• Amused
  • Angry
  • Annoyed
  • Awesome
  • Bemused
  • Cool
  • Crazy
  • Crying
  • Depressed
  • Down
  • Embarrassed
  • Enraged
  • Friendly
  • Geeky
  • Grumpy
  • Happy
  • Hungry
  • Innocent
  • Meh
  • Piratey
  • Poorly
  • Sad
  • Secret
  • Shy
  • Sneaky
  • Tired
  • Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
    Results 41 to 45 of 45

    Politics - Thread: 2020: Polls Already Busy!

    1. #41
      psalms 91's Avatar
      psalms 91 is offline Silver Member
      Moderator
      Supporting Member
      70
      Mood:
      Happy
       
      Join Date
      Jun 2015
      Location
      Pa
      Posts
      13,504
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      6,648
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (5,005,022 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      60,603
      Level
      61
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      44.28%
      Rep Power
      636
      Quote Originally Posted by tango View Post
      Don't expect it to get better if the government takes over providing healthcare. You'll just get a different type of ineptitude paired with stonewalling when it all goes wrong.

      In England for a long time the focus was on patient choice. The idea was that you could choose which hospital treated you, you could choose your surgeon, you could choose all sorts of things. But as one group said, most people would rather just be given an appointment at a clean, local hospital with a good rate of success than be given the choice between the hospital with a bad rate of MRSA infections, the hospital that never seems to be cleaned properly, and the hospital that will probably do a good job but is a seven hour drive away, meaning a logistical headache to get there and back. My dentist wanted me to have a badly broken tooth extracted but the local hospital had one of the worst rates of MRSA infections in the country so I decided against it.
      You keep looking at England which does have many problems with its system so how about look to Finland and Sweeden and see how theirs stack up as well as other countries. By the way MRSA is a big problem in this country right now
      Isaiah 40:31

    2. #42
      tango's Avatar
      tango is offline Bronze Member
      Valued Contributor
      Married
      ... and you shall live ...
       
      Mood:
      Bemused
       
      Join Date
      Jul 2015
      Location
      Elsewhere
      Posts
      7,073
      CH Cash
      1,577
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (8,967,213 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      32,084
      Level
      48
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      13.07%
      Rep Power
      808
      Quote Originally Posted by psalms 91 View Post
      You keep looking at England which does have many problems with its system so how about look to Finland and Sweeden and see how theirs stack up as well as other countries. By the way MRSA is a big problem in this country right now
      I keep looking at England because that's where I have the most experience of the medical system. And the socialised medical system in England is so badly broken it's not funny.

      One brutal reality that has to be addressed is that healthcare is the sort of thing that ultimately has to be rationed one way or another because there can only ever be so many resources to go round. There is only so much money, there are only so many doctors, only so much hospital time available, and so on. If people are willing to accept that their condition doesn't need medical attention because it will go away by itself naturally imposes less of a burden upon the system as a whole, but as soon as people who have been sneezing for three days figure they need to go to the doctor for some pills they make the situation worse (and of course there's nothing a doctor can do to fix a cold anyway). If people are willing to accept that their condition might be troublesome to them but it's a lower priority than someone else's more serious condition then some form of queueing system can work, but if people are used to the idea that they should get the treatment they choose at a time that suits them the whole thing starts to fall apart.

      There's also the issue of medical insurance - if any mistake, however innocent, is likely to result in expensive legal action it is inevitable that the cost of insurance rises rapidly, which means costs for everyone have to rise to pay for the insurance, which in turn means that either the end user pays more or the government pays more on their behalf.

      When something is free at the point of use people typically regard it as priceless or worthless. The trouble is the growing number of people who regard such things as worthless and little more than a system ripe for abuse. I still remember the time my wife had been loaned a crutch by the hospital after badly spraining her ankle. A few days later she didn't need it any more so I took it back to the hospital. The staff looked as if I'd given them a piece of myrrh - they clearly didn't expect to ever see it again. I wonder just how much taxpayer's money is wasted on crutches that end up thrown in the river, and to what extent having to pay to borrow a crutch would focus people on actually returning it.

      I don't dispute for a second that the US healthcare system is badly broken. The trouble with a centrally funded and managed system is the inevitability of costs rising out of control. In Scandinavian countries they are generally more tolerant of higher taxation and more government involvement in their day-to-day lives. I'm not sure the political system in the US is such that a centrally funded healthcare system would work well, and certainly not sure that the American people are willing to pay higher taxes to find an ever-wider range of medical services, especially when those services will include things people find morally objectionable.

      Look at the outcry over employers being required to fund health insurance that includes access to abortion. Will the people worrying about being "forced to pay for abortions" be happy to fund gender realignment, abortions, boob jobs for would-be porn starlets, fertility treatments for drug addicts who want a child even though any child would immediately be taken from them at birth, and the like?
      "Do what thou will shall be the whole of the law" - Aleister Crowley

      "If you love me, obey my commandments" - Jesus Christ

      The Bible comes as a complete package. If we want to pluck verses out of context so make them mean what we want them to mean, if we want to ignore the passages that are inconvenient to our outlook, we should be intellectually honest enough to throw our Bibles in the trash and admit we are following Crowley and not Christ.

    3. #43
      psalms 91's Avatar
      psalms 91 is offline Silver Member
      Moderator
      Supporting Member
      70
      Mood:
      Happy
       
      Join Date
      Jun 2015
      Location
      Pa
      Posts
      13,504
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      6,648
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (5,005,022 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      60,603
      Level
      61
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      44.28%
      Rep Power
      636
      Quote Originally Posted by tango View Post
      I keep looking at England because that's where I have the most experience of the medical system. And the socialised medical system in England is so badly broken it's not funny.

      One brutal reality that has to be addressed is that healthcare is the sort of thing that ultimately has to be rationed one way or another because there can only ever be so many resources to go round. There is only so much money, there are only so many doctors, only so much hospital time available, and so on. If people are willing to accept that their condition doesn't need medical attention because it will go away by itself naturally imposes less of a burden upon the system as a whole, but as soon as people who have been sneezing for three days figure they need to go to the doctor for some pills they make the situation worse (and of course there's nothing a doctor can do to fix a cold anyway). If people are willing to accept that their condition might be troublesome to them but it's a lower priority than someone else's more serious condition then some form of queueing system can work, but if people are used to the idea that they should get the treatment they choose at a time that suits them the whole thing starts to fall apart.

      There's also the issue of medical insurance - if any mistake, however innocent, is likely to result in expensive legal action it is inevitable that the cost of insurance rises rapidly, which means costs for everyone have to rise to pay for the insurance, which in turn means that either the end user pays more or the government pays more on their behalf.

      When something is free at the point of use people typically regard it as priceless or worthless. The trouble is the growing number of people who regard such things as worthless and little more than a system ripe for abuse. I still remember the time my wife had been loaned a crutch by the hospital after badly spraining her ankle. A few days later she didn't need it any more so I took it back to the hospital. The staff looked as if I'd given them a piece of myrrh - they clearly didn't expect to ever see it again. I wonder just how much taxpayer's money is wasted on crutches that end up thrown in the river, and to what extent having to pay to borrow a crutch would focus people on actually returning it.

      I don't dispute for a second that the US healthcare system is badly broken. The trouble with a centrally funded and managed system is the inevitability of costs rising out of control. In Scandinavian countries they are generally more tolerant of higher taxation and more government involvement in their day-to-day lives. I'm not sure the political system in the US is such that a centrally funded healthcare system would work well, and certainly not sure that the American people are willing to pay higher taxes to find an ever-wider range of medical services, especially when those services will include things people find morally objectionable.

      Look at the outcry over employers being required to fund health insurance that includes access to abortion. Will the people worrying about being "forced to pay for abortions" be happy to fund gender realignment, abortions, boob jobs for would-be porn starlets, fertility treatments for drug addicts who want a child even though any child would immediately be taken from them at birth, and the like?
      I would say determine what is cosmetic and make people pay privately for those services but life saving procedures and necessary medical would be covered
      Isaiah 40:31

    4. #44
      Albion's Avatar
      Albion is offline Expert Member
      Married
      Mood:
      Friendly
       
      Join Date
      Sep 2017
      Posts
      3,123
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      15,909
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      21,277
      Level
      40
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      82.16%
      Rep Power
      637
      Sure. That would make sense. Unfortunately, that is not how these things work.

      Half of the cosmetic procedures would be defended as essential to the persons mental health; and every questionable medical procedure, cosmetic or not, would have advocacy groups arguing their case. Then there are those things that fall into the category of preventive medicine. All sorts of procedures that most people would say common sense argues against covering under the national health system would wind up being covered because, you know, equal treatment, non-discrimination, yada yada yada.

    5. #45
      tango's Avatar
      tango is offline Bronze Member
      Valued Contributor
      Married
      ... and you shall live ...
       
      Mood:
      Bemused
       
      Join Date
      Jul 2015
      Location
      Elsewhere
      Posts
      7,073
      CH Cash
      1,577
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (8,967,213 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      32,084
      Level
      48
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      13.07%
      Rep Power
      808
      Quote Originally Posted by psalms 91 View Post
      I would say determine what is cosmetic and make people pay privately for those services but life saving procedures and necessary medical would be covered
      That's great in theory but I think we both know how that will happen. It will go the same way as the NHS, where all sorts of procedures that were elective became considered "quality of life" issues and funded by the taxpayer.

      Some years ago I read about a teenage girl who was afraid she might be bullied because she was part way through puberty and one breast was visibly larger than the other. She hadn't been bullied, but she was afraid she might be. She had a procedure that essentially provided an inflatable implant so she could adjust the size of the smaller one as required. Despite not even claiming to be bullied, this was considered necessary for her quality of life and funded by the NHS.

      At about the same time a family member was in hospital following a nasty traffic accident. They had surgery to put them back together again. While they were recovering they were in a bed next to a guy who was having his nose reshaped. His doctor had ticked whatever boxes it took to have that purely cosmetic procedure classified as necessary, so the NHS funded it. He was very open about the fact that if he'd known just what was involved he wouldn't have bothered but, no matter, the NHS picked up the tab for his new nose.

      Abortions started out as an option if the mother's life was in danger and before long became a matter of convenience where a pregnant woman who didn't want the child could claim her well-being was at stake and terminate it. Does anyone really think the healthcare system would do anything different?
      "Do what thou will shall be the whole of the law" - Aleister Crowley

      "If you love me, obey my commandments" - Jesus Christ

      The Bible comes as a complete package. If we want to pluck verses out of context so make them mean what we want them to mean, if we want to ignore the passages that are inconvenient to our outlook, we should be intellectually honest enough to throw our Bibles in the trash and admit we are following Crowley and not Christ.

    Bookmarks

    Posting Permissions

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