The Vent - Part 2

[bowflex 0]

but I won't call ANY of this healthcare. It's illness care. If a culture has systemic conditions it takes for granted as normal, people in it may not even question how they are getting sick in the first place. And it all costs money, and someone has to pay.

The attitude of don't think a government should pay for its citizens to have care because you're doing just fine thankyouverymuch is an attitude which reflects how ignorant in general we are of how much our materialistic, individualistic, greedy and polluting society creates the very illnesses it won't pay for.

You don't want to be responsible for paying someone else's bill? Well, you (all of us) are responsible systemically for that illness in the first place. Reconcile that. Please.

I actually want universal healthcare for America but I want it to be done fairly. There's no reason that everyone should be paying the exact same premiums and such when the obesity rate in the States is now at 67%. If someone doesn't smoke, drink, or eat unhealthy constantly, their payments should be lower than those who do, that's just being fair. I workout 5-6 days a week, eat very healthy, and refuse to even try a smoke.

I've heard proposals that are in Congress that involve rewarding those people who live in a healthy way with lower costs and such and I'm in full support of that. Everyone should have health care, but everyone should also take responsibility for their part in it.

[wowswift 3]

I don't want national health insurance. I'm happy with my HSA/HDHP and like the fact that I don't have to pay into some massive insurance plan that I will most likely never use and I get to save money.

and yes the canadian wait is bad, not that i ever used it, but hubby and his family obv hated it. but of course it is newfoundland, so i'd imagine the wait for any surgery there is gonna be pretty bad. but that shouldn't be an accepted rule, at least for me.

And it is for people like you that a true universal health care system in the U.S. has been curbed.

"I don't want national health insurance. I'm happy with my HSA/HDHP and like the fact that I don't have to pay into some massive insurance plan that I will most likely never use and I get to save money".

yes which is fine since if you truely can't afford medical insurance, you get treated anyways. i guess im just with the people who don't like paying for everyone else. and which is also why i got an HSA so i don't have to pay a higher rate, and get to save the rest. but its not only from people like me that has it curbed. its the own governments fault.

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

but I won't call ANY of this healthcare. It's illness care. If a culture has systemic conditions it takes for granted as normal, people in it may not even question how they are getting sick in the first place. And it all costs money, and someone has to pay.

The attitude of don't think a government should pay for its citizens to have care because you're doing just fine thankyouverymuch is an attitude which reflects how ignorant in general we are of how much our materialistic, individualistic, greedy and polluting society creates the very illnesses it won't pay for.

You don't want to be responsible for paying someone else's bill? Well, you (all of us) are responsible systemically for that illness in the first place. Reconcile that. Please.

I actually want universal healthcare for America but I want it to be done fairly. There's no reason that everyone should be paying the exact same premiums and such when the obesity rate in the States is now at 67%. If someone doesn't smoke, drink, or eat unhealthy constantly, their payments should be lower than those who do, that's just being fair. I workout 5-6 days a week, eat very healthy, and refuse to even try a smoke.

I've heard proposals that are in Congress that involve rewarding those people who live in a healthy way with lower costs and such and I'm in full support of that. Everyone should have health care, but everyone should also take responsibility for their part in it.

I agree with you. That is one reason my mother always tells me that universal healthcare won't work in the U.S. I am on the fence on this one because you could argue that I didn't support the war so why should I have my taxes sent to the war effort, it is a slippery slope argument. I think something in the form of a tax incentive, as opposed to a lower premium might do it. Go to the doctor on a regular basis, get a gym membership, etc. There should be some form of reward, aside from good health, to people who take care of themselves but will it lead to people avoiding the doctor so that they don't appear to be using resources, that's what I worry about.

[trailmix 77]

And I think you are spot on there IR5 - I definately think it will lead people to avoiding the doctor so they don't appear to be using resources. Plus you are then 'tagged' - no one likes to be tagged.

You can't have an all for one and one for all system with a boat load of stipulations.

Also, how would anyone determine 'eat unhealthy constantly'. The truth is you cannot. If you purely use a body weight scale - say that a person is obese and pays a higher rate. Do you then lower the premium they pay with each pound of weight they lose? For the land of the 'free' - it certainly sounds nanny-ish to me.

Plus, then you will get a ####### for tat system. I'm not sure how many injuries there are per year in vehicle accidents in the U.S. - but it's probably pretty large. Therefore if I lived in the U.S. and did not drive - I should pay a lower premium.

Edited October 16, 2009 by trailmix

[bowflex 0]

And I think you are spot on there IR5 - I definately think it will lead people to avoiding the doctor so they don't appear to be using resources. Plus you are then 'tagged' - no one likes to be tagged.

You can't have an all for one and one for all system with a boat load of stipulations.

Also, how would anyone determine 'eat unhealthy contantly'. The truth is you cannot. If you purely use a body weight scale - say that a person is obese and pays a higher rate. Do you then lower the premium they pay with each pound of weight they lose? For the land of the 'free' - it certainly sounds nanny-ish to me.

Plus, then you will get a ####### for tat system. I'm not sure how many injuries there are per year in vehicle accidents in the U.S. - but it's probably pretty large. Therefore if I lived in the U.S. and did not drive - I should pay a lower premium.

I'm sure there would need to be a lot of provisions put in, but the slippery slope argument is brought up with almost any policy change yet there are ways around it. It would require a lot of discussion but I think it could be figured out. Perhaps instead of lesser premiums, higher fat foods could be taxed more or the costs of healthier food could be lowered. I know my wife and I spend approximately $50-100 more a week on groceries just because we only buy those products that are healthier for us.

As for eating unhealthy constantly, that was definitely an overstatement on my part. By measuring one's body fat percentage, cholesterol levels, BMI (in most cases anyway), the doctor could definitely get a summarization of their patient's lifestyle choices. There could be premium ranges for healthy weights or other determining factors on health.

It is very nanny-ish but I feel it's the best way to go for a system that could offer coverage for everyone. This country is so horribly out of shape and unhealthy that the costs will start to grow for everyone.

[trailmix 77]

Yes, in theory it could be worked out - but I say shelve that for the 100 year plan. This is a country that cannot even agree on universal health care, cannot agree that everyone should have coverage - trying to work out when a person should have a cholesterol test and when a food should be taxed will only add more issues to an already volatile issue.

I agree that a fairer way to do it might be to tax higher fat/sugary foods. However you will then have people arguing that they are not guilty of 'over' consuming these foods, so why should they pay more?

Say you are someone who only eats at Mcdonald's around once a year - should there be a 50 cent tax on each big mac because the next person is overweight and eats there every day? Why should you have to pay the 50 cents as well? Maybe they could put a little scale in front of the counter

Edited October 16, 2009 by trailmix

[bowflex 0]

Yes, in theory it could be worked out - but I say shelve that for the 100 year plan. This is a country that cannot even agree on universal health care, cannot agree that everyone should have coverage - trying to work out when a person should have a cholesterol test and when a food should be taxed will only add more issues to an already volatile issue.

I agree that a fairer way to do it might be to tax higher fat/sugary foods. However you will then have people arguing that they are not guilty of 'over' consuming these foods, so why should they pay more?

Say you are someone who only eats at Mcdonald's around once a year - should there be a 50 cent tax on each big mac because the next person is overweight and eats there every day? Why should you have to pay the 50 cents as well? Maybe they could put a little scale in front of the counter

Haha That'd be quite the sight

I just hope something can be figured out soon. When my wife went to have a MRI done a few months ago and we got a bill for $7,700.00 for a test that took 30 minutes, I was shocked. Now granted they were just missing some completed form to bill our insurance with, but I still can't believe how much things cost. I wish more people would stop just thinking that because they have the money to pay for coverage that everyone should. It's just such hard times right now, I hope something can be figured out to keep the costs down and the coverage up. Bill Maher says it on his show all the time, We're the only country in the world that makes their biggest profit off of the their own sick.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

charles has timbits.

Len has NO timbits.

Edited October 16, 2009 by *Len*

[Malrothien 6]

I could go for a walk and get timbits.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

I could go for a walk and get timbits.

Now you did it. u not mah frenz no moah

[Malrothien 6]

I could go for a walk and get timbits.

Now you did it. u not mah frenz no moah

Am I gonna have to friend request you back?

[Chica Yeyé 41]

I could go for a walk and get timbits.

Now you did it. u not mah frenz no moah

Am I gonna have to friend request you back?

I luvz u again!!!

[Ban Hammer 13,283]

charles has timbits.

Len has NO timbits.

[thetreble 19]

As for eating unhealthy constantly, that was definitely an overstatement on my part. By measuring one's body fat percentage, cholesterol levels, BMI (in most cases anyway), the doctor could definitely get a summarization of their patient's lifestyle choices. There could be premium ranges for healthy weights or other determining factors on health.

It is very nanny-ish but I feel it's the best way to go for a system that could offer coverage for everyone. This country is so horribly out of shape and unhealthy that the costs will start to grow for everyone.

While I understand what you are saying, this is pretty judgmental. If you think that measuring body fat and BMI, especially for women, can determine if someone is unhealthy or not, I think you need to look a little back about 50 years and see, for example, the size of women then. I walk my dogs, I try to eat well, but I'm not a teeny, tiny woman. I don't have that bloodline. I have friends who eat complete junk and have never visited a wait room, but they are still "thin" on the outside.

Also, your lifestyle comment isn't really fair as some people like myself have really atypical daily routines. When I'm in the car at 5:45am going to work, people are at the gym working out because they don't have to go to work until 9. Also, by the time I get home, it's usually 6 and I've got take care of my dogs and make dinner. By 8, I'm wiped. Every one has a different thing they've gotta do, and I'm not sitting around eating McDonalds all day. So, if a doctor looks at me and determines I'm overweight, which I am according to the BMI index (which just takes the height and weight of someone like every one has the same body type) I have to pay more money?? Come on now....where do you draw the line?

[Rhiannercakes 14]

Uh, I guess I don't have anything to add to the healthcare thing other than I want onto my fiance's US healthcare.

Sure, it's pricey but I won't have to wait 1.5 months to see my doctor, sit in her office for almost an hour after my appointment time and hardly even get to talk to her because she's so darn busy.

Sure, I'll miss being able to just walk in, show my health card and walk out without paying, but I'm willing to give them 20 to 30 bucks and listen to me for as long as I need them to.

Not to mention I wont have to pay an arm and a leg for prescriptions when I get onto my fiance's heathcare.