Universal Health Care ending in Hawaii

[Tom]

Seven months after passing UV health care for everyone up to age 18, Hawaii is now ending the program. Reason - it costs too much. Everyone stopped paying for their own childrens' HC to get the free stuff.

Of course. O'bama says HC is a right - therefore, no one can be forced to pay for it. It is a right. Consider it as a preview of the long line of failures O'Bama has in store for us all.

[Bubba X]

It's always amusing to read how Obama is responsible for everything from the holocaust to the high cost of health care.

Folks might just want to read a bit about the subject of the cost of health care, how it delivered and financed in various developed nations and THEN make dumb comments.

The US ALREADY leads the world in public financing of healthcare in total dollars as well as in dollars per person. Interestingly, the nations which, as a percentage, finance more health care publicly spend FAR LESS PER PERSON and also have FAR BETTER OUTCOMES.

Go to Kaiser.org or google up some white papers from the educational institution of your political preference.

There is a BIG difference between the issues of WHY health care costs so much vs WHO should pay for it. They are not the same; not even close.

Bashing Obama for his stance on health care being a "right" is just one more played out Republican cliche that resonates only with played out Republicans who don't understand the issue and don't want to understand.

[Tom]

No, he clearly said it was a right.

If it is a right, why pay for it? I have a right to it, so I will get it whether I pay of not. Otherwise, it is not a right.

I Don't pay for free speech, or to vote. Yet. Remains to be seen what HUSSEIN has is store for us.

[Bubba X]

You need to read better. Or, at least, try to comprehend. The point is this: nations with universal healthcare coverage have:
1. Lower Costs vs the U.S.
2. Better medical outcomes than the U.S.

If I were a third grade teacher, I'd put it this way... Healthier people at less cost.

Pretty much, bashing Obama for calling health care a right is just a tired cliche-ish response which translates into "too lazy to understand.... too provincial to care to understand."

[Tom]

Bullshit. It is not a right. It forces an obligation on someone else to pay for it.
That was the point of my post - I you had read it carefully. How can it be a right when only some get it free and others foo the bill? Answer - it cannot.
If HC is a right, all should get it equally - that is, we all pay the same or we all pay nothing. Your reply, like HUSSEIN'S, are the lazy way out. Call it a right and then impose an obligation on others to carry those who do not contribute to this country....40% at last count.

[boxcar]

It's always amusing to read how Obama is responsible for everything from the holocaust to the high cost of health care.

Ahh...kinda like how Bush for the last 8 years has been blamed for virtually everything that has gone on within this country and even the world!

Folks might just want to read a bit about the subject of the cost of health care, how it delivered and financed in various developed nations and THEN make dumb comments.

Take your own advice before you let your mouth run ahead of your brain. Digest why it was that Hawaii saw the light and dropped the freebies like hot potatoes.

And if you think you're such an expert on how to deliver "free" health care, get on the horn with governor Lingle ASAP and set her straight. (And be sure to tell us how you made out.)

Boxcar

[Bubba X]

Ahh...kinda like how Bush for the last 8 years has been blamed for virtually everything that has gone on within this country and even the world!



Take your own advice before you let your mouth run ahead of your brain. Digest why it was that Hawaii saw the light and dropped the freebies like hot potatoes.

And if you think you're such an expert on how to deliver "free" health care, get on the horn with governor Lingle ASAP and set her straight. (And be sure to tell us how you made out.)

BoxcarWell, now. Hawaii saw the light because it cannot be funded. That's the pretty simple part most people can follow. What takes just a modest amount of understanding and motivation to understand is why. Go back to my first post on the thread where I seperate the two issues of cost and funding. Then begin to enlighten yourself from that point.

You'll be glad you did.

[Bubba X]

Bullshit. It is not a right. It forces an obligation on someone else to pay for it.
That was the point of my post - I you had read it carefully. How can it be a right when only some get it free and others foo the bill? Answer - it cannot.
If HC is a right, all should get it equally - that is, we all pay the same or we all pay nothing. Your reply, like HUSSEIN'S, are the lazy way out. Call it a right and then impose an obligation on others to carry those who do not contribute to this country....40% at last count.It is all about how you view the world. In your world, I suppose those on the lower end of income are not worthy of police and fire protection since, as is the basis of your bullshit argument, they do not pay for it. They are also not worthy of benefitting from our national defense.

In your world, we all would have our own little armies and police/fire departments.

I read your post very closely. Obviously the point I made that universal coverage RESULTS IN LOWER COSTS AND BETTER MEDICAL OUTCOMES is either lost on you or does not matter to you.

I'll assume both are true and just be thankful that my army is ready for action should those who share your view ever get a say in anything important.

[boxcar]

Well, now. Hawaii saw the light because it cannot be funded. That's the pretty simple part most people can follow. What takes just a modest amount of understanding and motivation to understand is why. Go back to my first post on the thread where I seperate the two issues of cost and funding. Then begin to enlighten yourself from that point.

You'll be glad you did.

the biggest problem Hawaii had was with dishonest people who wanted to drop their insurance to get the freebies from the state. This is what happens when the state removes motivation from the people to be self-reliant and self-sufficient. This is why Socialism and Communism have always failed and always will fail. (Too many people don't want to take care of themselves, let alone bear the burdens of others!)

Boxcar

[boxcar]

It is all about how you view the world. In your world, I suppose those on the lower end of income are not worthy of police and fire protection since, as is the basis of your bullshit argument, they do not pay for it. They are also not worthy of benefitting from our national defense.

In your world, we all would have our own little armies and police/fire departments.

I read your post very closely. Obviously the point I made that universal coverage RESULTS IN LOWER COSTS AND BETTER MEDICAL OUTCOMES is either lost on you or does not matter to you.

I'll assume both are true and just be thankful that my army is ready for action should those who share your view ever get a say in anything important.

why don't you tell us precisely what the federal government's responsibilities are -- to what are they limited, according to the U.S. Constitution? What services are specifically mandated in this document?

For example, does the constitution mandate socialized education? Yes or no.

Boxcar

[delayjf]

They are also not worthy of benefitting from our national defense.
IMHO, there are many who are not worthy of the freedoms this country's Military provides and if it were up to me they could fend for themselves.

[Tom]

It is all about how you view the world. In your world, I suppose those on the lower end of income are not worthy of police and fire protection since, as is the basis of your bullshit argument, they do not pay for it. They are also not worthy of benefitting from our national defense. No, you are not thinking. First of all, fire protection is not a right. Many communities do not have fire departments. National defense is not a right, it is a responsibility of government to provide.

In your world, we all would have our own little armies and police/fire departments. That conclusion is not supported by the facts.

I read your post very closely. Obviously the point I made that universal coverage RESULTS IN LOWER COSTS AND BETTER MEDICAL OUTCOMES is either lost on you or does not matter to you. Because it is not right.

I'll assume both are true and just be thankful that my army is ready for action should those who share your view ever get a say in anything important.

Man, that bar is going lower and lower.

[Bubba X]

IMHO, there are many who are not worthy of the freedoms this country's Military provides and if it were up to me they could fend for themselves.

dang right.

Who?

[Bubba X]

Man, that bar is going lower and lower.Have a little courtesy and tgy not to manipulate my posts. Answer as you want, sure , but really do you need to manipulate my words?

[delayjf]

Who?
I'd start with those with the mentality to spit on soldiers and call them baby killers or run off to Canada. Someone like Jane Fonda would be high on my list.

[Tom]

Have a little courtesy and tgy not to manipulate my posts. Answer as you want, sure , but really do you need to manipulate my words?

I didn't manipulate anything. I replied to your points.

[Lefty]

Bubba, you're saying Universal healthcare results in lower cost I understand in Canada the taxes are prohibitive and there's a long wait for tests such as catscans. Same in england and I heard they're about to ration healthcare if they haven't already. They stopped it in Hawaii because the can't fund it and you brush over it like it isn't relevant.
I really doubt that Universal Healthcare results in lower costs and better outcomes.

[robert99]

This is why Socialism and Communism have always failed and always will fail. (Too many people don't want to take care of themselves, let alone bear the burdens of others!)

Boxcar

Except for China, Russia, Australia and European Union which pay year after year to bail out the USA deficit burden.

[keilan]

Bubba, you're saying Universal healthcare results in lower cost I understand in Canada the taxes are prohibitive and there's a long wait for tests such as catscans.

Yeah I waited a couple weeks for an MRI but I could have been in a couple hours if needed. The ignorance shown on most of these threads should be downright embarrassing. This from the same people whom are riding the S. Palin bandwagon. Also the same people who thought the bailout wasn't necessary, be careful guys, next you could be working for the Mexicans.

It's great that you're all so patriotic when you're not fighting amongst yourselves but a dose of reality might be nice occasionally.

In Canada we don't feel the need to put the USA down to make ourselves feel good, try that approach sometime.

[Tom]

Robert-
Too bad civilized people don't live in any of those places.
I'll take this place over anything Europe has to offer any day.

[Bubba X]

Bubba, you're saying Universal healthcare results in lower cost I understand in Canada the taxes are prohibitive and there's a long wait for tests such as catscans. Same in england and I heard they're about to ration healthcare if they haven't already. They stopped it in Hawaii because the can't fund it and you brush over it like it isn't relevant.
I really doubt that Universal Healthcare results in lower costs and better outcomes.
I'm not the world's foremost expert but I do work in the field.
Here's a couple studies:

The world's 5 healthiest countries:
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4025
Japan
France
Iceland
Sweden
Cuba
All five countries have some form of mandated universal health care.

Top 5 nations in per cap spending for health care:
http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/full/24/4/903/T1
1. U.S. $5267 (15% of GDP, 50% government funded)
2. Switzerland $3746
3. Norway $3083
4. Canada $2931
5. Germany $2817

Eventually, you get to Japan:
Japan $2077 (7.8% of GDP, 83% government funded)

I suppose people could bicker about how "health" is measured. But there is no doubt the Japanese plan, which allows patients access to any facility, scales family premium to inclome and includes out of pocket costs per family not dissimilar to those in the U.S., produces superior results at 35% of the cost we see here in the U.S., while doing so at a total cost (as measured by % of GDP) barely 1/2 of what we spend here.

Tons of studies show the following:
1. There is no correlation between how care is financed and the quality of care
2. The U.S. is the ONLY industrialized nation with no form of government mandated universal health care.

Another, incontrovertable, conclusion is that the U.S government already funds a greater $$ amount per capita than any other nation. We also, to some extent, already index family HC costs to income by allowing itemized deductions for costs over 5% of AGI.

Is the problem here, as provicial folks claim that the poor are dragging down the wealthier classes? Or is it more that, in the face of realizing we already have our govermnment spend more $$ per capita than the "nationalized insurance" countries, we still are accomplishing far less for much more?

There certainly are tempering factors for those supporting nationalized health care, especially the fact that since there is still more total private funding in the U.S., this is where research and innovation happens. And there are others.

All the arguments about England, Canada and Hawaii you and others note are valid. The UK is f'd up because they have 4-5 programs in place and the continued existence of private and supplemental plans siphon off the better drs. Hawaii's plan was just plain stupid as it allowed adverse selection by allowing people to choose between the government plan and any existing private plan. Canada is Canada. They lnow hockey.

[boxcar]

Except for China, Russia, Australia and European Union which pay year after year to bail out the USA deficit burden.

Yeah...and at whose expense do they do perform this bail out, eh?

Boxcar

[Bubba X]

I didn't manipulate anything. Well, yes you did. I replied to your points. And not very well.

Ok, we're all square.

[Bubba X]

Yeah...and at whose expense do they do perform this bail out, eh?

Boxcar
Yours?

[Bubba X]

Yeah I waited a couple weeks for an MRI but I could have been in a couple hours if needed. The ignorance shown on most of these threads should be downright embarrassing. This from the same people whom are riding the S. Palin bandwagon. Also the same people who thought the bailout wasn't necessary, be careful guys, next you could be working for the Mexicans.

It's great that you're all so patriotic when you're not fighting amongst yourselves but a dose of reality might be nice occasionally.

In Canada we don't feel the need to put the USA down to make ourselves feel good, try that approach sometime.I went to an orthopedic last week because my elbow hurts. Not awful, just sore. He wanted to skip X-Rays and do both an MRI and Bone Scan. I asked him if it didn't make sense to treat it first as likely tendonitis and follow up in a couple weeks. He told me he didn't want to wast his time when he knew he would do those tests anyway. I told him he was fired.

[JustRalph]

You need to read better. Or, at least, try to comprehend. The point is this: nations with universal healthcare coverage have:
1. Lower Costs vs the U.S.
2. Better medical outcomes than the U.S.

"

yep, that's why they come down from Canada daily to Buffalo for MRI's and serious surgeries.

In France you pay a 15% tax to pay for Health care and then you are "required" to buy a policy to take care of everything the government doesn't take care of.

Somebody explain this to me?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4u5x9XAsAs

[Bubba X]

yep, that's why they come down from Canada daily to Buffalo for MRI's and serious surgeries.

In France you pay a 15% tax to pay for Health care and then you are "required" to buy a policy to take care of everything the government doesn't take care of.OK, Meat. One last, final time. You need to read and understand what you are trying to talk about.

I wouldn't go to Buffalo to die.

[keilan]

I went to an orthopedic last week because my elbow hurts. Not awful, just sore. He wanted to skip X-Rays and do both an MRI and Bone Scan. I asked him if it didn't make sense to treat it first as likely tendonitis and follow up in a couple weeks. He told me he didn't want to wast his time when he knew he would do those tests anyway. I told him he was fired.


Bubba -- my condition wasn't nearly as minor. Secondly whenever statistics are quoted it's like everything else is meaningless. Canada has a population of 33 mil and a total area 9,984,670 sq km, per cap our costs can reasonably be expected to cost more per unit than a nation of 30 mil and 25% of our land area.

Could we be better? of course!! But to diss Canada only demonstrates one's immaturity.

[Bubba X]

Bubba -- my condition wasn't nearly as minor. Secondly whenever statistics are quoted it's like everything else is meaningless. Canada has a population of 33 mil and a total area 9,984,670 sq km, per cap our costs can reasonably be expected to cost more per unit than a nation of 30 mil and 25% of our land area.

Could we be better? of course!! But to diss Canada only demonstrates one's immaturity.You are right about all that.

[delayjf]

Here's a couple studies:

The world's 5 healthiest countries:

One of the major componants of those rankings are accessability. In other words the study's and the rankings are skewed to prefer Universal healthcare. If you want to go to Cuba for treatment be my guest, you can stand in line behind Michael Moore.

Keilan,
I don't think anybody is knocking Canada as a country, the disagreement is with universal healthcare. If it worked in your case great, but the man who designed the program ( Claude Castonguay )has now been quoted as saying it's in crisis. More and more countries are moving away from government healthcare as the costs get higher and higher.

[JustRalph]

Keilan,
I don't think anybody is knocking Canada as a country, the disagreement is with universal healthcare. If it worked in your case great, but the man who designed the program ( Claude Castonguay )has now been quoted as saying it's in crisis. More and more countries are moving away from government healthcare as the costs get higher and higher.

That is the point. Not knocking Canada at all.

[Tom]

I didn't manipulate anything. Well, yes you did. I replied to your points. And not very well.

Ok, we're all square.

First day on the internet?

[Tom]

OK, Meat. One last, final time. You need to read and understand what you are trying to talk about.

I wouldn't go to Buffalo to die.

Don't let us stop you.

[Rookies]

I don't think anybody is knocking Canada as a country, the disagreement is with universal healthcare. If it worked in your case great, but the man who designed the program ( Claude Castonguay )has now been quoted as saying it's in crisis. More and more countries are moving away from government healthcare as the costs get higher and higher.

It's not in crisis. Flushed Oxy-cotin Windbag and his fellow neo con sycophants love to trot that lie out- as though we've all been living in some 3rd. world health hell hole since socialized medicine was introduced by Tommy Douglas. Yep, there are some waits and there are some deficiencies in the system. Governments, Federal & Provincial attempt to deal with these issues. But to have everyone under the system, as opposed to millions who aren't in America, strikes most of us here as sound health & ECONOMIC medicine.

ANY government here... of any political stripe, F-s with it at their own peril. Thank God my in laws (average working people from Pa ) were fortunate enough to have developed quality health insurance on top of Medicare.

But their most brilliant move was to sign off their home to their children years before the debilitating illnesses that would have bankrupted them took hold ! May they rest in peace, but no American should need to go through the same terrible Hobbesian choice.

[JustRalph]

Rookies, how do you explain away that info from the video link I posted?

This guy is a medical broker..........why does he even have a job? if there wasn't a crisis, he wouldn't exist? Would he?

[wonatthewire1]

This guy is a medical broker..........why does he even have a job? if there wasn't a crisis, he wouldn't exist? Would he?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


best post of the day - by far

[Rookies]

And what was he before ? An executive with the Insurance industry !

So, obviously Castonguay would have no vested interest now would he ?

Just the same dispassionate review as the AMA/ American Insurance industry would give the Canadian Health care system !!

Right ?

[Bubba X]

[QUOTE=Bubba X]

First day on the internet?We can only hope the next 30,000 will be more clever. Keep Hope Alive!

[The Judge]

Well it wasn't exactly Universal Health care now was it.. It was designed to take care of childern up to 18 years of age who weren't covered by insurance. How many kidds were enrolled when the program folded a mere 2,000 how much did it cost the govenment per month ,per child $25.50 so a total of $50,000 per month was what was being spent. A lousy $50,000 is too much yet 1trillon dollars and counting for the rich. http://www.gopusa.com/news/2008/october/1020_hawaii_health.shtml

Hawaii thought this was too much money or they thought it wasn't reaching the people it was intended to help.

If you can't get an MRI in Canada that can be fixed with better scheduling and more machines. My real question is what was being done before MRI's which are relatively new, are X-rays still being done? If MRI's are so necessary there should be dead bodies lining the street of Vancouver and Ottawa.

There are horror stories here of HMO's denying treatment of covered clients as a matter of "policy" to save the bottom line.

[delayjf]

But to have everyone under the system, as opposed to millions who aren't in America, strikes most of us here as sound health & ECONOMIC medicine.

Well, if we didn't have the imigration problem perhaps the above would not be truth. Just curious, how many illegals are in Canada (serious question). I would also point out that other countries with universal healthcare are having their own growing problems - and that growth will continue.

[Tom]

What percent of Canadians do not pay taxes?
We are around 40%. I bet Canada is not that high.

And I know very little about Canada's government, but I'll bet dollars to donuts it is nowhere near as inept and incompetent as ours is. Ours cannot do anything on time, on budget, effectively, or at all. Look at Amtrak. Look at our AHOLES in congress - they were opposed to a 700 billion dollar bail out because it cost too much, but then voted for an 850 billion dollar pork-filled version a week later. This is our governemnt - mental midgets who represent only those who give them bribes. You want this bucnh of disgusting jerks running your health care? Notivce, THEY have a great HC package.....but not for us.

It is a worthy goal to have everyone able to get health care, but I have not heard word one from anyone about individuals being responsible for themselves. Do we never spread the work around? The answer is not just let the rich guy pay for it.

[robert99]

All the arguments about England, Canada and Hawaii you and others note are valid. The UK is f'd up because they have 4-5 programs in place and the continued existence of private and supplemental plans siphon off the better drs. Hawaii's plan was just plain stupid as it allowed adverse selection by allowing people to choose between the government plan and any existing private plan. Canada is Canada. They lnow hockey.

On the contrary, the UK Health system improves every year and is thriving.
Administration costs are 8% of total spend. In USA 43% of health costs are spent on administration - chasing up on approvals and billing payments. Total costs per person are half USA's. Any individualised system does not have economies of scale such as bulk buying of drugs and equipment - but for those that can afford it, it is a more personable system. What matters most is prompt and effective treatment and most systems supply that. The real issue is about spiralling costs and availability as people live longer and more and more complex and costly treatments and drugs are developed. Whether it is paid by general taxation or higher insurance premiums, costs will be getting higher year by year which means less and less people in USA will eventually be covered.

The national service, in fact, has the best doctors, the best training and the most advanced treatments - the private hospitals avoid any high risk or new procedures - they call in a national health doctor for that. Those that go private pay for both so the national system gains cash which is not then used for those patients ie reduced demand - not a bad system at all. There are only two systems "free" or 100% private.

[Marshall Bennett]

Would be nice if a very small part of all those billions could assist a crowd in Galveston . This crowd has been waiting all day and last night in a parking lot for $200 in hurricane assistance ( two $100 Walmart gift certificates ) . Sorry to appear OT but this makes my blood boil . They haven't even been furnished a toilet to piss in . Galveston's mayor is about a hundred years old and is as dumb as the day is long . She belongs in a nursing home , or mental institution . If this isn't bullshit bureaucracy in its lowest form I don't know what is . :mad:

[LottaKash]

Would be nice if a very small part of all those billions could assist a crowd in Galveston . , or mental institution . If this isn't bullshit bureaucracy in its lowest form I don't know what is . :mad:

I suspect for the most part, most Americans haven't realized the real truth that Katrina has taught us......The bureaucratic machine doesn't give a "Flyin' F--k" about the people any longer.....At least not in the way we once knew it......

best,

[JustRalph]

I suspect for the most part, most Americans haven't realized the real truth that Katrina has taught us......The bureaucratic machine doesn't give a "Flyin' F--k" about the people any longer.....At least not in the way we once knew it......

best,

believing that it ever did, is the first fatal flaw in your logic

[delayjf]

Robert99

Curious, what are the tax rates like in the UK?

[LottaKash]

believing that it ever did, is the first fatal flaw in your logic

Even at my age, I still have a hard time letting go of Old Fashioned Idealism, I am a "flaw" in the ointmnent.......:jump:

But, we used to care much more than we do now, for the whole world as well as our own....But, what happened after Katrina defined us as a nation from thereon.....How sad.....

best,

[Rookies]

Estimate of illegal immigants in Canada



"Citizenship and Immigration Canada and academics say Canada's illegal community is proportionately smaller than that of the United States. "In the U.S. 30 per cent of all foreigners who come to live there every year are illegals. In Canada, it's about 8 per cent," says Don Devoretz, an economist at Simon Fraser University.



Illegal Immigrants in Canada:

Estimated number: up to 200,000
Estimated number in Ontario's construction sector: 76,000
Illegals as percent of foreigners who come to live in Canada every year: 8%
Methods of entry: refugee system; visa overstays
Refugee claim acceptance rate: 48% of about 40,000 annual claims
Number of refugee claimants ordered deported in the last five years who are still here: 36,000
Number of student, visitor and work visas issued last year: 800,000
Percentage who overstay their visa: 8% (or 64,000)
Ontario's construction boom has also encouraged foreigners to overstay their visas and work in the cash economy. With 225,000 annual housing starts across the country, contractors cannot find enough Canadians to fill jobs.