Think National Health Care is a Better Option?
When the government ensures that everyone has health insurance, then the government gets to decide what to treat and WHO to treat. You think our privatized health insurance is bad? Just wait.
A National Health Care plan is not about better health CARE or more accessible health care……..it IS about making sure all people are INSURED.
Under a single-payer system, all Americans would be covered for all medically necessary services, including: doctor, hospital, long-term care, mental health, dental, vision, prescription drug and medical supply costs. Patients would regain free choice of doctor and hospital, and doctors would regain autonomy over patient care.
Physicians would be paid fee-for-service according to a negotiated formulary or receive salary from a hospital or nonprofit HMO / group practice. Hospitals would receive a global budget for operating expenses. Health facilities and expensive equipment purchases would be managed by regional health planning boards.
A single-payer system would be financed by eliminating private insurers and recapturing their administrative waste. Modest new taxes would replace premiums and out-of-pocket payments currently paid by individuals and business. Costs would be controlled through negotiated fees, global budgeting and bulk purchasing.
Here’s another look at this National Health Care plan everyone seems in favor of:
Published on Friday, August 8, 2008 by The Seattle Timesby Lance Dickie
Searing headlines about local job cuts sharpen interest in universal health-insurance coverage. The topic grabs the attention of those vulnerable families and voters broadly defined as the middle class, the engine of change.
Increasingly, the focus is on national single-payer health insurance. Acceptance of the concept is growing, especially among a key constituency: doctors.
Two years ago, I opined the health-care system was not yet bad enough for real change to occur. The economy was propped up by easy credit and the soon-to-be-exposed liar loans of a fraudulent housing boom. The link between having a job and access to medical care was still secure for so many.
Well, yes, the number of Americans without health insurance was estimated at 47 million – a staggering figure – but the topic and threat seemed comfortably distant from most households.
At the same time, coverage was eroding for many wage earners. Benefits were being cut, insurance exclusions were mounting, co-payments and deductibles were climbing, and children of the middle class were entering a stark economy where employers can no longer afford to offer coverage.
Single-payer health insurance is about who pays the bills, not who provides the medical care. Instead of having private insurance, everyone pays into a common fund. Nothing about the health-care-delivery system changes.
No one is employed by the government except the people who write the checks. Call it Medicare for everyone. Instead of waiting until age 65 for decent medical care, everyone – everyone – has access to a doctor.
If you want to know how great Medicare is, ask your parents or grandparents. My mother has less coverage now than when she had employer-provided group private insurance. Her out of pocket on prescriptions is outrageous AND the extra insurance she now has to pay for on top of her Medicare so far hasn’t covered a single thing they said they did. AND my mother is a relatively healthy woman of 78, who has Type I diabetes and an irregular heart rate, both things requiring regular doctors visits to monitor. And forget dental…………..Medicare doesn’t cover dental unless you wish to pay extra for it.
Junkfood Science gives us a glimpse at where the UK’s National Health Service (NHS) is at:
August 15, 2008
When is a human life not worth saving? When healthcare resources are limited, who gets life saving drugs and medical care, and who should go without — and who decides? Should care be denied to those whose health problems are believed to be their own fault, who are too old or too fat, or whose quality of life is not worth the price of saving?
Today, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) released its Social Value Judgements, outlining its guiding principles in deciding the allocation of National Health Services resources. The entire world should care about what this disturbing document forewarns. It is the most palpable document in recent history to bring the same bioethical dilemmas, on the moral claim of personhood and quality of life versus the interests of the state, that were raised in the 1920s.
© 2008 Sandy Szwarc. All rights reserved.
Read the FULL STORY here.
You can see the NICE document here.
IF our politicians get their way, we will be facing more of the same if not worse………….with NO option to opt-out of paying into the plan, like we have now with private/business sponsored health insurance plans. I mean all I hear these days is that smokers and the obese cost too much and raise everyone’s health insurance premiums; yet these same people want a National Health Care plan thinking they won’t be paying for anyone else’s illness?!
For those of you who still think there is nothing wrong with this practice, you might want to re-read your history………..this is dangerously close to eugenics and not too far from Hitler’s Eugenics program in the 1930’s and his attempts to create the perfect Aryan race.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Nazi eugenics were Nazi Germany‘s race based social policies that placed the improvement of the race through eugenics at the center of their concerns and targeted those humans they identified as “life unworthy of life” (German Lebensunwertes Leben), including but not limited to the criminal, degenerate, dissident, feeble-minded, homosexual, idle, insane, religious and weak, for elimination from the chain of heredity. More than 400,000 people were sterilized against their will, while 70,000 were killed in the Action T4.
Think about it.
While it might make sense to give a new liver to a young person in their 30’s who doesn’t drink over the 60 year-old who does drink and is next on the recipient list, by allowing that you are opening a Pandora’s Box that you can’t close. Who are WE to decide who is more worthy or whose life will better off?
IF you allow government, OR health insurance programs, to decide what illnesses to treat, or who is more deserving of life than another; you can bet the farm that one day it will you they decide is not worthy for whatever reason. Allowing for personal preferences is a dangerous path to take. I mean what if I decide that vegetarians are such pains in the asses that I insist meat lovers get preferential treatment, regardless of waiting lists?
You cannot promote people living longer lives (which is what all this health obsession is about) and then tell them when they start getting sick because their bodies are wearing out that you will then decide IF they are worth helping?
Do you really want a stranger deciding what is a good quality of life for you? As an example, if I am ever in such a state that I cannot eat, breathe on my own and there is NO idea how long it will last, OR if I’m ever in a position that I cannot do anything for myself……….I want the plugs pulled. MY idea of a quality of life is NOT laying in a bed in a coma for years OR being a burden to anyone. Maybe you prefer to be kept alive by machines. I know I don’t want you deciding my fate. Do you want me deciding you? Because THIS is what is being proposed here.
Are you sure you want to live in THAT kind of world?
We need to be careful what we ask for…..we just might get it, and then some.
~ by swfreedomlover on August 18, 2008.
Posted in health
Tags: eugenics, health insurance, hitler, medicare, national health insurance, national health plan, national health service, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, nazi germany, NHS, NICE, quality of life, single-payer national health insurance, social value judgements, UK