I will say I detest paying for services I don't get to use and even detest further having to wait exorbitant times to see my doctor. Many years ago, I went to my family doctor after coming down with Bells Palsy a second time. I saw him that day and went back for the follow-up. The follow-up visit was a nightmare. I waited for an hour in the waiting room then when I finally was taken to an examination room, I waited another 45 minutes. I put my clothes back on and left after not seeing the doctor in a reasonable amount of time. I stopped by the desk on the way out and told them I was leaving and to not bill me. When asked why, I told them I had not seen the doctor and felt I had nothing to pay for.

Nowadays, most doctors offices are crowded even with people with insurance and many are fed up with the waiting and the small amount of face time with the doctor once he enters the examination room. They are fed up enough to pay $1,500* or more per year to a doctor can get you 24/7 medical care with including more face time and less waiting. I had never heard of concierge health care until I read this article. I think more people will turn to this kind of service, including the doctors, if we have any kind of universal health care.

The biggest problem we have are companies who sell insurance and have a hard time paying it out, enough so that I feel insurance is a racket, but that is just me. I really dispise paying for things I can't use. While universal health care sounds good, it really isn't. That doctors visit I talked about earlier is just the tip of the iceberg. I have seen the lines of people waiting for health care at the local county health clinic and it has been out of the front doors at times. It is busy enough that the people at the clinic can't even answer the phone (I was trying to inquire about a much needed tetanus shot that I was even willing to pay for if need be). I don't want to subject myself to all of that at my regular doctor and I am sure there are others who feel the same way.

Demon is right, statistics and polls can be skewed to read any way the compilers wish to. The way something is worded can mean many different things to many people and can have different connotations.

quote:

Originally posted by Olegious:
Iguana:
I was lucky enough to be in a situation where my parents paid for most of my undergrad (about $80K), I'm paying for my graduate work, by the time I get out (2.5 years from now) I should have about $110,000 in education debt (a more detailed explanation of my background is found below). Fun!

So, I take it that with all of the debt that you have personally taken on that you won't want to be relegated to being a government employee, right?

quote:

Now for your response, you're wrong about the survey- Exhibit 1 http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/full/23/3/89/T1
gives the numbers for all the countries involved in all the QUALITY categories (the US is the 5th column). Can you point me to the report that you read (I'm assuming it showed that the US has far superior quality vs. other 1st world states)? Also, how are cancer survival rates, screening rates, and disease rates not symptoms of quality?

OK...didn't see that chart, but if you read the fine print at the bottom, it doesn't support your argument. Those are standardized scores, and in every category, a higher number indicates a better result. So, with that in mind, look at those numbers again and tell me that they support your argument. They don't. Although, I must admit that they don't support mine either. It looks like a pretty mixed bag to me, Oleg, with Australia excelling in some areas, Canada in others, New Zealand in others, the UK...the US...yada yada yada. Overall though, it looks like its a tossup between Australia and the US.

quote:

Your point about Clinton and the HMOs- exactly, so how is this situation fair?

Its not fair, Oleg, that's what I was trying to point out. It came from an attempt at Socialism in a country that is culturally ill-equipped to handle Socialism. Americans are not Socialists and there will ALWAYS be somebody there to use Socialism to their economic advantage...and its most often the people claiming to be "champions of the middle class".

quote:

Your previous questions lead me to believe that you think I come from a situation of coddling/lap of luxury- you couldn't be more wrong.

Really? Because that was the same impression I got from your comments about me

quote:

My family came to this country in 1992, escaping a brewing civil conflict in my home nation (Moldova). We came here with what was in our suitcases- no English, no money. My parents worked like dogs, while I took care of my younger brother (I was 9 he was 5 when we came here). We were on welfare, received foodstamps and Medical. I attended inner city public elementary and middle schools, got made fun of for my accent and my name.

Wow! We came up in almost identical situations. I was born here though, and didn't come from another non-English-speaking country. So, hat's off to your family. One thing though, if your parents were both working, how was your family on welfare and getting foodstamps? Maybe it was a 90's thing, but in the decade I came up in, if you worked, you got ZERO government assistance. My mom...oh yeah, it was just her, as opposed to two parents (dad and mom got divorced when I was 7 due to dad's alcohol abuse. Dad contributed jack bone, financially, to my upbringing), worked two jobs most of the time, sometimes three, to keep a roof over our heads and food in our bellies (my brother was 9 years younger than me). She applied for government assistance, and was denied because she had a job. I wasn't made fun of for my accent though. I just got the tar kicked out of me on a regular basis because I was white. I worked a full-time job throughout High School to help support the family, joined the military at 17...lost part of a major limb at the age of 20, in 1991...and continued with college, all while working a full-time job, so I guess I had it easy compared to you. My brother also had it easy, he wasn't so unfortunate to attend a private university. He served 8 years in the Marine Corps, fought in two different countries, and received most of his college credits through the Marine Corps. That lucky, overprivileged *******! Seriously, he'll weep for you when he reads your tale of hardship, much like I have.

quote:

However by 1997 we owned a house, by 2003 my dad owned his own business and my mom had a good tech job, and both my brother and I attended private universities. We worked hard to get to where we are today, and I know all about the value of hard work, I've had minimum wage jobs and have worked 70 hour weeks and night shifts. My views on universal health care are based on economics, not feelings of laziness or entitlement.

Myself, my mother, and my brother are all doing quite well these days too, and we all take pride in the fact that we made our own way through life as a family. I guess this whole experience has just affected my opinion in a different way than you

quote:

I think I've answered all your questions, so please, answer my (often repeated) question:

"why should our companies be the ones burdened by health care costs and how this reduces our competitiveness on an international stage"?

I have answered this already...now if you'll just go back and look at that link you posted with an objective eye...

All I know is that I don't want to wait three months for surgery like out neighbors to the north have to.

Iguana:
-My debt- if I don't do well on my finals in 2 weeks I won't get to accumulate that debt

-The exhibit does support my argument- that for all the money that we're spending we should be getting much better quality, but we're not- like you said it's a mixed bag.

How about this analogy- you have 2 race cars, A and B. A costs $1,000,000 and B costs $150,000. During the course of a season A wins some races while B wins other races, lets say the final count has A winning 10 races while B wins 8. Is winning 2 more races worth the extra cost of A?

Everyone wants quality, I'm not against quality either, but at what cost?

-Welfare in the 90s was one of the dumbest institutions ever created. What else could one call something that discouraged people from finding work? But to get around that, you work for below minimum wage and for cash.

-Hats off to you and your brother for your service to the country. I have nothing personal against either of you, it's simply a divergence of opinions.

-Can you point out where you addressed the issue of companies and health care?

quote:

Originally posted by Olegious:
Iguana:
-My debt- if I don't do well on my finals in 2 weeks I won't get to accumulate that debt

Well...not sure what to say about that, Oleg. Good luck? Its a big plunge, dude, and there's never a guarantee on anything. But your potential with a post-grad degree will definitely be there.

quote:

-The exhibit does support my argument- that for all the money that we're spending we should be getting much better quality, but we're not- like you said it's a mixed bag.

Not really...it goes back to what I said earlier about insurance premiums versus higher taxes. Insurance premiums usually win in the cost versus benefits war.

quote:

How about this analogy- you have 2 race cars, A and B. A costs $1,000,000 and B costs $150,000. During the course of a season A wins some races while B wins other races, lets say the final count has A winning 10 races while B wins 8. Is winning 2 more races worth the extra cost of A?

I guess that's a good analogy, that is IF you take into account that the $1,000,000 car is a design which uses mostly original ideas and automotive technology, while the $150,000 car has hacked versions of every original design feature of the more expensive car. Everything from the engine, down to the tires, were made, on the cheap, for the $150,000 car based on the competition's original designs. Then, the race commission gives no penalties for copying your opponent's design...in fact, the race commission even makes it so the better funded team HAS to provide the lesser funded team with its research without ANY compensation. Wait! Maybe THAT'S the solution to our problem! If the US government said "TOUGH S**T!" to the rest of the world when they come looking for our pharmaceutical and medical technology research and development, and demands that they all pay a royalty for those services....well then, there should be PLENTY of money in our coffers.

quote:

-Welfare in the 90s was one of the dumbest institutions ever created. What else could one call something that discouraged people from finding work? But to get around that, you work for below minimum wage and for cash.

Nope, sorry. If you are working for below minimum wage, you are either a tipped employee (which the government STILL considers to be employed, and therefore not eligible for Federal assistance), or your employer is violating the law. If you are working for cash, you are not paying your share of taxes and are therefore DEFINITELY not entitled to government assistance. If you fall into that category, you may be able to trick the government into paying you when they don't pay others who document their earnings, but that doesn't make it right.

quote:

-Hats off to you and your brother for your service to the country. I have nothing personal against either of you, it's simply a divergence of opinions.

Thank you, Oleg. I agree, its just a difference of opinion. Now we both know something about each other, and we know that neither one of us were born into privilege. Military service IS one way for an individual in the "limbo" age group to deal with the healthcare issue though. Its also the perfect scenario in which to see the difference between normal healthcare and universal/socialized healthcare. When you are active duty, you get some of the best care in the world. Once you are discharged and your only healthcare choice is the VA, however, get ready for some major disappointment and LOOOOONNNNGGGG wait times.

quote:

-Can you point out where you addressed the issue of companies and health care?

I shouldn't have to do that. If you must, just re-read a few of my posts, especially the one about me providing healthcare to my employees...and...there ya go.

Actually Oleg, I got a better analogy than the race car one. The race car analogy isn't appropriate since you're comparing your health to a sport. Here's my analogy, someone tell me if you think this is more appropriate.

You're a cop in an inner-city and you have to choose between two bullet resistant vests, A and B.
A costs $10,000 while B costs $4,500.
Vest A is guaranteed to stop almost all bullets from handguns and some bullets from smaller caliber rifles.
Vest B is pretty hit and miss and will probably let a bullet pass straight through about 30% of the time.
Sure, if all goes well, you really would hope you don't get hit at all, but you decide you want to get a vest anyway just in case. You are about to go on a raid of a drug house. Which one do you prefer to invest your money on?

So you guys tell me, which analogy is better, mine or Oleg's? I chose to make it a life or death thing since healthcare is about your health and your well-being, which is closely tied to whether or not you die if something bad happens to you, so yes, it is a life or death decision in my opinion...

Demon, your analogy would be better if statistics showed that the US system is much better in quality. But they don't show that, it shows a mix- sometimes better, sometimes the same, sometimes worse- so a better analogy would be that it stops handgun bullets better, shotgun shots the same and assault weapon rounds worse .

Oh yah, your so-called "studies" lol. Riiight...

But the funniest thing is, I used around the same percentage difference as your race car analogy, lmao. Shows how much you pay attention to detail, no wonder you believe in those studies...

Well if you want pointers on how to work and still receive welfare benefits you can join the Hasidic community. Their knowledge of the welfare system and religious exemption from taxes is astonishing.

Demon,
Instead of laughing, why don't you present statistics to back up your arguments? Oh yeah, I forgot your attack against the statistics is that "numbers can be manipulated"- that is a cop out that could be used in any argument.

As for the analogy,your analogy reflects your opinion of the situation- "USA ALL THE WAY!" While my version reflects the reality- insane amounts of money spent with few improvements in the results.

Hmmm...you think that Demon's analogy is "USA ALL THE WAY!"? Yet, no comment on my analogy and the reasons I gave supporting it. Interesting.

Demon's analogy was pretty much dead on, and it echoes my own analogy. One of the cost factors that you seem to be omitting is pharmaceutical and medical research. The US, due to our better funding, is responsible for the vast majority of advances in both categories. We don't keep those things secret from other countries though, so the other countries get to take our research and use it without having to foot the bill of developing most of it. Isn't it sad how, in those charts, the UK had so many 100s in its column...yet so many people who don't know any better are convinced that they have a healthcare system that is superior to that of the US.

quote:

Originally posted by GSG_9_Rage:
All I know is that I don't want to wait three months for surgery like out neighbors to the north have to.

Thanks to Klein, If you gotz the money, you don't have to wait. Just like anywheres in z world.

Oleg, seriously, I expect more from you at least. You are asking for "statistics" when it comes to QUALITY. Think about what you're asking...

And I'm only laughing because you attack my analogy because you are claiming my numbers are too far off, yet, I used a similar percentage as you did, so in a way, aren't you attacking your own analogy at the same time? You don't think that's funny? I think that's hilarious.

And I don't see why you refuse to use anything more serious than a sport in your analogy as if you don't believe that healthcare can be a life or death decision. And I think when you have personal experience to back up your opinion, you don't need numbers that some other person compiled, unless you are easy to convince that your own eyes are lying to you... It's like if I released a study that shows that your mother doesn't exist, and because I have all the numbers there you have no other choice but to believe it... Oh, but it's all official because I published the study on a .org website, lol.

Don't get personal Demon. You should know better than that. Keep others people's mothers out of these arguments.

??

I didn't say a single bad thing about his mother, I just used that because it's a person that you know exists (well, she has to or you won't be here, lol) so I just said that to show how stupid it is to let a survey convince you that something you know is true isn't...

Would you like it more if I said his tonka toy dumptruck and cross my fingers hoping he actually has one?? It really doesn't matter, I don't see how that is getting personal, everyone has a mother, I never said anything specific about her, or him for that matter...

PC police please don't arrest me, lol.

Here's a good site about a menace that everyone should be aware of...not sure if I've posted it before.

www.dhmo.org

LMAO, that's classic...