Reasons for Nationalised Health Care
- Thread starter RBBailey
- Start date
Just like Coronado Bridge across San Diego Bay.pwp said:
It was a toll bridge...
Then the toll time span ran out, and it became free.
But the tool booths remained.
Now they want to reinstate toll (at much higher rage) to control traffic.
Or the Bay Bridge...was supposed to be paid for in 1964 then no toll. Now they're trying to raise it to 5 bucks. When I was a kid it was 25 cents.
DougG said:
At times, doctors can't get paid now. Insurance companies refuse or fight payment if they disagree with treatment. Lots of insurance companies refuse payment the first submission, hoping the claim will go away, making collections for doctors more expensive.
Insurance companies also determine what treatment can be provided to patients. Didn't that used to be the doctor's job?
Government's could easily fuck up nationalized health care, that I won't argue too much. Big public insurance and pharma companies however, have already fucked up health care right now.
Insurance and other medical fees + normal taxes cost you more money than Norway's 40% mean tax rate with free health care every year and you are getting less for your money.
Last edited:
For those who may think that "Nationalised" health care is the "wave of the future" you may want to think again . . . what OUR COUNTRY calls "Nationalised" will be nothing more than an insurance policy underwritten by a major insurance company, and you will pay dearly for it. Why do you think the big insurance companies supported Hillary Clinton's campaign ??? Why do you think they switch to supporting ~"O"~ after the primaries ??? They do have a vested interest in "National Healthcare", and most of the "obamanites" are too star-struck to see that . . .
With my current health insurance I can go and get a generic medication with a ten dollar co-pay . . .
Without it I am forced to pay the "regular" price . . . SEVEN DOLLARS !!!
atriot:
With my current health insurance I can go and get a generic medication with a ten dollar co-pay . . .
Without it I am forced to pay the "regular" price . . . SEVEN DOLLARS !!!
atriot:
Funny thing everyone completely ignored the below statement as well as discoinjapan. This is the problem with America we never want to listen to anyone elses ideas. I lived in England for four years and all of my British friends had nothing but good things to say about the healthcare in fact my Chief married a British women and said he didnt pay a cent for anything. Doctor visits were worry free, waits were no longer than we do here, they pick the doctor the wanted. He liked it so much if we dont have universal helath care by the time he retires he is moving back to England. By the way off the subject most of them didnt have house payments either, why there banks finance homes like cars. they pay them if in 5 to 10 years. Maybe we should open our eyes here in America and learn from some other countries. I love my country too but the greed and corruption has to stop sometime.
deeker said:
Last edited:
Springsroverfamily said:
I in no way ignored that statement, I may not have read it; don't remember. Anyway I totally agree with his statement. His statements are correct in every way to the Japanese system as well.
The people bitching and complaining here are only ignorant to the idea and are misinformed. It has been a proven successfull in MANY countries. I myself have first hand experience with it! And would want nothing else but Nationalized health care. I dont go to the Hospital or dentist on Base because they have to cut one of my limbs off for payment even though I'm paying over $300 a month for insurance not to mention the Govt is matching my payment for coverage.
From experience in this type of system Nationalized Health Care is the best way to go!
Mike
ArmyRover said:
That's why I choose TriCare extra instead of Prime now that I'm retired. It is worth the co pay to allow me to choose any damn where or doctor I choose. Prime is a good deal financially but the gov tells you how much and where. TriCare extra is basically basic but with a 20% copay. BTW I spent 27 years in the military earning this shit. It erks me a little that soon anyone and everyone will get the same shit without sacrificing for it including illegals!
Springsroverfamily said:
I too lived in England as well as many other countries and when I was in England the health care SUCKED! The workers cared for the most part, but their facilities were nasty compared to the US. Maybe you never looked at the teeth. But dental coverage is something totally different LOL.
flyfisher11 said:
I can agree with your facilities statement. Over here the Hospitals are fairly old but clean and par with technology.
Who here would like to play 200 dollars a month for healthcare? That is what I pay for health care I am a Goverment employee. My aunt is a school teacher and pays 700 month. It just doesnt seem right that a third of her pay goes to health care and it is just here and her husband no kids.
Last edited:
Welcome to government run healthcare ...... or not
(Wash.) Lottery may be used to cut 36,000 from state health plan
ncpa.org ^ | 6.1.9
- 100,000 enrolled
- majority are in their 20s, 30s and 40s
- some are disabled or unemployed, but many work
- members pay $36 a month
- state pays the rest -- $209 a month on average
- plan doesn't includes vision or dental benefits
- cost the state about $300 million a year
Cost per enrolled person = $3000/yr
(Wash.) Lottery may be used to cut 36,000 from state health plan
ncpa.org ^ | 6.1.9
Steve Hill is about to decide how to eject some 36,000 people from Washington's Basic Health Plan, the popular state-subsidized insurance program .....
- 100,000 enrolled
- majority are in their 20s, 30s and 40s
- some are disabled or unemployed, but many work
- members pay $36 a month
- state pays the rest -- $209 a month on average
- plan doesn't includes vision or dental benefits
- cost the state about $300 million a year
Cost per enrolled person = $3000/yr