Universal health care by default?
@thegreatdebater (7316)
United States
January 25, 2009 9:34am CST
I am a salesman, and I talk to alot of small and mid-size business owner. Their number one cost right now is health care, which ten years ago wasn't even in the top ten. This is an industry where they have rising fuel cost, high repair cost, and high labor cost. Many of these companies can not afford health care anymore, and as many have told me are doing a Wal-Mart (offer health insurance that is either so high you can't afford it, thus relying on the government), or not offering it at all. The CEO of JP Morgan Jamie Dimon actually announced that they supported government run universal health care. He said: "you could argue that it's unethical" that nearly 50 million Americans are uninsured, and said "at a minimum it's not humane". Do you think with unemployment nearing double digits(many economist actually think it is closer to 13% NOW), with many companies insurance plans to high to afford, and the rising in insurance for selfemployed people, that many will have to rely on the the government to pick up the bill, thus creating government sponsored health care? And, do you think that states, or the federal government could buy health care better than companies that have 10, or 30 employees?
2 people like this
5 responses
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
25 Jan 09
Well this is a tricky issue. For one do you actually trust the government with handling your health care? Look at other government run programs....like the VA hospitals....it is run horribly and the care veterns get there is just offal. Socical security is going bankrupt because it has been mismanaged (plus congress pulled money that suppost to go to SS and put it in other programs leaving a bunch of worthless IOUs in its place, that has been going on for at least 15 years).
Our government is known for wasting money, not using it for what it is for and mismanaging the programs they have....do you want to give them even more money to mismanage and waste?
I think BEFORE we even think about universal or single payer health care we have a lot of work to do on how our government is held accountable for the money and programs they already have. Make them show us we can trust them with this. But to be honest....I am not a fan of government run healthcare. Yes it is a shame that so many people are un insured....but is it the governments job to take it over? I think if we look we might find a solution that involves less intrusion by the federal government.
2 people like this
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
25 Jan 09
"Obama is doing the right thing by hiring someone to look for this waste and fraud, and getting rid of it"
yes, he has already demonstrated we can trust him implicitly do do this by hiring a tax cheat to run the treasury department and a defense lobbyist as deputy defense secretary. oh COME ON !
What the hell is wrong with people in this country? Are people really that blind now? "Obama is gonna..." "Obama is making sure...." "Obama Obama Obama....."
For CRIPE SAKES! What is going to take for everyone to realize all we did was change one name plate on the oval office desk for another? Obama, Bush. Bush Obama. It's the whole abominable bunch. Until we purge the system, we can trust it to successfully operate, manage or clean [b] NOTHING
1 person likes this
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
25 Jan 09
"nearly 50 million Americans are uninsured"
I can't believe this figure is still being pushed. Broken down it's actualy much less, unless your one of the uninsured, and then it becomes personal and in one's view, it's a crisis.
I'm all for providing access to financial assistence to pay for healthcare, IF
a. there is a reasonable way to pay for it.
b. It can be done with out compramising the quality of care
c. it can be done with out the monsterous beurocrocy this corrupt government is famous for
d. it can be done with out orwelian intrusion in to people's lives this corrupt government is famous for.
Until all of that criteria can be met, we should stand firmly against adding another inevitably fallible system that will reign havoc on this country.
1 person likes this
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
25 Jan 09
X, I guess you didn't read my entire post. If the economy continues at this pace, and businesses continue to stop offering medical insurance, or make it so expensive that no one can afford it, then the government will be forced to act. We will have universal health care wheather we want it or not. It always makes me laugh when republicans complain about corrupt government buerocrocy when it comes to health care, but never say a word about the extremely corrupt tatics of our department of defense when you have defense contractors working with generals that they have already offered jobs to when they retire. Ever look at the number of former pentagon workers employed by defense contractors? Ever hear of the reason D!ck Cheney was selected to run Haliburton? If you want to talk about corrupt government buerocrocies, lets talk about the department of defense (we won't even get into the money laundering going on between the department of defense, the defense industry, and the republican party).
As for paying for it, two corporations (GE and GM) have subsidized the United States health care system to the tune of $1 + Billion dollars for years now. That is just two companies out of millions of companies in the United States. The health care industry is a $2 Trillion dollar a year industry that was less than $1 Trillion ten years ago. Here is my answer to your points: A. Do you think there is some waste and excess there (How many government employees make $175 million a year, and have a golden parachute worth $300 Million?) B. We have the best military in the world, and they are payed for by the United States government. Maybe moving the health care industry under government control we would have the best health care in the world. C. We have monsterous buerocracy in the department of defense, I never heard you say a word about that X. Why is that? And, if you want talk about corrupt? The department of defense is the most corrupt department in our government. D. Orwelian intrusion? You mean like the patroit act?
X, it sounds like you are taking sides with the executives of the health care industry (who donate large amounts of money to the republican part. Go figure). I would rather be on the side of the American people who are sick of subsidizing the health break throughs that save lives everyday at the expense of the American people. We need to find another way to pay for or health care, and I think common business practices should come into effect: If 313 million people you buy insurance from one company, they would get a better price than if 313 million people by seperate policies.
1 person likes this
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
26 Jan 09
And it makes me laugh even harder when people assume I am a republican.
I also find it funny you mention corruption in the defense department when your guy appointed a defense lobbyist to the position of assistant secretary of defense. I haven't heard you utter a peep about that.
"If 313 million people you buy insurance from one company, they would get a better price than if 313 million people by seperate policies. "
No, if there is one insurance company, there is nothing to keep prices affordable as people will have no other choice but to buy from thatone company who can charge what ever they feel like for the policy, knowing full well people will have no other choice or the ability to shop around.
I don't know what the tally is right now of medicaid and medicare recipiants is right now, if things get bad eniugh, then yes as the rolls increase in recipients, we will have a defacto national healthcare system in place, but it would still not be legaly mandated.
What I fear is a system that becomes so bloated and complicated and expensive that healthcare quality will go through the floor, the requirements and strings that inevitably come with any government program will be intrusive and infringe on peoples personal lives far more than they already do and the cost to the country will be astronomical because we will not only be paying for the health practices, doctors and hospitals themselves, but for the beurocrocy that runs it, which will be twice as expensive itself with out even figuring in the cost of the care itself.
I'm not saying something shouldn't or won't be done, but we should be very very carefull about how we go about it and not fall in to the same pit we seem to always do of creating a beurocrocy to fix a problem.
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
26 Jan 09
X, I did not assume you are a republican, I take the information you give me, and it tells me what you are. You can call yourself something else (like O'Reilly, and Hannity love to do), but your ideas are in line more with the republican party then the Democrats.
I never said anything about a lobbiest being appointed to assistant secretary of defense because our entire department of defense is corrupt, so hiring one is just par for the course. I don't agree with the selection, but again it is par for the course when it comes to the department of defense.
Your comment about insurance would make sense unless you look at history. Don't you remember when we deregulated the electric companies in California in the 90's? Does the name Enron ring a bell? Competition doesn't always lead to lower prices, as a matter of fact deregulation has created more monopolies, and has destroyed competition in many cases. Recently my states public utilities were ready to become deregulated, and were forced to stop after they announced they would raise prices 20% (we are now we have the highest rates in the state, and some of the highest in the country).
X, if you look at the amount of money Americans spend on health insurance alone you could create a system to cover every American without forcing them to pay one dollar more than they do today. You are paying hundreds of billions of dollars covering medicaid, and medicare, why not cover everyone and save yourself a few thousand a year. You could give every American a huge cut in their daily expenses, and take away the liability from corporations, saving them hundreds of billions. This could stimulate the economy so much, you might be able to avoid Bush's depression.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
26 Jan 09
I think it makes perfect sense that the CEO of a large company like JP Morgan would support universal health care. Just think about how much big corporations such as GM pay out in health care premiums for their employees. The part I can never figure out whenever there's a discussion about universal health care is how those who are opposed to it make the assumptions that suddenly the government will be "in charge" of our health care and that our taxes are going to go up so much we'll all end up in the poor house. Obviously, like you said, if everyone in the U.S. were in the same "pool" the premiums would be considerably lower for everyone than they are now. Just look at the difference between those who purchase their own policies and those who are covered by group plans where they work. Buying in volume saves. If it were decided that we would switch to a government funded single payer system I believe it the worst case scenario would be that most of us would break even or enjoy a net savings. I don't believe our quality of care would suffer. I don't have a problem with doctors making a good living, after all they save lives. I DO have a problem with being gouged by the insurance and pharmaceutical companies and hospital "corporations" that are in it purely to make a profit. As it is now, those of us who are fortunate enough to have health insurance are already having our health care dictated by the insurance companies instead of our doctors and every doctor I've ever talked to about it doesn't like it one bit but they have no choice in the matter. As much as I don't like the government meddling in my life if I were given a choice between someone from the government who's going to keep their job and get paid the same salary regardless or some insurance executive who is only in it for the profits deciding what kind of tests or treatments I can have to keep me alive and healthy I'll take the government every time.
Annie
1 person likes this
@MysticTomatoes (1053)
• United States
27 Feb 09
No. The federal government needs to stay out. Any area of anyone's life that has anything to do with the federal government is too complicated for words. The government takes something that is perfect and then interferes and screws it up.
Public or universal health care for Americans is a joke.
@MysticTomatoes (1053)
• United States
2 Mar 09
But are you willing to work 40 hours a week or more and only come home with half the income you currently make? In areas where there are universal healthcare plans in place, the citizens pay upwards of 60% or more in income taxes to support this. Keep in mind all the bills you currently have will likely increase but your pay will be slashed in half. I don't know about you, but I know I couldn't afford it.
@jjbogosian (15)
• United States
26 Jan 09
I work for a company which is considered CONSUMER DRIVEN HEALTHCARE (www.HealthNDentalPlans.com)Basically we take out the middleman and it's just the provider and the member only which in turn keeps the cost way down for everyone. No paperwork or claims. It's a smart alternative to traditional insurance and I'm hoping that this is the wave of the future for healthcare as opposed to government taking over. It is unethical, in my opinion that so many are walking around with no coverage however there are programs out there that can help. This insurance mess is going to take awhile to get straightened out so I recommend to people to explore some different options that are out there.