Question About Natl. Health Care

From everything I have read and seen, the answer is simple. The new healthcare plan they are pushing through has very little to do with providing health care to those that don't have it and more to do with money. The fact is if they wanted to provide healthcare to everyone that doesn't have it, it would be a simple thing: simply provide an automatic MediCaid card to everyone who doesn't have insurance regardless of income. The problem comes in that they are trying to cut back on healthcare and keep the money being paid out to it. Sorry to say but the ppl that get the most healthcare are the elderly, handicapped (mentally or physically) and the terminally ill. What I mean by that is that those are the ppl that have the highest costing medical conditions. Now look at it this way, if they can limit how much money is spent on these groups then they can keep the extra money for themselves. Here's an example: Let's say there's an 80 year old woman who needs a pacemaker. She has MediCare and it's going to cost $10,000 for the pacemaker for her. Under the new plan, she wouldn't be worth the cost of treating...she's too old and doesn't have enough earning potential years left in her. So she's left to die and the government gets to save the thousands it would have spent to treat her. Another example: Let's say there's a 6 year old child that has leukemia. He has MediCaid and it's going to cost $15,000 to treat him and care for him. Under the new plan, he wouldn't be worth the cost of treating...leukemia isn't curable. He would be left to die and the government saves the money. One more: A 20 year old man falls off a ladder and breaks his hip. He doesn't have any insurance or medical coverage and it's going to cost $20,000 to fuse his hip and have therapy. Under the new plan, he would be worth treating...once his hip is fixed he still has at least 40-45 years of earning potential. This new healthcare plan isn't about providing for ppl it's about the government saving money and controlling who gets what treatment. Ppl's treatment isn't going to be up to their Dr's anymore (they can be jailed for not following the governments rulings) it's up to a faceless government official to decide. Some ppl may think it's not a big deal but what about when it's your child dying of leukemia and you have to sit by and watch or when it's your parent needing a pacemaker and is told no. Then the outlooks will change and by then it will be too late. I think healthcare for everyone is a great thing but not having the government in charge of it...it just gives them way too much control over ppl. [b]~~AT PEACE WITHIN~~ **STAND STRONG IN YOUR BELIEFS**[/b]

I totally agree with you. I think that the people who can afford to pay their own insurance, be it a private plan or offered through their employer should have to cover themselves. Those of us that can't afford it, or our employer does not offer this benefit are the ones who should be helped out a little bit. I, too, have heard of the problems that Canadians are facing, and to tell you the truth, it scares me. Our health care system is already messed up enough. If they want to help people, why don't they put a cap on the amount that hospitals are allowed to charge us? Or put a cap on salaries? That way, the care that we need would be more affordable and insurance would not cost as much.

Living in the U.K. healthcare is free to all, (although some can go private as well, but it is their choice), and I would hope that should continue. I don't see any problem in the U.S. providing the same. I can see the objections though, Doctors may not get quite so rich, and as it has to be paid for somehow, then I would assume that some taxes would have to rise, but then health insurance should decrease. Why should healthcare depend on how much money someone has, or how much insurance they can afford. Healthcare is a basic human right should always be treated freely.

It's not likely to be just "a" national health plan as in a single payer system like they have in Canada. That seems to have been taken off the table completely. They're talking about a possible "public option" for those who aren't covered through an employer plan and can't afford private insurance. I don't think they have the details worked out yet, at least nothing has been decided or voted on so far. I think if everyone were covered that in itself would help to bring costs down but it's very important that everyone IS covered because otherwise we'll just be right back where we are now with those who can pay or have insurance paying more to make up for those who can not. Annie

I live in Florida and I haven't heard anything about folks coming here from other countries for our medical care. We have a lot of Cubans who come here for our freedoms. I don't believe the goal is for a national health care plan that will cover everyone. As far as I know, it will be designed to help those who don't have health insurance provided by their employers or by medicare or medicaid to be able to buy affordable insurance. As it stands now it's way too expensive to buy your own health insurance, with high premiums, high deductables and little benefits. Providing affordable health insurance for those who don't currently have it won't create long waiting lists and will in fact shorten the wait times in most Emergency Rooms because the uninusred won't have to use the ER in place of the doctor they can't afford to go to.

How can the federal government have control and make everyone dependent on them if the people who can't afford health insurance are the only ones who will be receiving national health care?

what he ment was all the middle class or below middleclass level because well lets face it mostley every one is in that level so thats what is being plained or at least tryed to be