• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NHS branded 'evil' and 'Orwellian' by high-level US politicians

Scarecrow Akhbar said:
June, 1945, as soon as we won your war for you.
Click to expand...

We started running ads on US Domestic issues and discussing it and attacking it?

Interesting.
Now prove that assertion from 1945 if you please.
 
I'll take that back. A more appropriate date is the day Chucky DeGaulle insisted on riding into Paris leading the French Army that did nothing to liberate Paris. You can study the history books to find the exact date for that event.
 
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYrlDlrLDSQ"]YouTube - Ronald Reagan speaks out on Socialized Medicine - Audio[/ame]
 
Last edited:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YR0H-C65yM"]YouTube - Ronald Reagan speaks out about obama's Socialized Medicine[/ame]
 
PeteEU said:
Although personally if I was Swiss then I would be asking lots of questions on why your system is so expensive and try to cut down that cost :) but that is me :)
Click to expand...

Oh, we do. Every year, when the government and the insurance companies get together to reevaluate the premiums and they invariably go up. :(
 
Arcana XV said:
Oh, we do. Every year, when the government and the insurance companies get together to reevaluate the premiums and they invariably go up. :(
Click to expand...

Maybe it is time to re-evaluate that method since I see a huge conflict of interest there :)
 
PeteEU said:
Maybe it is time to re-evaluate that method since I see a huge conflict of interest there :)
Click to expand...

No, it actually works quite well. The problem with the rising costs is some regions' healthcare habits. There is a reason why Swiss Germans manage to keep their costs down. Their cultural approach to healthcare is much more responsible than in the rest of the country. They don't run to the doctor for every sniffle like the morons around here where I live do. And they certainly don't have two or more major hospitals within a 30km radius. :2razz:
 
Arcana XV said:
No, it actually works quite well. The problem with the rising costs is some regions' healthcare habits. There is a reason why Swiss Germans manage to keep their costs down. Their cultural approach to healthcare is much more responsible than in the rest of the country. They don't run to the doctor for every sniffle like the morons around here where I live do. And they certainly don't have two or more major hospitals within a 30km radius. :2razz:
Click to expand...

Habits is one thing, however I doubt that Swiss habits are that much different than the other countries including that of going into the doctor for the sniffles and what not. I know we had and have that problem in Denmark. Does it drive costs up? Sure, but by that much? I have my doubts. It is "odd" that the 2 most expensive healthcare systems on the planet are mostly private run and do not provide massive better healthcare results than those with both a private/public UHC system.

My point is that I have a natural scepticism of any system where private companies are involved in critical aspects of "public" life and especially when those private companies have to negotiate with Government for something. Private companies want profit naturally, and the Government should be getting the best deal as possible, however if those on the Government side of the negotiating table have an interest in "boosting" profits in said private companies then we got a problem and the normal citizen will get the short stick.

Now I dont know about campaign funding in Swiss politics, but I do know that in most European countries it is not allowed for companies or head of companies to contribute to political campaigns or parties. This is to prevent any conflict of interest in cases where the possible elected official has to negotiate with the private sector. Are companies allowed to back political parties or persons there? Are politicians allowed to own stock in companies they are negotiating with and so on?
 
PeteEU said:
Habits is one thing, however I doubt that Swiss habits are that much different than the other countries including that of going into the doctor for the sniffles and what not. I know we had and have that problem in Denmark. Does it drive costs up? Sure, but by that much? I have my doubts. It is "odd" that the 2 most expensive healthcare systems on the planet are mostly private run and do not provide massive better healthcare results than those with both a private/public UHC system.
Click to expand...

It does drive costs up. But what drives them up even more is having costly hospitals every couple of miles.

My point is that I have a natural scepticism of any system where private companies are involved in critical aspects of "public" life and especially when those private companies have to negotiate with Government for something. Private companies want profit naturally, and the Government should be getting the best deal as possible, however if those on the Government side of the negotiating table have an interest in "boosting" profits in said private companies then we got a problem and the normal citizen will get the short stick.
Click to expand...

Well, there's no way the Swiss Germans will agree to a government run health care where they end up footing the bill for the irresponsible parts of the country and where their freedom to choose their doctors and hospitals might be compromised. Right now, every canton sets its own premiums and they benefit from that. Seeing as they are the largest voting block in the country, what they say goes.

Now I dont know about campaign funding in Swiss politics, but I do know that in most European countries it is not allowed for companies or head of companies to contribute to political campaigns or parties. This is to prevent any conflict of interest in cases where the possible elected official has to negotiate with the private sector. Are companies allowed to back political parties or persons there? Are politicians allowed to own stock in companies they are negotiating with and so on?
Click to expand...

If IIRC, I think we have whole political parties here that are funded by banks and other companies. I'm not sure about stock ownership, but I'm pretty sure that the Minister for Health (the one who negotiates with the insurance companies) can't be privately involved with any of them. That would create a major scandal the likes of which the country rarely sees.
 
Arcana XV said:
It does drive costs up. But what drives them up even more is having costly hospitals every couple of miles.
Click to expand...

I agree totally however my point is that costs can be driven up by many things including private companies "padding" the books so to say. And that is the question, is the Swiss government strong enough to stand up against the private corporations demands.. I know they are not in the US.

Well, there's no way the Swiss Germans will agree to a government run health care where they end up footing the bill for the irresponsible parts of the country and where their freedom to choose their doctors and hospitals might be compromised. Right now, every canton sets its own premiums and they benefit from that. Seeing as they are the largest voting block in the country, what they say goes.
Click to expand...

Interesting.

If IIRC, I think we have whole political parties here that are funded by banks and other companies.
Click to expand...

Ahh that is my fear. That means that the companies are sitting on both sides of the table when negotiating price.. that is a HUGE conflict of interest if you ask me. I know in Denmark we have huge issues if a doctor is elected to become health minister for example.. he or she is usual looked over with magnifying glass all the time even though the person might be the best qualified for the job.

I'm not sure about stock ownership, but I'm pretty sure that the Minister for Health (the one who negotiates with the insurance companies) can't be privately involved with any of them. That would create a major scandal the likes of which the country rarely sees.
Click to expand...

I doubt that also, that is a way too obvious conflict of interest, but that whole parties are funded by industries.. bad bad bad..I would wager that your cost issues is in a large part due to this if you are correct in your comments.
 
Laila said:
I don't recall Obama singling out UK and you yourself just said he mentioned Europe.

I didn't realize UK was the only country in Europe.
Click to expand...

Is this not becoming a bit silly ?

We must learn from other nations, their mistakes and their successes.

I have lost an awful lost of respect for the republicians...particularly the conservatives and the liberatians...notice the absence of capitalization.. :(
Our Republicans must clean up their act, much the same as the Islamics..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom