcare, just better access.

The US does not limit access based on race, age, or sex. It's not a civil rights issue. The only issue with access, is cost.

It's a health cost bill. You could in fact, remove healthcare from the equation all together, and just say there is this thing out there that everyone wants/needs, but it's expensive. So, we are looking to government to make it less expensive.

It's a money problem. Do we really want our federal government solving a money problem by taking over a program, and running it themselves?

Let that sink in, and you will know why all of us are against THIS bill.


They aren't taking it over themselves though... they're doing something even worse.  Just throwing a bunch of money at the problem and hoping the problem will go away... which is healthcare being too expensive... which is just a horrible plan.



It is a ping ponging failure with cost overruns of trillions of dollars in the long term and it does not include cross state portability and tort reform. The simple fact is that no matter how liberal or conservative you are the bill has the worst of both sides of the ideological aisle and is neutered to nothing more than a simple code change package with inside deals and kickbacks.



The US needs healthcare reform desperately. The amount you pay as a % of GDP is absurd.

Heres a website with some neat little charts to show you what I mean

http://www.angelfire.com/rnb/y/universal.htm

USA pays 16% of GDP, next highest in the OECD is France with 11%