Why we need universal health care + my sob story

[Mustachio]

I don't live in the USA anymore... I live in New Zealand. We have ACC which is universal health care.

OH! Sorry! I missed that, which completely changes your post
Man it says a lot that I read your post and got mad simply at the suggestion of people getting medical care for free. It's so ingrained into me that hospitals and ERs and ambulances cost thousands of dollars, which is ironic because giving people help when they need it is so instinctive. For me it's instinctive. Maybe that's the difference between the two sides here. Some people need to learn about the good Samaritan.

 

[Mycroft]

OH! Sorry! I missed that, which completely changes your post
Man it says a lot that I read your post and got mad simply at the suggestion of people getting medical care for free. It's so ingrained into me that hospitals and ERs and ambulances cost thousands of dollars, which is ironic because giving people help when they need it is so instinctive. For me it's instinctive. Maybe that's the difference between the two sides here. Some people need to learn about the good Samaritan.

The thing about the Good Samaritan, though, is that nobody TOLD him he had to be good...he did it of his own free will.

 

[Mycroft]

Yeah... we pay in our taxes. Big deal though. We pay 33% and that might lower to 30%. Everybody is covered and you know one of the best parts? Nobody sues each other since they get free health care.

Big differences between NZ and US...not least of which is size of population.

It would cost us much more than 33%.

 

[Neomalthusian]

It's entirely possible that the sum of a country's health care needs multiplied by the price of those services exceeds what they do pay in or even what they could pay in. The only group that receives A LOT of health care and doesn't pay for it BUT COULD... is the elderly who are covered by Medicare. That's it. Everyone else pretty much pays what they can, and doing so gets harder and harder every single year.

So then what is the real root of the problem here? Two-fold. 1) The cost of the health care services themselves, and 2) the fact that we guarantee it. And when you look deeper than that, it's just #2, the fact that we guarantee it. If we didn't guarantee services, they could not possibly grow to unaffordable levels in the first place. Someone has to get an unfavorable answer if we are to ever control costs.

 

[billmaher]

Too bad he died before it became a reality.





I am approximately 30, come from a middle class family and a history of being active, healthy and successful. I went to a very expensive private university for a year and dropped out because I didn't think I would be able to pay back the student loans I needed to continue my education there. Later I went to a technical college and paid my way through. When I finished school, I was primed to be very successful and because of my dedication and talent I had some amazing opportunities. Then I started heaving health problems. I lost two internships because of my health problems. But it got way, way worse.

In the years that I thought I would be thriving, I took food service jobs and tried to network and do my own thing on the side so that I would get back to doing what I want to do. I actually did a pretty damn good job and have a long list of past projects that I've been involved in. Once again, I felt like I was headed straight to the top!

Then I found out that I have an auto immune disease. It's not life threatening but it interferes with pretty much everything in my life. I had to start turning things down and being selective about what I took on after some people got fed up with my inability to complete work I said I would dedicate myself to. But I didn't feel bad for myself, and I don't feel bad for myself, because I still have an awesome resume and I'm still young and I can make it. Not only can I make it, I will make it, and I don't care what's in my way.

But what just happened really, really, sucks. I'm still working a regular job to support myself, as everybody else is I suppose. It's not a high paying job but I love it. Three weeks ago I worked a really long week filling in for other people and it was just a tough week. I screwed up and didn't respect the condition of my body and wound up with some serious nerve damage in my tibial nerve (the inside of my leg). For the last three weeks, I've had no feeling in my left foot and I can't walk. So I can't work. I had to take a mandatory medical leave and after six weeks I'll lose my job. It's been three weeks so far and the neurologist I saw told me that he doesn't think I'll be able to walk within that time frame, so I'll probably lose my job. And I have really good health insurance, but so far there's about 5 thousand dollars of medical bills I'll have to pay, including the MRIs I'm getting next week.

How is that fair? How is it fair that I will be way over my head in debt because I worked too hard? I could be successful, make lots of money, pay lots of taxes, give a lot of money to charity and all that other good stuff. But I can't do that if I don't have any money, or any transportation, or any opportunity. That's bad for me and it's bad for society. There are people like myself all over who could be successful and give back but they can't because one day they woke up and their foot didn't work any more. You don't want people to be on welfare, or need food stamps to feed their family? You don't want people to default on their mortgages? Well then stop this absurd system in which your life is practically ruined because you need medical care.

This system is stupid. And frankly, this isn't really about my sob story. I'll get better, and 5 thousand dollars is NOTHING compared to what other people owe. My health care is really, really good, it's other people in my position who don't have good health care that I'm concerned about. The least we can do for people is give them what I've got. Because the way it is now, the system is bad for everybody who doesn't have millions of dollars. Anyway, that's just a snippet of my story, presented for your consideration.[/QUOTE]

 

[Mustachio]

So then what is the real root of the problem here? Two-fold. 1) The cost of the health care services themselves, and 2) the fact that we guarantee it. And when you look deeper than that, it's just #2, the fact that we guarantee it. If we didn't guarantee services, they could not possibly grow to unaffordable levels in the first place. Someone has to get an unfavorable answer if we are to ever control costs.

You're making a lot of assumptions here. You're saying the only way to control cost is to reduce coverage. That's obviously not true. There's many reasons it costs way, way more to get health care in the US, not just because it's guaranteed. The system is loaded with middlemen, loop holes, inconsistency, corruption, and greed. Just about every person I know has either been, at a time, uninsured because they couldn't afford coverage or in need of care they didn't receive because it was too expensive even WITH their health care coverage. I worked with a girl who was coughing up blood for two weeks because she was waiting until her benefits kicked in. That's an extreme example, but it happens every day, and when it happens, it hurts the individual, the business they work for, and could wind up having irreversible health problems and end up on disability and medicare.

I know I sound like a broken record, but that's the point I'm trying to make. Providing universal care, and thus preventative care, would in theory boost performance, productivity, sustainability and the economy. That's the philosophy I'm endorsing and it's good common sense IMHO.

 

[Neomalthusian]

You're making a lot of assumptions here. You're saying the only way to control cost is to reduce coverage. That's obviously not true. There's many reasons it costs way, way more to get health care in the US, not just because it's guaranteed.

Ultimately it requires control of one feature or another (what a procedure is worth, what health care professionals can earn, what patients can receive), which is extreeeeemely difficult. Even controlling for the middlemen, loopholes, inconsistencies, corruption and greed you speak of are monumental tasks, because what's medically necessary and what's not? It's a subjective professional judgment call in each case. But at the very core of this problem is that we all feel entitled to all the health care we'll ever need, and we expect that to cost rather little to us personally.

Just about every person I know has either been, at a time, uninsured because they couldn't afford coverage or in need of care they didn't receive because it was too expensive even WITH their health care coverage. I worked with a girl who was coughing up blood for two weeks because she was waiting until her benefits kicked in.

An example of the lengths to which people will go to make sure the cost is absorbed by someone else.

I know I sound like a broken record, but that's the point I'm trying to make. Providing universal care, and thus preventative care, would in theory boost performance, productivity, sustainability and the economy. That's the philosophy I'm endorsing and it's good common sense IMHO.

In theory, you're right. In reality, there's also the cost thing.

 

[Bodi]

Big differences between NZ and US...not least of which is size of population.

It would cost us much more than 33%.

I am not saying it is an easy fix... I am simply saying it is a worthy goal to have.

Obama Care has it's flaws and could even cause more problems than it solves currently... but it is still the right step.

 

[solletica]

I'll warn you that this post might annoy you if you have a low tolerance for sob stories.

But here is a snippet of my story and a very logical argument that we need universal health care. I think my story and stories like mine can change the way we think about health care, so here goes:

I am approximately 30, come from a middle class family and a history of being active, healthy and successful. I went to a very expensive private university for a year and dropped out because I didn't think I would be able to pay back the student loans I needed to continue my education there. Later I went to a technical college and paid my way through. When I finished school, I was primed to be very successful and because of my dedication and talent I had some amazing opportunities. Then I started heaving health problems. I lost two internships because of my health problems. But it got way, way worse.

In the years that I thought I would be thriving, I took food service jobs and tried to network and do my own thing on the side so that I would get back to doing what I want to do. I actually did a pretty damn good job and have a long list of past projects that I've been involved in. Once again, I felt like I was headed straight to the top!

Then I found out that I have an auto immune disease. It's not life threatening but it interferes with pretty much everything in my life. I had to start turning things down and being selective about what I took on after some people got fed up with my inability to complete work I said I would dedicate myself to. But I didn't feel bad for myself, and I don't feel bad for myself, because I still have an awesome resume and I'm still young and I can make it. Not only can I make it, I will make it, and I don't care what's in my way.

But what just happened really, really, sucks. I'm still working a regular job to support myself, as everybody else is I suppose. It's not a high paying job but I love it. Three weeks ago I worked a really long week filling in for other people and it was just a tough week. I screwed up and didn't respect the condition of my body and wound up with some serious nerve damage in my tibial nerve (the inside of my leg). For the last three weeks, I've had no feeling in my left foot and I can't walk. So I can't work. I had to take a mandatory medical leave and after six weeks I'll lose my job. It's been three weeks so far and the neurologist I saw told me that he doesn't think I'll be able to walk within that time frame, so I'll probably lose my job. And I have really good health insurance, but so far there's about 5 thousand dollars of medical bills I'll have to pay, including the MRIs I'm getting next week.

How is that fair? How is it fair that I will be way over my head in debt because I worked too hard? I could be successful, make lots of money, pay lots of taxes, give a lot of money to charity and all that other good stuff. But I can't do that if I don't have any money, or any transportation, or any opportunity. That's bad for me and it's bad for society. There are people like myself all over who could be successful and give back but they can't because one day they woke up and their foot didn't work any more. You don't want people to be on welfare, or need food stamps to feed their family? You don't want people to default on their mortgages? Well then stop this absurd system in which your life is practically ruined because you need medical care.

This system is stupid. And frankly, this isn't really about my sob story. I'll get better, and 5 thousand dollars is NOTHING compared to what other people owe. My health care is really, really good, it's other people in my position who don't have good health care that I'm concerned about. The least we can do for people is give them what I've got. Because the way it is now, the system is bad for everybody who doesn't have millions of dollars. Anyway, that's just a snippet of my story, presented for your consideration.

Creating taxpayer/deficit funded health care is not the answer. The answer is to eliminate the regulations, subsidies, and restrictions that create artificial shortages and insurance oligopolies.

Once all barriers to complete competition is removed, prices will drop. However, that will never happen, since the GOP staunchly opposes free market solutions and favors heavy taxpayer-funded subsidies and import bans to maintain the status quo.

 

[ReformCollege]

This system is stupid. And frankly, this isn't really about my sob story. I'll get better, and 5 thousand dollars is NOTHING compared to what other people owe. My health care is really, really good, it's other people in my position who don't have good health care that I'm concerned about. The least we can do for people is give them what I've got. Because the way it is now, the system is bad for everybody who doesn't have millions of dollars. Anyway, that's just a snippet of my story, presented for your consideration.

You're story is certainly sad, but it doesn't prove or disprove that we need universal health care. Reading from your story, it seems like you got health care, they just couldn't really help you on that front. So it's not as if we had universal health care, you would somehow be in a better place than you are now. Saying the system only works for those who have millions of dollars is a terrible assumption, obviously you don't have millions of dollars because if you did you wouldn't have dropped out of your first college, and you even said yourself that you have great health care. You are trying to hard to twist your personal narrative into a vouch for your political beliefs.

Autoimmune diseases are classified as a disability by the SSA, so you should have looked into talking with a disability lawyer. You may have qualified for disability insurance, or Social Security benefits.

The safety net is already in place for individuals like yourself, you just have to look into your options. If you are as hard working as you say you are, then I think you'll end up doing fine in the long term.

 

[Mustachio]

You're story is certainly sad, but it doesn't prove or disprove that we need universal health care. Reading from your story, it seems like you got health care, they just couldn't really help you on that front. So it's not as if we had universal health care, you would somehow be in a better place than you are now. Saying the system only works for those who have millions of dollars is a terrible assumption, obviously you don't have millions of dollars because if you did you wouldn't have dropped out of your first college, and you even said yourself that you have great health care. You are trying to hard to twist your personal narrative into a vouch for your political beliefs.

Autoimmune diseases are classified as a disability by the SSA, so you should have looked into talking with a disability lawyer. You may have qualified for disability insurance, or Social Security benefits.

The safety net is already in place for individuals like yourself, you just have to look into your options. If you are as hard working as you say you are, then I think you'll end up doing fine in the long term.

Well, thank you for the information about disability, I actually didn't know that but will definitely look into it. Hopefully my foot will come home from its vacation in the near future and I can go back to working on my old, chronic medical problem instead of my new, acute medical problem. Also, thank you for the validating words and the thoughtful reply.

It's true that I "twisted my personal narrative" into an argument for universal heath care, but I wouldn't say "twisting" as I think I'm just presenting my story to lay the foundation for my argument. That argument isn't about myself, it's about my logical argument, and for the record here's a concise version of that argument: providing universal health care leads to better preventative care and is, for many reasons, fiscally beneficial to all Americans. Affordable health care prevents little problems from building up into big ones. Most Americans can afford to get one stitch but few Americans can afford nine. Since they still need stitches, and can't pay for them, we wind up paying.

The second part of the argument is that the more Americans we have in debt, the worse it is for the economy. People in debt are obviously more likely to need food stamps or welfare. Imagine if you were in debt $50,000. You'd have to start working an awful lot. You wouldn't be able to take out a loan to start a small business and you'd be too busy to enroll in college courses. You would be exhausted and stressed out, which would make you much more susceptible to illness. You have a hard time getting over that illness because you need to keep working and you're too busy trying to scrape together enough money for your car payment, car insurance, loan payment, rent, food, and gas to take a week off and rest.

My original post was just saying, "if I have this much trouble in my situation, imagine where a person with no health insurance would wind up." Not at the top of the world, I assure you, unless that person is James Cagney. So that's my little dissertation - universal health care: good for the body, good for the mind, good for the economy.

 

[ReformCollege]

Well, thank you for the information about disability, I actually didn't know that but will definitely look into it. Hopefully my foot will come home from its vacation in the near future and I can go back to working on my old, chronic medical problem instead of my new, acute medical problem. Also, thank you for the validating words and the thoughtful reply.

It's true that I "twisted my personal narrative" into an argument for universal heath care, but I wouldn't say "twisting" as I think I'm just presenting my story to lay the foundation for my argument. That argument isn't about myself, it's about my logical argument, and for the record here's a concise version of that argument: providing universal health care leads to better preventative care and is, for many reasons, fiscally beneficial to all Americans. Affordable health care prevents little problems from building up into big ones. Most Americans can afford to get one stitch but few Americans can afford nine. Since they still need stitches, and can't pay for them, we wind up paying.

The second part of the argument is that the more Americans we have in debt, the worse it is for the economy. People in debt are obviously more likely to need food stamps or welfare. Imagine if you were in debt $50,000. You'd have to start working an awful lot. You wouldn't be able to take out a loan to start a small business and you'd be too busy to enroll in college courses. You would be exhausted and stressed out, which would make you much more susceptible to illness. You have a hard time getting over that illness because you need to keep working and you're too busy trying to scrape together enough money for your car payment, car insurance, loan payment, rent, food, and gas to take a week off and rest.

My original post was just saying, "if I have this much trouble in my situation, imagine where a person with no health insurance would wind up." Not at the top of the world, I assure you, unless that person is James Cagney. So that's my little dissertation - universal health care: good for the body, good for the mind, good for the economy.

If you want to make that argument feel free to do so seperate from your own personal story. Your logical presentation requires things such as facts, statistics, analysis, etc. etc. Not, here's my very sad story, oh and by the way I think we should have Universal Health care, whereas Universal Health Care probably would not affect your personal outcome for the reasons I explained. And it's not even "if I didn't have health insurance" because I clearly stated that any individual can apply to the SSA if they meet the criteria.

 

[tessaesque]

I'm sorry, but you blatantly say in your post that you ignored your own limitations and then suffered the consequences of that decision. Why is it fair for other people who are "working very hard" to subsidize your health care because you admit to failing to properly balance your health with your work obligations?

There are laws in place that protect you against employment discrimination and retaliation on the basis of health limitations. If you choose to ignore that protection and ignore your own body's signals, why is anybody else obligated to foot the bill for that?

If I see the posted speed limit is 70 and I go 75, I can't demand that the other speeders who didn't get caught share the burden of my ticket. I can't demand that those who obeyed the law share the burden of my ticket, either. I made choices that led to negative consequences and I'm obligated to deal with the consequences of those choices.

So based on the specific example cited in the OP, I fail to see a compelling argument there for universal healthcare.

My own little "sob story": I was awakened at 3am with severe pain on the lower right side of my abdomen. Thinking it might be my appendix, I immediately went to the ER, as the pain was severe enough to make me vomit. Upon arriving, a sonogram did not reveal any issues with my appendix, so an MRI was ordered. The MRI revealed a "large" (by the doctor's estimation) kidney stone making it's way through my ureters into my bladder. I was prescribed several medications (including one that my insurance wouldn't cover) and sent on my way.

I spent $150 at the ER (co-pay for ER visit).
I spent $225 at the pharmacy (generic co-pay on 4 medications, full price on the one insurance wouldn't cover).

About a month later, I received two bills from the hospital and one from the radiology group that was contracted with the hospital. The hospital bills totaled $450. The radiology bill was $3,500. My insurance company (Blue Cross Blue Shield) rejected the MRI claim because they deemed it "medically unnecessary for diagnosis". I paid the hospital bills off $50 at a time based on an agreement I made with billing, but the radiology bill was put on a "hold" with the radiology company pending a petition for re-assessment with my insurance company. After getting my company's owner, our insurance broker, and the ER doctor involved, we finally got the insurance company to reverse their original decision. As it turned out, the billing department at the hospital had not coded the MRI order correctly, resulting in the refusal to pay at BCBS.

Long story short: I ended up paying $700 for the MRI (20% of the $3500, per the terms of my plan), at $50/month until it was paid off (no interest on medical bills, woot!).

So total out of pocket for me was $1525. Took me quite awhile to pay it off, and it put a major dent in my savings with the initial pay outs at the hospital and pharmacy. All because I developed a kidney stone, something that was likely beyond my control. And yet I still don't support universal healthcare. It's my body and as an adult I'm the only person obligated to care for it and maintain it.

 

[tessaesque]

You're making a lot of assumptions here. You're saying the only way to control cost is to reduce coverage. That's obviously not true. There's many reasons it costs way, way more to get health care in the US, not just because it's guaranteed. The system is loaded with middlemen, loop holes, inconsistency, corruption, and greed. Just about every person I know has either been, at a time, uninsured because they couldn't afford coverage or in need of care they didn't receive because it was too expensive even WITH their health care coverage. I worked with a girl who was coughing up blood for two weeks because she was waiting until her benefits kicked in. That's an extreme example, but it happens every day, and when it happens, it hurts the individual, the business they work for, and could wind up having irreversible health problems and end up on disability and medicare.

I know I sound like a broken record, but that's the point I'm trying to make. Providing universal care, and thus preventative care, would in theory boost performance, productivity, sustainability and the economy. That's the philosophy I'm endorsing and it's good common sense IMHO.

That girl could have gone to a local clinic (most urban hospitals offer free clinics w/no income verification) and spent a paltry sum of money (if anything) to receive care.

People have an obligation to learn how to care for themselves within the limitations that exist. When I was in high school and my family didn't have health insurance, I called around for pricing for a standard OBGYN wellness exam. I chose the one with the best price for what was included, saved up from my part-time, minimum wage job, and got the exam done. When I got super sick and needed to see a doctor I called around for low-prices before I made an appointment.

And I never used the ER for sniffles, coughs, fevers below 103, or mild asthma issues. Why? Because they weren't emergencies.

That's part of the problem, you know. People go to the ER for everything. They keep the kid out from school for a few days because of the flu, but they have to submit a doctor's note for the kid to return. So they go to the ER instead of finding a reasonably priced clinic. Somebody who gets chronic bronchitis recognizes the symptoms and goes to the ER to get a prescription instead of finding a reasonably priced clinic. Somebody who has an inflamed spinal disc goes to the ER to get a prescription for heavy duty Ibuprofen (and pay $50 for it at the pharmacy) instead of finding a reasonably priced chiropractor (many will adjust you for less than $40 a visit). So in that sense, the other poster was correct. The misuse and ignorance of those seeking care is a direct cause of out of control expenses. 'Cause most of those people don't pay for that trip to the ER. And then when you show up because you're bleeding profusely due to a chainsaw accident, you're charged 2x more via insurance and pissed off over the $400 bill for stitches.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

I'm not sure we need universal health care as much as we need affordable health care which in turn means affordable insurance. If you go to the doctor with a stomach ache he is going to immediately have you making appointments for very expensive test he knows you don't need but he has to tell you to get them in order to cover his own ass from being sued. It is mandated by his insurance carrier that he do so just in case you have stomach cancer even though you told him you ate 2 pizzas, an apple pie and a chocolate cake the night before. The lawyers have run up the cost of health care to the point where it is not affordable to the average Joe and the cost of health insurance reflects this. The answer for this is litigation legislation.
The next problem is the illegals in this country that show up at the hospital ER for free health care. The hospital just tacks their unpaid bill onto yours so in essence you pay or your insurance company pays for them. The answer is secure our borders and send all illegal aliens home.
If we did these two things and these two things alone it would go a long way toward fixing our health care problems and then we could have a rational discussion on some form of universal care but from an entirely new starting point. As of now implementing a plan like this is like putting a new roof on a house as it is burning down, first put the fire out.

 

[Mustachio]

If you want to make that argument feel free to do so seperate from your own personal story. Your logical presentation requires things such as facts, statistics, analysis, etc. etc. Not, here's my very sad story, oh and by the way I think we should have Universal Health care, whereas Universal Health Care probably would not affect your personal outcome for the reasons I explained. And it's not even "if I didn't have health insurance" because I clearly stated that any individual can apply to the SSA if they meet the criteria.

Like I said, I'm using my personal experience as a foundation for my argument, and my argument does not require statistics or analysis of statistics, it is a valid logical argument which I just outlined. It does require facts, and the facts are on my side. Millions of people are in debt, medical bills are putting people in debt, and we can logically conclude that debt prevents people from living up to their full potential. I've seen that in my life, which is part of the reason I used it in this thread. My experience is a microcosm of the experience of millions of Americans who find it impossible to get a diploma and a good job in the field of their choice because of medical bills. While there are a fair amount of replies to this thread, not a single response has addressed the argument I just outlined.

 

[Neomalthusian]

Like I said, I'm using my personal experience as a foundation for my argument, and my argument does not require statistics or analysis of statistics, it is a valid logical argument which I just outlined. It does require facts, and the facts are on my side. Millions of people are in debt, medical bills are putting people in debt, and we can logically conclude that debt prevents people from living up to their full potential. I've seen that in my life, which is part of the reason I used it in this thread. My experience is a microcosm of the experience of millions of Americans who find it impossible to get a diploma and a good job in the field of their choice because of medical bills. While there are a fair amount of replies to this thread, not a single response has addressed the argument I just outlined.

Mmm, what IS that argument? You listed a number of observations, sprinkled with some causal simplifications. Yes, many people are in debt. Yes, medical bills are the primary reason SOME people are in debt. I think more people are in debt because of their mortgage, frankly. It is very common to plunge yourself way into debt to pay for a house over time. Yes, of course some people have very unfortunate things happen to them. Some struggle with family stressors like divorce, abuse, deaths of loved ones, etc. We could launch into ALL SORTS of unfortunate things that happen in life that leads to depressive realities like "I was prevented from achieving what I thought to be my true potential." And there are countless variables that play into unfortunate events, and in plenty of cases the causes/contributors are random and unlucky whereas others are due to costly mistakes the individual made. But acknowledging this isn't an argument by itself. What's the thesis or the conclusion? The "so what?"

 

[Middleground]

Mmm, what IS that argument? You listed a number of observations, sprinkled with some causal simplifications. Yes, many people are in debt. Yes, medical bills are the primary reason SOME people are in debt. I think more people are in debt because of their mortgage, frankly. It is very common to plunge yourself way into debt to pay for a house over time. Yes, of course some people have very unfortunate things happen to them. Some struggle with family stressors like divorce, abuse, deaths of loved ones, etc. We could launch into ALL SORTS of unfortunate things that happen in life that leads to depressive realities like "I was prevented from achieving what I thought to be my true potential." And there are countless variables that play into unfortunate events, and in plenty of cases the causes/contributors are random and unlucky whereas others are due to costly mistakes the individual made. But acknowledging this isn't an argument by itself. What's the thesis or the conclusion? The "so what?"

Mortgage is considered "good debt." Maybe it's just me being the spoiled rotten Canadian that I am, but I wouldn't consider medical costs "good debt." To me, that's maintenance.

 

[Mustachio]

Mmm, what IS that argument? You listed a number of observations, sprinkled with some causal simplifications. Yes, many people are in debt. Yes, medical bills are the primary reason SOME people are in debt. I think more people are in debt because of their mortgage, frankly. It is very common to plunge yourself way into debt to pay for a house over time. Yes, of course some people have very unfortunate things happen to them. Some struggle with family stressors like divorce, abuse, deaths of loved ones, etc. We could launch into ALL SORTS of unfortunate things that happen in life that leads to depressive realities like "I was prevented from achieving what I thought to be my true potential." And there are countless variables that play into unfortunate events, and in plenty of cases the causes/contributors are random and unlucky whereas others are due to costly mistakes the individual made. But acknowledging this isn't an argument by itself. What's the thesis or the conclusion? The "so what?"

Dude, I don't expect people to read every word I write and inspect my posts with a magnifying glass, but my argument is pretty clear. Let me dumb it down: universal health care would pay for itself.

That's not exactly the argument I'm making. I'm saying that logically, giving people health care will make them able to live up to their full potential, thus you'd have more healthy people, and thus you'd have more people able to work hard, start small businesses, and create jobs. So the burden of paying for universal health care would be more than offset by the economic advantages of such a plan. That's the line of logic I'm using, and if you'd like me to expand on that reasoning, feel free to read the half dozen posts in this thread where I do exactly that. And also feel free to respond to that argument, it would be refreshing.

 

[Bodi]

The idea of Universal Health Care is such a good idea that it amazes me that anybody would be against it. I brought it up innocently last visit and my friend got so angry so fast that I dropped it. Couldn't believe it.

 

[lizzie]

The idea of Universal Health Care is such a good idea that it amazes me that anybody would be against it. I brought it up innocently last visit and my friend got so angry so fast that I dropped it. Couldn't believe it.

It isn't a good idea, because its another expense that the taxpayer is picking up for another entitlement program, and we are already heading for significant monetary problems with our current ones as it is. I understand that it sounds great in theory, but it's not feasible, in this country, to put even more demand on a finite resource, because it will increase costs even more than they are currently escalating.

 

[ReformCollege]

Like I said, I'm using my personal experience as a foundation for my argument, and my argument does not require statistics or analysis of statistics, it is a valid logical argument which I just outlined. It does require facts, and the facts are on my side. Millions of people are in debt, medical bills are putting people in debt, and we can logically conclude that debt prevents people from living up to their full potential. I've seen that in my life, which is part of the reason I used it in this thread. My experience is a microcosm of the experience of millions of Americans who find it impossible to get a diploma and a good job in the field of their choice because of medical bills. While there are a fair amount of replies to this thread, not a single response has addressed the argument I just outlined.

I'm not seeing it.

1. I clearly stated that you obviously would not have experienced any better of an outcome under UHC than you already have received. The social safety net is already in place for individuals with your specific criteria. From what you stated, you did not fail to get a diploma or a job because of hospital bills, you had to drop your college before experiencing health problems, and you failed to protect yourself when your health problems arose. That's not a microcosm of "millions of Americans" at all. That's your life, and your situation applies to a very small group of people, and a majority of the people in your situation would have protected themselves.

2. No we can not conclude that "debt prevents people from living up to their full potential." That makes zero sense. First off, you reach that conclusion from two arbitrary and completely neutral statements. I have absolutely no idea how "Millions of people are in debt" and "medical bills puts people in debt" can lead you to conclude that "debt is bad." Two are vague statements, and the last is a personal assumption.

If you want to make the argument that health care costs need to come down, be my guest, I'll agree with you. But to make a completely illogical connection and call it logical completely defies logic.
By your logic, mortgages, car payments, and credit card bills should all be paid for by the government because that is "debt" and it is "preventing people from living up to their full potential."

A word of advice, keep your personal values out of your reasoning skills/ argument. You are trying way too hard to put round peg into a square hole.

 

[Neomalthusian]

Mortgage is considered "good debt."

:shrug:

Maybe it's just me being the spoiled rotten Canadian that I am, but I wouldn't consider medical costs "good debt." To me, that's maintenance.

Medical problems leave us feeling victimized, unlucky, without choices. Therefore we resent having to pay anything to maintain our functioning and comfort. But our functioning and comfort should be valuable to us. Valuable enough to save money for it. Most of us would accumulate enormous amounts of money if the equivalent amount of our employer-paid insurance premiums were instead deposited into a tax-free HSA. And if we did that, and had a medical need, it would be OUR MONEY that we were opting to spend to address the problem, and we'd have an incentive to shop around for the best bargain. But that's just one idea of many.

Dude, I don't expect people to read every word I write and inspect my posts with a magnifying glass, but my argument is pretty clear. Let me dumb it down: universal health care would pay for itself.

That's not exactly the argument I'm making. I'm saying that logically, giving people health care will make them able to live up to their full potential,

Not necessarily. Only a few would. And some people don't have a heck of a lot of potential to live up to in the first place even if they were in perfect health. Plus, some people get health care to maintain their dysfunction or mask their symptoms, not to restore their health or functioning to its previous state. So ultimately you're guaranteeing a very expensive benefit that might not return jack squat in most cases.

So the burden of paying for universal health care would be more than offset by the economic advantages of such a plan.

You leap to this conclusion. See above for the alternative possibility.

That's the line of logic I'm using, and if you'd like me to expand on that reasoning, feel free to read the half dozen posts in this thread where I do exactly that. And also feel free to respond to that argument, it would be refreshing.

Our unemployment problems are not due to the fact that the unemployed are too sick to work. It is not as though there are millions of unfilled/unfillable jobs because all the candidates are home, bedridden, with an antidote for their illness that would fix them that exists but that they cannot afford.

 

[Mustachio]

I'm not seeing it.

1. I clearly stated that you obviously would not have experienced any better of an outcome under UHC than you already have received. The social safety net is already in place for individuals with your specific criteria. From what you stated, you did not fail to get a diploma or a job because of hospital bills, you had to drop your college before experiencing health problems, and you failed to protect yourself when your health problems arose. That's not a microcosm of "millions of Americans" at all. That's your life, and your situation applies to a very small group of people, and a majority of the people in your situation would have protected themselves.

2. No we can not conclude that "debt prevents people from living up to their full potential." That makes zero sense. First off, you reach that conclusion from two arbitrary and completely neutral statements. I have absolutely no idea how "Millions of people are in debt" and "medical bills puts people in debt" can lead you to conclude that "debt is bad." Two are vague statements, and the last is a personal assumption.

If you want to make the argument that health care costs need to come down, be my guest, I'll agree with you. But to make a completely illogical connection and call it logical completely defies logic.
By your logic, mortgages, car payments, and credit card bills should all be paid for by the government because that is "debt" and it is "preventing people from living up to their full potential."

A word of advice, keep your personal values out of your reasoning skills/ argument. You are trying way too hard to put round peg into a square hole.

Both the reply you responded to and this reply responding to your reply to me are challenging because we're talking about both my personal experience and the discussion about health care/other Americans with or without health care. The criticism that I shouldn't combine them is valid but I did title the thread health care + my sob story and not health care = my sob story. So I don't think we're getting anywhere. But let me respond to a strange thing you said, which was most people in my situation would have "protected themselves." What does that mean? I had to make my car payment, insurance payments, plus cost of living. I was getting overtime hours because I was offered them and the money helps obviously, but also they were understaffed and I wanted to help out. I don't see why most people in my position would have refused to take the overtime hours, and I haven't said much about my job or health problems because it's both private and TMI, so I have no idea how you came to the conclusion that most people would have "protected themselves," whatever that means, from what turned out to actually be a very strange and rare problem that continues to piss me off and may very well cost me my job.

From what I've seen, people don't protect themselves. They go to work when they're sick, they continue to work when they're hurt, and they run themselves into the ground because they're in debt. They have to pay off their cars and their houses and their health is rarely a priority. That's why my story IS a microcosm of what's happening in America. People can't afford health care because it's way, way too expensive, and we shouldn't be fighting about how to "make it affordable," we should be making it available, plain and simple, because nobody should have their life ruined by medical debt. And one more time, my experience made me see how bad it is, not because I got screwed over, but because I saw the exact dollar figures that a person WITHOUT health care would have had to pay in my situation, and it's screwed up.

Ok and one last point. Credit card debt is totally different. That's money you owe for something you received. When I went to the ER just over a month ago, I only did so because two doctors told me I should go. I went there, they did nothing, I received a large bill that would have been an enormous bill for somebody without health care. That's terrible. Some would argue "you received treatment." Well, no, actually I didn't receive treatment. They told me they couldn't do anything and advised me to call my doctor back. I've had at least three experiences exactly like that in the last month. Somebody not having health care is no reason they should pay two thousand dollars to talk to a person who knows less than google knows.

 

[Kushinator]

because it will increase costs even more than they are currently escalating.

I already know you cannot defend this comment. Care to retract it?