Page 17 of 17 FirstFirst ... 7151617
Results 161 to 166 of 166

Thread: U.S. offers its human rights record for U.N. review

  1. #161
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: U.S. offers its human rights record for U.N. review

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Something willm always come between doctors and patients, even if it is just money. The patient who can't afford care, won't get it under any system. It's a false argument to suggest that the only way someone is between the patient and the doctor is with government involvement. For the patient who can't afford care, that intervention seems pretty damn good.
    There are people who can't afford health care because the middleman, either the government or insurance companies, are forcibly involving themselves in the process. Intervention between two consenting parties committing a legal act is never pretty damn good. We can see how that works.

  2. #162
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: U.S. offers its human rights record for U.N. review

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    There are people who can't afford health care because the middleman, either the government or insurance companies, are forcibly involving themselves in the process. Intervention between two consenting parties committing a legal act is never pretty damn good. We can see how that works.
    That's not really true. Remove them, and the cost is still prohibative. Medicien will not go back to a time of trading fruits and vegatables for service, and even then, most could not afford adequate care and simply went without.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  3. #163
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: U.S. offers its human rights record for U.N. review

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    That's not really true. Remove them, and the cost is still prohibative. Medicien will not go back to a time of trading fruits and vegatables for service, and even then, most could not afford adequate care and simply went without.
    There is absolutely no evidence that this is the case. With outsiders deciding how much the doctor will receive, as well as the restrictions that be followed, then it naturally follows that there will be more money going to the middleman rather than the doctor. Someone has to pay for all that administration that's required to oversee who's getting what, and that's why prices are so high.

    At one time, before these shenanigans began, most people could afford a doctor and if there was a special needs case, such as in the polio epidemic, private citizens jumped in to help. And when there was a special rare operation that was expensive, family, friends and neighbors all chipped in to help.

    Those days are gone now, thanks to a recent ideology that some stranger, "the rich" according to this administration, should pay for everyone else. This is immoral of course but that won't stop the process. It will eventually collapse from its own weight, as we can see elsewhere, but facts will never stop the ideologues.

  4. #164
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: U.S. offers its human rights record for U.N. review

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    There is absolutely no evidence that this is the case. With outsiders deciding how much the doctor will receive, as well as the restrictions that be followed, then it naturally follows that there will be more money going to the middleman rather than the doctor. Someone has to pay for all that administration that's required to oversee who's getting what, and that's why prices are so high.

    At one time, before these shenanigans began, most people could afford a doctor and if there was a special needs case, such as in the polio epidemic, private citizens jumped in to help. And when there was a special rare operation that was expensive, family, friends and neighbors all chipped in to help.

    Those days are gone now, thanks to a recent ideology that some stranger, "the rich" according to this administration, should pay for everyone else. This is immoral of course but that won't stop the process. It will eventually collapse from its own weight, as we can see elsewhere, but facts will never stop the ideologues.
    Outsiders generally work to bring costs down. Third party payers want to pay less and not more.

    Before third party payers, we lived in a different world. Medicine was limited, and many relied on home remedies. What medicine many got form doctors was from a town physician who often traded services for things liek fruits and vegatables. Only the very wealthy had access to more. As medicine became more advanced, people were being left out of it and were easy prey to dishonest quacks who lacked the actual training, causing harm. So, we began to regulate more and bring in insurance.

    This allowed more people access. And allowed for people to specialize and do more for people than they could in the past. Sure, people aslo came to expect more, and that has it's problems, but overall this has been good. No one really wants a return no matter how much they have forgotten or don't know the actual history here, but the fact is, we won't go back. So with that fact, we need to see how to go forward.

    And the rich are not so abused as they want to stop being rich. I know their lot is a hard, hard thing. Sad really. But they still prefer being them than the poor.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  5. #165
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: U.S. offers its human rights record for U.N. review

    [QUOTE]
    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Outsiders generally work to bring costs down. Third party payers want to pay less and not more.
    How is third party involvement going to bring costs down? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
    Before third party payers, we lived in a different world. Medicine was limited, and many relied on home remedies.
    Are you saying that had there been third party inolvement 80 years ago or so, the technology would have been better? That's just a part of how we have advanced in almost all areas of life, and has nothing whatsoever with third party involvement.
    What medicine many got form doctors was from a town physician who often traded services for things liek fruits and vegatables.
    That did occasionally happen but so what? The bottom line is that people got treated.
    Only the very wealthy had access to more.
    That is simply not true. It's not even remotely true and you should be ashamed for making such a claim.

    As medicine became more advanced, people were being left out of it and were easy prey to dishonest quacks who lacked the actual training, causing harm. So, we began to regulate more and bring in insurance.
    That is simplistic nonsense as well. I'd really like to see your sources for this disinformation.
    This allowed more people access. And allowed for people to specialize and do more for people than they could in the past. Sure, people aslo came to expect more, and that has it's problems, but overall this has been good. No one really wants a return no matter how much they have forgotten or don't know the actual history here, but the fact is, we won't go back. So with that fact, we need to see how to go forward.
    The fact is that with government involvement no one has any idea where you are going. No one does because it's all based on whimsy.

    And the rich are not so abused as they want to stop being rich. I know their lot is a hard, hard thing. Sad really. But they still prefer being them than the poor.
    The "rich" are leaving. I'm in Central America at the moment and they''re arriving daily from the highly taxed countries. Why should they give away their money to the US government when there are other very attractive places to live? The next "rich" is the middle class.

  6. #166
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: U.S. offers its human rights record for U.N. review

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    How is third party involvement going to bring costs down? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
    By saying what they will and won't pay for, negotiating savings, and denying payment for certian types of procedures (death panels )

    Are you saying that had there been third party inolvement 80 years ago or so, the technology would have been better? That's just a part of how we have advanced in almost all areas of life, and has nothing whatsoever with third party involvement.
    Remember, better doesn't mean only. Sure, there are other factors and other ways, but yes, it would have been better (though that was a main point of mine). The point was more where we were, and that technology increased and people could not afford it, and didn't actually have access to it. Insurance provided access.

    That did occasionally happen but so what? The bottom line is that people got treated.
    Acutally no. Many did not get treated, and fewer got good treatment. Most could not afford the modern techonologies.


    That is simply not true. It's not even remotely true and you should be ashamed for making such a claim.
    No, that is true.

    When doctors began learning more about diseases and effective treatments, they started charging more - more than most people could afford. They also needed to treat people in hospitals to take advantage of new medical technology, which further added to the costs. Couple that with the start of the Great Depression, and the situation was even worse.

    U. S. Healthcare History

    For a number of reasons, health care costs also began to rise during the 1920’s, mostly because the middle class began to use hospital services and hospital costs started to increase. Medical, and especially hospital, care was now a bigger item in family budgets than wage losses.

    A Brief History: Universal Health Care Efforts in the US | Physicians for a National Health Program

    Price has always rationed health care in this country.

    That is simplistic nonsense as well. I'd really like to see your sources for this disinformation.
    See above, or look up the history of health care insurance. cost was outdistancing people's ability to pay, so insurance was needed. There were efforts at being about nation health insurance, but the same socialism scares we see today were at work back then, and that is how we came to have insurance attach to the empolyer. I could link several history sites, but I think you can do that as seasily as I can.


    The fact is that with government involvement no one has any idea where you are going. No one does because it's all based on whimsy.
    I'm really not sure what you're saying here. Can you clarify?


    The "rich" are leaving. I'm in Central America at the moment and they''re arriving daily from the highly taxed countries. Why should they give away their money to the US government when there are other very attractive places to live? The next "rich" is the middle class.
    Well, they're free to go. Greed has always played a role in world history. I don't suspect that will change. And the wealthy lived overseas even in the past. So, I'm not sure I care about this too much. Workers and the average citizen loses either way.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

Page 17 of 17 FirstFirst ... 7151617

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •