• 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!

Is health care in the US a right?

Is health care a right?


  • Total voters
    53
  • Poll closed .
OK if that is the best rebuttal you can come up with to my post. We are done here. :lol:

My BEST rebuttal??

Hmm....Let me think.......

I probably could write a better one but.....for the sake of time....I'll stand firmly by that one.;)

You're excused.:)
 
Most people do want health care reform
Absolutely correct


they don't want Obama care in it's present form.
Problem is......the GOP will be against ANY Democrat HC proposal........"in it's present form."

Sen. DeMint gave away the show......the GOP doesn't really want ANY HC Reform....They just want to "Break" Obama......even if that means breaking this country. (in my opinion)
(come on....you claim you aren't a Repub.........Do you really deny the GOP wants to keep the status quo & will be against ANY reform Obama suggests?.......even if it is good one?
 
Last edited:
Problem is......the GOP will be against ANY Democrat HC proposal........"in it's present form."

Sen. DeMint gave away the show......the GOP doesn't really want ANY HC Reform....They just want to "Break" Obama......even if that means breaking this country. (in my opinion)


(come on....you claim you aren't a Repub.........Do you really deny the GOP wants to keep the status quo & will be against ANY reform Obama suggests?.......even if it is good one?

If it is just your opinion it is worthless in the face of facts as mentioned below.

The GOP does not have the votes to stop the bill from passing. That says to me allot of Democrats are blocking it as well. What does this say to you?
 
Last edited:
Got some evidence to back up that accusation?
We back to the "Prove It" game?

The GOP does not have the votes to stop the bill from passing. That says to me allot of Democrats are blocking it as well. What does this say to you?
It says to me that there are a few Repubs posing as Democrats to get elected (Blue Dog Dems) & that the Democratic party needs to weed out these "Closet" Republicans in the next few elections.
 
We back to the "Prove It" game?

You changed your post. :roll:

It says to me that there are a few Repubs posing as Democrats to get elected (Blue Dog Dems) & that the Democratic party needs to weed out these "Closet" Republicans.

:shock:

I have nothing left to say to you.

Have a good one.
 
The GOP does not have the votes to stop the bill from passing. That says to me allot of Democrats are blocking it as well. What does this say to you?

thats right the GOP wants what is best for this country not to just Break Obama he has done that one his own and the blue dogs should keep this bill form passing because they can tell this is a bad deal and they are demicrates. any one who votes for the HC bill should not have a job in after the next election
 
thats right the GOP wants what is best for this country not to just Break Obama he has done that one his own and the blue dogs should keep this bill form passing because they can tell this is a bad deal and they are demicrates. any one who votes for the HC bill should not have a job in after the next election

There you have the real GOP view.......Not ......"let's fix HC reform & make it better"

But instead......Let's KILL HC Reform...Period!
 
There you have the real GOP view.......Not ......"let's fix HC reform & make it better"

But instead......Let's KILL HC Reform...Period!

Well some people are against it. So what? :roll:
 
we have the best health care in the world there is no need to reform what is working people come here for health care because we are the best why change that
 
How does your view accommodate your side's admition that:

What is this "my side" stuff?

One person said they don't want it, so ****ing what? You don't know anything else about the guy.

Man your opinion is really stupid and not based on any kind of common sense.
 
Last edited:
I am not calling any body any thing but i think people think that it needs reformed but what really needs changed is the insurance program
 
I am not calling any body any thing but i think people think that it needs reformed but what really needs changed is the insurance program

Don't try and tell him that. He seems to think UHC or HC Reform must be a government program. If it does not fit into his tiny little world view it must be GOP!

Go figure.
 
I am not calling any body any thing but i think people think that it needs reformed but what really needs changed is the insurance program

I can agree with that. Basing a HC system on for profit insurance companies is an RX for disaster.
 
Don't try and tell him that. He seems to think UHC or HC Reform must be a government program. If it does not fit into his tiny little world view it must be GOP!

Go figure.

I don't think that at all....But I do think a public OPTION is the only way competition will bring prices down. (otherwise, it's still letting the foxes guard the chicken coop....or hen house)
 
Last edited:
Moderator's Warning:
It is baiting and against the rules to use the quote function to present something as another posters statement when its not. This includes "summarizing" a poster's post in an insulting and flaming way. If it happens again action will be taken
 
Universal health care is good for the people, it should be available to every citizen/resident, like education and other services provided by the state.

Life expectancy stats show US health care has a lot of work to do, so much, is just embarrassing:

Rank country (years) Date of Information 2009 est.

1 Macau 84.36
2 Andorra 82.51
3 Japan 82.12
4 Singapore 81.98
5 San Marino 81.97
6 Hong Kong 81.86
7 Australia 81.63
8 Canada 81.23
9 France 80.98
10 Sweden 80.86
11 Switzerland 80.85
12 Guernsey 80.77
13 Israel 80.73
14 Iceland 80.67
15 Anguilla 80.65
16 Cayman Islands 80.44
17 Bermuda 80.43
18 New Zealand 80.36
19 Italy 80.20
20 Gibraltar 80.19
21 Monaco 80.09
22 Liechtenstein 80.06
23 Spain 80.05
24 Norway 79.95
25 Jersey 79.75
26 Greece 79.66
27 Austria 79.50
28 Faroe Islands 79.44
29 Malta 79.44
30 Netherlands 79.40
31 Luxembourg 79.33
32 Germany 79.26
33 Belgium 79.22
34 Saint Pierre and Miquelon 79.07
35 Virgin Islands 79.05
36 United Kingdom 79.01
37 Finland 78.97
38 Jordan 78.87
39 Isle of Man 78.82
40 Korea, South 78.72
41 European Union 78.67
42 Puerto Rico 78.53
43 Bosnia and Herzegovina 78.50
44 Saint Helena 78.44
45 Cyprus 78.33
46 Denmark 78.30
47 Ireland 78.24
48 Portugal 78.21
49 Wallis and Futuna 78.20
50 United States 78.11


https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2102rank.html

BBC NEWS | Health | Healthcare around the world
 

Attachments

  • healthcare_stats_466_2.jpg
    healthcare_stats_466_2.jpg
    13.9 KB · Views: 70
Universal health care is good for the people, it should be available to every citizen/resident, like education and other services provided by the state.

Life expectancy stats show US health care has a lot of work to do, so much, is just embarrassing:

Rank country (years) Date of Information 2009 est.

1 Macau 84.36
2 Andorra 82.51
3 Japan 82.12
4 Singapore 81.98
5 San Marino 81.97
6 Hong Kong 81.86
7 Australia 81.63
8 Canada 81.23
9 France 80.98
10 Sweden 80.86
11 Switzerland 80.85
12 Guernsey 80.77
13 Israel 80.73
14 Iceland 80.67
15 Anguilla 80.65
16 Cayman Islands 80.44
17 Bermuda 80.43
18 New Zealand 80.36
19 Italy 80.20
20 Gibraltar 80.19
21 Monaco 80.09
22 Liechtenstein 80.06
23 Spain 80.05
24 Norway 79.95
25 Jersey 79.75
26 Greece 79.66
27 Austria 79.50
28 Faroe Islands 79.44
29 Malta 79.44
30 Netherlands 79.40
31 Luxembourg 79.33
32 Germany 79.26
33 Belgium 79.22
34 Saint Pierre and Miquelon 79.07
35 Virgin Islands 79.05
36 United Kingdom 79.01
37 Finland 78.97
38 Jordan 78.87
39 Isle of Man 78.82
40 Korea, South 78.72
41 European Union 78.67
42 Puerto Rico 78.53
43 Bosnia and Herzegovina 78.50
44 Saint Helena 78.44
45 Cyprus 78.33
46 Denmark 78.30
47 Ireland 78.24
48 Portugal 78.21
49 Wallis and Futuna 78.20
50 United States 78.11


https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2102rank.html

BBC NEWS | Health | Healthcare around the world

Sigh, I'm so tired of these statistics that don't ever put anything into perspective.
Does anyone research this stuff past the bare numbers, like ever?
 
Sigh, I'm so tired of these statistics that don't ever put anything into perspective.
Does anyone research this stuff past the bare numbers, like ever?

No they don't. They never mention our heavy smoking and overweight society contributes because we have the money to do so.

The stats are ridicules if taken at face value.
 
Facts are facts, it doesn't matter how "tired" or "sick" you get. ;)

France

It's a common lament among health-policy wonks that the world's best health-care system resides in a country Americans are particularly loath to learn from. Yet France's system is hard to beat. Where Canada's system has a high floor and a low ceiling, France's has a high floor and no ceiling. The government provides basic insurance for all citizens, albeit with relatively robust co-pays, and then encourages the population to also purchase supplementary insurance -- which 86 percent do, most of them through employers, with the poor being subsidized by the state. This allows for as high a level of care as an individual is willing to pay for, and may help explain why waiting lines are nearly unknown in France.

France's system is further prized for its high level of choice and responsiveness -- attributes that led the World Health Organization to rank it the finest in the world (America's system came in at No. 37, between Costa Rica and Slovenia). The French can see any doctor or specialist they want, at any time they want, as many times as they want, no referrals or permissions needed. The French hospital system is similarly open. About 65 percent of the nation's hospital beds are public, but individuals can seek care at any hospital they want, public or private, and receive the same reimbursement rate no matter its status. Given all this, the French utilize more care than Americans do, averaging six physician visits a year to our 2.8, and they spend more time in the hospital as well. Yet they still manage to spend half per capita than we do, largely due to lower prices and a focus on preventive care.

That focus is abetted by the French system's innovative response to one of the trickier problems bedeviling health-policy experts: an economic concept called "moral hazard." Moral hazard describes people's tendency to overuse goods or services that offer more marginal benefit without a proportionate marginal cost. Translated into English, you eat more at a buffet because the refills are free, and you use more health care because insurers generally make you pay up front in premiums, rather than at the point of care. The obvious solution is to shift more of the cost away from premiums and into co-pays or deductibles, thus increasing the sensitivity of consumers to the real cost of each unit of care they purchase.

This has been the preferred solution of the right, which has argued for a move toward high-deductible care, in which individuals bear more financial risk and vulnerability. As the thinking goes, this increased exposure to the economic consequences of purchasing care will create savvier health-care consumers, and individuals will use less unnecessary care and demand better prices for what they do use.

Problem is, studies show that individuals are pretty bad at distinguishing necessary care from unnecessary care, and so they tend to cut down on mundane-but-important things like hypertension medicine, which leads to far costlier complications. Moreover, many health problems don't lend themselves to bargain shopping. It's a little tricky to try to negotiate prices from an ambulance gurney.

A wiser approach is to seek to separate cost-effective care from unproven treatments, and align the financial incentives to encourage the former and discourage the latter. The French have addressed this by creating what amounts to a tiered system for treatment reimbursement. As Jonathan Cohn explains in his new book, Sick:

In order to prevent cost sharing from penalizing people with serious medical problems -- the way Health Savings Accounts threaten to do -- the [French] government limits every individual's out-of-pocket expenses. In addition, the government has identified thirty chronic conditions, such as diabetes and hypertension, for which there is usually no cost sharing, in order to make sure people don't skimp on preventive care that might head off future complications.

The French do the same for pharmaceuticals, which are grouped into one of three classes and reimbursed at 35 percent, 65 percent, or 100 percent of cost, depending on whether data show their use to be cost effective. It's a wise straddle of a tricky problem, and one that other nations would do well to emulate.


The Health of Nations | The American Prospect
 
Back
Top Bottom