Health Care in the U.S. [split topic]

[verneforchat 139]

1 hour ago, FloridaMinsk said:

 

I agree on hearing people complain about our healthcare in particular.   I guess if you are used to cradle to death government healthcare our way is a change.    

 

The reality is that if we had a socialist medical system like European nations then the overall advancement of medicine would slow down significantly.   Since we are one of the few places where governments don't set medical costs we end up subsidizing the world in medical/prescription research.   

 

Maybe if some of these other countries would stop with the socialized medicine they could help us all lower costs worldwide while increasing quality.   

 

That being said it's understandable why the immigrants think this way. They have been indoctrinated to think the socialized medicine is better for everyone.    Hopefully over time they realize this is what separates us from the world.   Everyone should have a choice on quality.  

Citation needed.

 

UK has has NHS. So much ground breaking medical research comes from UK. Getting research done in US is very very expensive at times (especially if it is in the hospital, clinical research). Sometimes our sponsors from outside US find it hard to sponsor research in US because of all the different healthcare costs we have. Ofcourse socializing medicine is not the complete answer to this, but we need to tamp down on the costs. 

[David&Femke 91]

Just now, FloridaMinsk said:

 

Some of the gene research is definelty more advanced outside of the US because I believe there are limitations.   

 

I am torn on these matters because once you go down that road it could lead to bad things.   

 I think one of the reasons more abstract siences are developed more ( thought defenitly not exclusivly) outside of free market countrys is because they cost a lot of mony but dont make a direct provit. more specific develepments like medications directly turn a profit when succesfull.

And that is why i think America is a world leader. but not THE world leader. there are great advantages in both socialism and free market.

and i dont think that that i just say that because i am indoctrinated to believe in the advantages of socialism because i am european , becasue all the same you are indocrinated by your upbringing but that does not soly forms your opinion. an is also not the opinion off all americans just as mine is not the opinion of all europeens.

what is so great for all of us. is that we get to live in the birth of a new age, off mass communication, whole worlds of since and information at the feet of the masses. communication not just by goverments but by individuals from all over the world.

This globelasion and abilety to freely excange ideas is and opertunity to develope all countrys (including america :P) and the world as a whole. Our generations lies the moral ground work for how we can work and inprove beond boarders of individual countrys. and tehre is an upportunity to open up the idea of an intergration of social and free market, and find a ballance that takes the best out of both worlds, based on the experience of many countrys, made posible by these global advancements in communication.

 

[verneforchat 139]

2 minutes ago, David&Femke said:

 I think one of the reasons more abstract siences are developed more ( thought defenitly not exclusivly) outside of free market countrys is because they cost a lot of mony but dont make a direct provit. more specific develepments like medications directly turn a profit when succesfull.

And that is why i think America is a world leader. but not THE world leader. there are great advantages in both socialism and free market.

and i dont think that that i just say that because i am indoctrinated to believe in the advantages of socialism because i am european , becasue all the same you are indocrinated by your upbringing but that does not soly forms your opinion. an is also not the opinion off all americans just as mine is not the opinion of all europeens.

what is so great for all of us. is that we get to live in the birth of a new age, off mass communication, whole worlds of since and information at the feet of the masses. communication not just by goverments but by individuals from all over the world.

This globelasion and abilety to freely excange ideas is and opertunity to develope all countrys (including america :P) and the world as a whole. Our generations lies the moral ground work for how we can work and inprove beond boarders of individual countrys. and tehre is an upportunity to open up the idea of an intergration of social and free market, and find a ballance that takes the best out of both worlds, based on the experience of many countrys, made posible by these global advancements in communication.

 

US is not the world leader in either healthcare not healthcare research. In a truthful way, there is no world leader. Some countries lead in some specialities, and lack in some at the same time. 

 

Prior to my studying and immigrating in the US, that was firmly my belief that it was number one in all healthcare related stuff.

Very disappointing to learn it is not since a considerable amount of money is spent on it. However, every system has it flaws and we need to figure out better solutions to make it affordable, accessible and current.

[FloridaMinsk 88]

37 minutes ago, David&Femke said:

 I think one of the reasons more abstract siences are developed more ( thought defenitly not exclusivly) outside of free market countrys is because they cost a lot of mony but dont make a direct provit. more specific develepments like medications directly turn a profit when succesfull.

And that is why i think America is a world leader. but not THE world leader. there are great advantages in both socialism and free market.

and i dont think that that i just say that because i am indoctrinated to believe in the advantages of socialism because i am european , becasue all the same you are indocrinated by your upbringing but that does not soly forms your opinion. an is also not the opinion off all americans just as mine is not the opinion of all europeens.

what is so great for all of us. is that we get to live in the birth of a new age, off mass communication, whole worlds of since and information at the feet of the masses. communication not just by goverments but by individuals from all over the world.

This globelasion and abilety to freely excange ideas is and opertunity to develope all countrys (including america :P) and the world as a whole. Our generations lies the moral ground work for how we can work and inprove beond boarders of individual countrys. and tehre is an upportunity to open up the idea of an intergration of social and free market, and find a ballance that takes the best out of both worlds, based on the experience of many countrys, made posible by these global advancements in communication.

 

I don't doubt or disagree that globalization has helped to lift all boats.  

 

I just believe there is a cost to the United States and other leading countries to lift others.    As an American I am less concerned with the well being of other countries.    Just as other countries are more concerned with their own well being over the United States.     

 

For these matters I just happen to believe that we should all be responsible for our own survival.   I read a disturbing story a couple years ago how people were coming to the U.K. And using the NHS to get diagnosed with HIV then getting he drugs. The cost was like 25k gbp per year per person.   That's just crazy to pay.  

 

Medical tourism should be encouraged but it needs to be paid 100% out of pocket costs with no government subsidy.    

 

Paying for services in the USA is not difficult.  If you are poor here for an extended period of time then you are just not good with money.  

[FloridaMinsk 88]

One thing I would love for the USA to change is for the FDA to allow drugs in the testing stage to be used at a severe discount or even free.  

 

People should have the freedom to try medications even if there is a risk to using them.   

[verneforchat 139]

2 minutes ago, FloridaMinsk said:

One thing I would love for the USA to change is for the FDA to allow drugs in the testing stage to be used at a severe discount or even free.  

 

People should have the freedom to try medications even if there is a risk to using them.   

That is not a determination FDA can make.

 

FDA is government. You want government to interfere with drug pricing? What happened to your stance of supporting FREE CAPITAL?

 

So you want Government to regulate and set pricing and then you want to support Free Capital? Those are contradictory. Pick your side.

 

People AS OF NOW have the freedom to try medications, but they also have the freedom to sue the pharma company if the medicines they were on have severe unexpected side effects. Or get some sort of medical expenses covered caused by any side effects. 

Edited February 6, 2017 by verneforchat

[David&Femke 91]

2 minutes ago, FloridaMinsk said:

One thing I would love for the USA to change is for the FDA to allow drugs in the testing stage to be used at a severe discount or even free.  

 

People should have the freedom to try medications even if there is a risk to using them.   

that is a very a very unique oppion from most standpints, but i think in a land like america were companys are very much held accountable fom the reprocussions that there servesis and products have on people, this would ahve a dramatic effect for the poeple developing and or suplaying these drugs

[verneforchat 139]

11 minutes ago, David&Femke said:

that is a very a very unique oppion from most standpints, but i think in a land like america were companys are very much held accountable fom the reprocussions that there servesis and products have on people, this would ahve a dramatic effect for the poeple developing and or suplaying these drugs

This is necessary in any FDA approved trial. Sponsors have to agree medical bills of people participating in their trial who suffer from unexpected/unrevealed side effects.

[TBoneTX 45,288]

The above posts have been split from the Trump Speculation Megathread in the General Immigration Discussion forum.

[FloridaMinsk 88]

9 hours ago, Transborderwife said:

Healthcare should be a right.  Nobody deserves to die because they cannot afford care.

 

Everyone has access to healthcare.   It just comes down to how much they are willing to pay.    You pay for the level of quality you desire.   The exact same thing we do when we choose a restaurant.    Some prefer fine dining, some prefer fast food.   Then some like to go to Applebee's.     The result is everyone has access to a restaurant they can afford.   No reason why healthcare can't be the same.   

 

 

[verneforchat 139]

10 minutes ago, FloridaMinsk said:

 

Everyone has access to healthcare.   It just comes down to how much they are willing to pay.    You pay for the level of quality you desire.   The exact same thing we do when we choose a restaurant.    Some prefer fine dining, some prefer fast food.   Then some like to go to Applebee's.     The result is everyone has access to a restaurant they can afford.   No reason why healthcare can't be the same.   

 

 

False. Not everyone has access to healthcare. And among healthcare there are tiers. Not all specialized treatment or diagnostics are available in rural areas.

Quality of care should not be determined upon your income status. Or the rich continue to keep living and the poor will die off. 

 

It is like saying, if you dont have money, you don't deserve to live?

 

Your comparing consuming fast food to getting life-saving treatment?

 

I am glad you are not in charge of any policy making in this country. 

[FloridaMinsk 88]

5 hours ago, verneforchat said:

False. Not everyone has access to healthcare. And among healthcare there are tiers. Not all specialized treatment or diagnostics are available in rural areas.

Quality of care should not be determined upon your income status. Or the rich continue to keep living and the poor will die off. 

 

It is like saying, if you dont have money, you don't deserve to live?

 

Your comparing consuming fast food to getting life-saving treatment?

 

I am glad you are not in charge of any policy making in this country. 

 

Healthcafe is a commodity.   Not a right.   

And the quality should most certainly be determined by how much you are willing to pay.  

 

 

And I hate to break this to you but we already have people on fast food healthcare..... it's called Medicaid.    

[Transborderwife 4,666]

7 hours ago, FloridaMinsk said:

 

Everyone has access to healthcare.   It just comes down to how much they are willing to pay.    You pay for the level of quality you desire.   The exact same thing we do when we choose a restaurant.    Some prefer fine dining, some prefer fast food.   Then some like to go to Applebee's.     The result is everyone has access to a restaurant they can afford.   No reason why healthcare can't be the same.   

 

 

That differs from your original statement.  I have no problem with tiered healthcare but it needs to be affordable so that everyone can access it.  To me that's a right saying that everyone should have access 

[Transborderwife 4,666]

1 hour ago, FloridaMinsk said:

 

Healthcafe is a commodity.   Not a right.   

And the quality should most certainly be determined by how much you are willing to pay.  

 

 

And I hate to break this to you but we already have people on fast food healthcare..... it's called Medicaid.    

Really?  When my daughter had to have special attention on Medicad in the hospital she got the exact same level of care as other babies in the nicu

[Transborderwife 4,666]

7 hours ago, verneforchat said:

False. Not everyone has access to healthcare. And among healthcare there are tiers. Not all specialized treatment or diagnostics are available in rural areas.

Quality of care should not be determined upon your income status. Or the rich continue to keep living and the poor will die off. 

 

It is like saying, if you dont have money, you don't deserve to live?

 

Your comparing consuming fast food to getting life-saving treatment?

 

I am glad you are not in charge of any policy making in this country. 

Indeed.  My sister was 30 when she had potentially terminal brain cancer.  Had she been in the USA with this attitude or would have been "oh well time to prepRe her children for her imminent death"