Username: Password:
Welcome! Please Sign In or Register

Health Care

reviewed by pek7683

pek7683
08/13/2009

Health Care 1

Over the past week, I've been alarmingly disturbed by the massive amount of "propaganda" distributed by those who oppose health care reform. This has been a long struggle for America as a country, we can look back to Truman's presidency for the first indication that we as a nation need a national health care system. That was some sixty years ago and is far too long for a system of affordable health care. As I hear both sides talk, I'm reminded of what our founding fathers wrote in the Declaration of Independence, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Does health care not fall under the category of "unalienable Right"? Does it not fall under "Life"? What about the "pursuit of Happiness"? Health care is not a privilege as it is now, but a right that each human being on this earth deserves. Are we as Americans too ignorant to recognize that maybe our system isn't the best? How can patients be denied the simple health care they deserve? Many people I know are denied care because of a "pre-existing condition" and it seems the insurance companies black list you if you go in for a simple test or two to determine if you have cancer. At that point they view you as a "risk" while trying to do preventive care. How is that fair? The insurance industry has had no regulation over the past that it has become out of hand. Someone must step in and make sure that the insurance companies are regulated and not in business to make money, they should be in business to ensure their members receive the quality care they deserve regardless of their condition. I'm just shocked that many people refuse to recognize this and then claim that by creating a government sponsored option that our health care system goes to pot? Are you kidding me!?! We have people in this country who are faced with the difficult decision of paying for health care or paying for a mortgage. Many choose to keep the roof over their head because they don't want to be on the street. It is our obligation as a nation to ensure that health care is available to every citizen of our country. We cannot continue to let big business control health care.

Finally, I would like to note that for approximately 85% of Americans NOTHING will change about their current health care plan. If you like it, you keep it and life goes on. If you don't currently have insurance and wish to have an affordable option, then you deserve to have it. Keep in mind no part of this legislation will change any of the other government sponsored health programs (medicaid/medicare), this is a separate option for you to consider before you qualify for these programs. Also to those who think medicare/medicaid aren't social health programs, well hello, what do you think they are? They seem to work quite well!

Go to the White House's "Fact Check" page and get the real facts for yourself here, http://www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck/ . This video might be the best to explain the "rationing" phenomenon that is being discussed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qn0xxjpf360). Note President Obama's explanation of Medicare.

Join to vote! 7 Helpful / 0 Funny / 6 Agree / 0 Disagree
Showing 21 Comments
You must be logged in to comment. login now.
Wiseguy commented 95 days ago.
(Edited 79 days ago)
Pursuit of happiness, does that mean I have to pay for your next trip to Disneyland? I have to clothe and feed you?

The idea was to “promote” the "general welfare” To protect our right to “pursue”- not for the government to “ make you happy” because you can’t do it on your own.

Gezz!

Lena commented 95 days ago.
there's a difference between going on vacation and staying alive.

I believe the latter falls under the "general welfare" umbrella you mention. :)

Wiseguy commented 95 days ago.
We're talking about interpretation of the constitution, and what the government has no right to do. The above reviewer thinks government is the provider of all things, when it is actually the opposite. He couldn't be more wrong about that.

Lena commented 95 days ago.
You can't claim "right" or "wrong" based upon your preference for strict constructionist judicial interpretation of the Constitution (well I guess technically you can, but it's opinion, not fact).

Wiseguy commented 95 days ago.
(Edited 95 days ago)
I believe I said that in my last comment. Maybe a lawsuit should be filed against Obama. If the Supreme Court had a chance to rule on this matter, what decision do you think they would make?

I guess I should say I wish a lawsuit could be filed.

Lena commented 95 days ago.
You want the supreme court to rule on what, exactly? checks and balances already exist among the three branches of government.

fitman commented 95 days ago.
Please advise where I might find an application form for Obama's FREE TRIP TO DISNEYLAND voucher.

Thank you.

Lena commented 95 days ago.

Wiseguy commented 95 days ago.
Hypothetically , If the Supreme Court had a chance to rule on the matter of universal health care that is being forced on us. Which way do u think it would go.

Lena commented 95 days ago.
Eh....that's kind of an impossible hypothetical to consider given the nuance involved in constitutional law, unless you're just making assumptions about what each justice thinks about the broader issue based upon their political affiliation & track record. That approach contradicts the job description and the entire point of the Supreme Court.

Otherwise, it would depend upon what led up to UHC and how the legislation were written.

Stepping outside your hypothetical: To say anything is being forced upon the American population, all things considered, is a bit dramatic. Obama got elected in part based upon a platform of UHC, and great pains are being made to enable constituents to chime in with both rational and insane concerns thanks to Town Hall Meetings.

fitman commented 95 days ago.
Thanks Lena, but I want the whole trip paid for by the US government, like Obama promised us!

Wiseguy commented 95 days ago.
(Edited 95 days ago)
Dramatic? Hardly. Most Americans don’t want UHC, we like what we have. After a period of time I will have no choice but to bow down to the state.

Your team is going it on blind faith. “All we’re encouraging is competition” “Keep your Doctor”

The end game is a state run system, it will take some for that to happen.

Only the politicians can opt out.

The Dems don’t need a single GOP vote to pass this, what’s the hold up?

Lena commented 95 days ago.
Most americans favor healthcare reform according to one of the most recent polls: http://kff.org/kaiserpolls/posr082209pkg.cfm

Others show it closer to a dead heat.

I'll assume your "we" above is another usage of it in the royal sense since I and many others think our current system is broken (and yes, I have insurance).

jedi58 commented 95 days ago.
(Edited 95 days ago)
Why do some people object to the idea of a government run healthcare system? It works for us. As it currently stands, a long stay in a US hospital could about bankrupt someone without insurance. I'm sure there must be people who can't afford treatment or insurance - do they deserve help any less?

fitman commented 94 days ago.
True American patriots are against National Health because lazy shiftless working class folks would then be eligible for free trips to Disneyland.

Wiseguy commented 94 days ago.
@ jedi58. Where to start.

A long time ago, England used to rule over here, and the people didn't much for care for their rules, so we helped them leave. In fact we (the U.S) created, and adhere to documents that are supposed to insure that a system (s) like what England used (s) won't happen here ever again.

Just because a tiny island can run a government program (that also has problems) doesn't mean a giant country with 300 million people ,with a incompetent power hungry government can.

jedi58 commented 94 days ago.
Back then though we didn't have the NHS, and the country was run by the monarchy. Now it is run by parliament. What became the NHS wasn't even started by the government - it was run by people for the people and the government later stepped in with funding.

Wiseguy commented 94 days ago.
Run by people, very interesting. It started as just a grass roots effort? What drove it?

jedi58 commented 94 days ago.
(Edited 94 days ago)
There were a lot of hospitals at the time but they all required that people paid for their treatment, which despite many people having work they couldn't all afford it and so would go untreated.

A group of doctors and volunteer nurses then started the London Hospital which was a place where anyone who was sick and couldn't pay for treatment could go to get treatment. They did it not for praise or for profit, but solely so they could help others - they believed in a fair system where everyone had the right to treatment. It relied on charitable donations from the wealthy and proved an unmitigated success. If you were someone who had money for treatment then you would have to go to one of the other hospitals instead.

Today the NHS doesn't turn anyone away whether they could potentially afford treatment or not. A portion of our taxes goes towards funding the NHS so that it's not just those that can afford treatment that get it, but everyone. If someone can't afford treatment it doesn't mean they're lazy, it could mean they can't find work that pays well enough.

We don't solely rely on the NHS either though, we do have private health insurance available - myself for example, I have annual health insurance with a company called Bupa which run their own hospitals and they do get plenty of custom which shows a government funded health service can work without it changing the quality of service.

Earlier this year I injured my hand at Judo, fighting, (all my fingers and my left hand bent back in totally the opposite direction to normal - quite painful) and the following day I went to the A&E department (an NHS one) to get them checked out (they'd gone a little blue) and in a matter of hours I'd had numerous X-Rays and was done and out of there in around 4 hours. It seemed like a long time, but when there are a lot of people who have accidents every day and that won't change. Overall I'd say I was quite happy with the service.

Wiseguy commented 94 days ago.
Very nice of that group of doctors and volunteer nurses, (they) believed in a fair system where everyone had the right to treatment. After all, we have to be fair no matter what.

If someone can't afford treatment it can mean they're lazy as well.

Entitlement and dependency (some call it lazy) is a huge problem in the states. That mentality was created by government.

fitman commented 94 days ago.
"... woe unto you who are rich, for ye have received your consolation. Woe unto you who are full! for ye shall hunger. Woe unto you who laugh now! for ye shall mourn and weep. Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets." - The Master Teacher
Showing 21 Comments
About This Reviewer
By the Numbers