Clinton to Offer Health Care Plan (Cost: $110 billion/year)

[Ban Hammer 13,361]

In this country we are forced to put up with a lot of #######. Forced to put up with guns, put up with do-nothing civil servants, restaraunts you can't understand the waiter in. Ya know, being forced to go to the doctor aint that bad of an idea. Heck, I should go more often.

yeah, my neighbors feel the same way

[trailmix 77]

If we let the government mandate our health care then we will end up with no choices at all. Case in point, see what Edwards wants to do. I realize that his chances are next to nil but it shows just how these people including Clinton, think.

If John Edwards is elected president, Americans will have no choice but go to the doctor when told.

Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards said on Sunday that his universal health care proposal would require that Americans go to the doctor for preventive care.

“It requires that everybody be covered. It requires that everybody get preventive care,” he told a crowd sitting in lawn chairs in front of the Cedar County Courthouse. “If you are going to be in the system, you can’t choose not to go to the doctor for 20 years. You have to go in and be checked and make sure that you are OK.”

He noted, for example, that women would be required to have regular mammograms in an effort to find and treat “the first trace of problem.” Edwards and his wife, Elizabeth, announced earlier this year that her breast cancer had returned and spread.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/...medical_choice/

Carefully read that. He is saying that you MUST go to the doctor. Whats next? Fines, jail, forced doctor visits or exclusion from the system if you don't go when ordered?

Sometimes, when I read this stuff in off-topic, I am truly astounded. I have to agree with Gary on this 100%.

Whatever happened to life, liberty etc etc??

[Fandango 1,439]

It's the self serving ####### that really chaps my hide. JE's wife has breast cancer, now they wanna prevent the world from it. Sheesh.

Totally agreed with Gary & TM. And yeah, preventitive health care is a great idea and ppl SHOULD do it, but we shouldn't be forced to.

[GaryC 7]

Why does everyone assume it must be about 'punishment' (given that it's Hillary we're talking about that's probably a rhetorical question)? Surely this sort of thing could be achieved merely by giving people positive incentives to take their health more seriously - premium reductions if you get a checkup twice a year or some such.

That may be the way it's suppose to be. But Edwards clearly states that he wants it to be MANDATORY. It would be inevitable. When the government starts getting involved with our health care they will be calling the shots. Then you will eventually get a "progressive" administration in there that thinks they know better than you what is good for the people. It's a very slippery slope. And one I don't think is to far fetched.

I can't see mandatory health checkups passing the House & Senate, let alone the Supreme Court. That doesn't mean the basic idea itself is a bad one, just that the folks in charge of it aren't the best.

As with anything else that the government gets it's hands on this will be no different. Once it gains control over an aspect of our lives it will seek to expand that control. They will rationalize it as for our own good but little by little we will be forced to exceed to their wishes. If you want you can draw a parallel with the war on terror. The government has taken some of our civil liberties away for our own good. You don't like that and speak out against it. This is no different in essence. Loss of choice is loss of liberty.

[Widge 0]

I find it very hard to follow some of what I find the "high ground" Logic applied throughout all arguements not to provide universal health care here. I suspect that many of those who argue most vehemently against it are in the very fortunate position of being very adequately covered by personal insurance or work related benefits.

I come from the UK health system and whatever anyone may say I personally through 47 years of experience never had a single complaint, I paid my taxes when working and from the cradle to the grave knew I was covered and wouldn't be questioned about my coverage or given a bill when circumstances dictated I needed to use the health service and if the situation was life threatening I never met a waiting list.

I am appalled that a country that ranks so poorly in league tables of life expectancy, health coverage and infant mortality can so easily scoff at systems like the UK's (I am amused when Rush Limbaugh can say socialist - which the UK's sysem isn't - and make it sound like communist!)

Some things I have witnessed since I have lived here:

- health care seems to be based on the insurance policy you carry if they'll pay for the tests they will run them regardless of necessity or benefit

- I have seen people lose their homes due to medical bills - unpalatable to me in a civilised society

- not qualifying for Medicaid due to low income doesn't mean you can afford the high premiums of an insurance policy and co-pays

- I have known someone die of cancer of the breast because she felt she couldn't afford to seek treatment by the time she did it was too late to be treatable

- in my job I have seen elderly people make the choice on whether to buy prescriptions or food !!!!!!!!

I personally believe that you judge a society by the way it treats those least able to help themselves ...............

By providing basic health care for all you automatically create a healthier society, and you can still allow those who can afford it the ability to buy fast executive care (BUPA) and by taking the management and funding off individual employers to provide and set a standard tax rate per employee for both employer and employee you create a level playing field for all businesses. I ead somewhere that the % of health care costs that goes on administration is astronomical compared to other systems (try a Google search) around the world.

Do I think it will ever change here .... no ..... there are too many vested interests (doctors, insurance companies etc) all with their finger in the pot and funding political candidates for there ever to be a decent system that is humane to all its societies members not just those lucky enough to be in a position to look after themselves.

[trailmix 77]

I absolutely support universal health care. What I wonder though (I mean truly) is that opponents of it fear that the government will then somehow take control of their lives and they will forever have sub-standard health care. In Canada we don't actually fear the Government - well I mean it's not a general concensus anyway. If they don't treat us the way we want to be treated - we get rid of them.

That is where I disagree with you Gary, I don't see the Government as being 'them' and 'us'. They are our representatives - we voted them in, we can vote them out.

And Lisa you really hit the nail on the head!

It's the self serving ####### that really chaps my hide.

Edited September 18, 2007 by trailmix

[russ 1]

Do I think it will ever change here .... no ..... there are too many vested interests (doctors, insurance companies etc) all with their finger in the pot and funding political candidates for there ever to be a decent system

I blame the hospitals more than the doctors. If you ask many doctors why they stop practicing medicine, a common answer is that they got tired of paying people to treat them (you read that correctly). It is becoming common for hospitals to charge more for nursing than a surgeon will charge you.

We in the US already have socialized health care. The problem is that it only covers certain people. (older voters). Providing basic and emergency care to everyone would cost nothing - young people are already healthy. The way to do it is cut benefits for seniors slowly over 10 years, and expand medicare coverate starting with 1 year olds and moving up. By the time coverage is phased in for everyone, new retiries will have had enough chance to buy supplemental coverage for the benefits they lose.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Why does everyone assume it must be about 'punishment' (given that it's Hillary we're talking about that's probably a rhetorical question)? Surely this sort of thing could be achieved merely by giving people positive incentives to take their health more seriously - premium reductions if you get a checkup twice a year or some such.

That may be the way it's suppose to be. But Edwards clearly states that he wants it to be MANDATORY. It would be inevitable. When the government starts getting involved with our health care they will be calling the shots. Then you will eventually get a "progressive" administration in there that thinks they know better than you what is good for the people. It's a very slippery slope. And one I don't think is to far fetched.

I can't see mandatory health checkups passing the House & Senate, let alone the Supreme Court. That doesn't mean the basic idea itself is a bad one, just that the folks in charge of it aren't the best.

As with anything else that the government gets it's hands on this will be no different. Once it gains control over an aspect of our lives it will seek to expand that control. They will rationalize it as for our own good but little by little we will be forced to exceed to their wishes. If you want you can draw a parallel with the war on terror. The government has taken some of our civil liberties away for our own good. You don't like that and speak out against it. This is no different in essence. Loss of choice is loss of liberty.

I think there is a call for at the least reforming the current healthcare system – doing away with the insurance system seems very unlikely given the history and that there is a whole industry which has been built up to serve a particular need. As far as ‘socialising’ healthcare goes – I don’t think that’s really on the cards, but I do agree that as far as ensuring a better standard of life (and lets face it – the US does rank rather low for a developed country when it comes to thinks like infant mortality, life expectancy etc.) its important that everyone have access to some sort of affordable healthcare.

I don’t you should or can ‘force’ people to see a doctor – but there’s no denying that health checkups are a good way of heading off potential problems (like high blood pressure) that may develop into more serious and all-round expensive problems later on. Its not something that needs to be imposed on people IMO – but providing incentives for people to do it, like reductions in medical premiums for example, doesn’t sound unreasonable.

All this of course depends very much on what bill is put on the table – as we’re not really at that stage yet – I think you’re assuming the worst case (though probably justified considering the people involved) its hard to do more than speculate.

Even so we shouldn't suggest that the choice we have at the moment is really a 'liberty'. In my current job I have the choice to choose two 'different' (and frankly confusing) health plans which I don’t feel I’m in much of a position to objectively evaluate. Choices are naturally limited by your circumstances anyway.