1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Health Care and Public Education....Rights?

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by Ronaldus Magnus, Apr 22, 2009.

  1. Ronaldus Magnus

    Ronaldus Magnus New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    NC
    The question is as simple as the title of the thread. Do you think that health care (insurance) and Public Education are rights? If so Why? If you don't think so Why Not? I don't see where either are located in the constitution. Although the state of NC has amended it's constitution to say that Public education is a state right.
     
  2. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,924
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    Health care and public education are not rights as such.

    Is it more efficient to provide public education to all, or would it be more efficient to have many different private institutions offering to educate children for profit? Should the government step in to pay for children whose parents can't pay? If not, should poor children simply be allowed to grow up on the streets?

    Is it more efficient to provide one entity that pays for health care for all, or is it more efficient to have health care tied to employment?

    Does having health care tied to employment make it easier, or more difficult to start a small business?

    If universal health care is a less efficient system, why does every nation that has adopted it pay less than the US for health care?

    Humankind got along for centuries without public education and universal health care. The question is, are we willing to go back to those good old days?
     
  3. Ronaldus Magnus

    Ronaldus Magnus New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    NC
    I agree that their is a place for both public and private schools. I would be in favor of those that don't have children not paying taxes for public schools. I also support the idea for school vouchers for private and charter schools. Of course nobody is suggesting that children should be left to grow up on the streets. However, Not attending a public school doesn't equate with being homeless or without parents. Having attended a private school I often compared my education to my friends in the public school system, and found myself always ahead of them. I would say that my private christian school education was better than their public education. I do think however of what my parents would have been able to do with their extra money if they had of received a tax rebate for not having myself or my brother in public school. They paid for someone else to be educated as well as paying for me and my brother to go to private school. We were not rich by any means, but my parents worked hard and through payment plans made it work.

    As far as health care goes I wouldn't say that it would make it harder to start a business, but definitely it puts a strain on attempting to expand the business. As far as every nation that has adopted Nationalized Health Care, spending less money on it I can completely understand that, as well as why that is possible. You see if you don't pay the doctors, if you refuse to give medical services to people like the elderly, if you pick and choose who gets service, and if you make certain medical conditions exempt from medical attention you would naturally spend less money. The flip side to that is why we have people crossing the Canadian border, coming from the UK, and doctors coming here to practice from other countries. People come because they want to be healed, they want to be treated, and doctors come because they want to be paid for the services that they provide. I'm not saying that they don't receive any payment, but nothing close to what the treatment cost.
     
  4. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,924
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    Sure, there is a place for public and private schools, and yes, parents should be given the right to choose, whether it is via expanding charter schools, or vouchers, or some combination of both, or some other means. The current system of every child in a particular area having to attend the designated school is totally contrary to free choice that we all say we hold dear.

    And yes, a tax credit for anyone who sends their kids to a private school is totally justified.

    The point is, even though education is not a right, providing access to education for everyone is a good public policy, don't you agree?

    If health care were not tied to employment, as it is now, then it would be a lot easier to ditch the corporate world and establish a small business, because the individual wouldn't have to take the chance of bankruptcy due to an accident or illness. He/she wouldn't have to pay an exorbitant fee for inadequate insurance.

    Do you have some actual evidence that Canadians and Brits "refuse to give medical services to people like the elderly"?

    What medical conditions do they exempt from medical attention to save money?

    Why is it we don't hear from Canadians and Brits on this forum saying that they wish they could opt for an American style health care system?
     
  5. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    My health care isn't through my job. So how can you claim it's tied together when there's millions like me with private health care coverage?
     
  6. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,924
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    Because most people's health care is tied to their job, and because there are millions who can't get health insurance at any cost, at least not insurance that will cover pre existing conditions.

    That's what Obama's proposal was that he outlined in the debates with McCain. It wasn't a "socialized" system in which the government runs health care. It was a proposal to allow people to buy into a government sponsored group insurance plan.
     
  7. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I already covered this. Pre existing condition clauses do not prevent people from getting health insurance. That's a myth.

    You are ruining the libertarian party for me. If this is what they say, then I can't vote for them either.

    Think through what you just said there. Show me examples of successful 'government sponsored' anything? Start with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

    First, the company was a revolving door for democrats. Second, it was politically motivated corporate policies, such as sub-prime loans. Third, they cooked the books and were never prosecuted for it. Fourth, they arguably helped cause a national recession.

    This is what you want to see in the health industry? Medicare is a "government sponsored" health insurance system too. It's loaded with fraud, and the weak payments are part of what is pushing up costs on the rest of us. Not to mention we all have to pay taxes to support the system.
     
  8. Ronaldus Magnus

    Ronaldus Magnus New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    NC
    Here's an example......of Canadians coming to get help.



    http://www.city-journal.org/html/17_3_canadian_healthcare.html
     
  9. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,924
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    Pre existing conditions don't keep people from getting health insurance, just from getting insurance that covers the pre existing condition. It is insurance, after all, and isn't going to cover something that has already happened. That would be a lot like buying car insurance to cover an accident that has already happened.

    Well, that's not what the Libertarians say, of course. When the conflict is between ideology and pragmatism, I'll go with pragmatism. As it is now, health care costs are ruining the country just as surely as the growth of government spending is ruining the country. Something has to be done, and the cost here is still a lot higher than it is anywhere else.


    That is a little scary, I'll admit. What, though, is the alternative? Our choices are somewhat limited. We can keep what we have for a time, as long as we can afford it. We can go totally to socialized medicine, which I think you'd agree would be a lot worse. We can go with a government subsidized insurance, a kind of government regulated monopoly, with the government's role simply allowing or disallowing cost increases. Maybe there is another alternative.

    California had such a system in place for electrical power. Pacific Gas and Electric had the northern part of the state, while Southern California Edison had the south. The state government set prices. It was a perfect marriage between government and private industry, with the industry running things and the government keeping the monopoly from charging what the traffic would bear. Then, Governor Pete Wilson decided that we needed competition in the industry. Ideologically, he was right, but pragmatically, he was dead wrong. The result was Enron, soaring prices, and an eventual return to the state regulated monopoly model once again.

    There is no perfect solution to any such problem, but a purely ideological solution is likely to fail, regardless of the ideology.

    Posted by Ronaldus Magnus:

    There are examples of failures in every health care system in the world, including ours.
     
  10. Ronaldus Magnus

    Ronaldus Magnus New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    NC
    Granted there have been problems in all systems. I do challenge you to find a system that is as reliable as ours, or as efficient as ours. For people to think that this is a right as an American citizen is ridiculous. 44% of the uninsured are uninsured by choice not because they can't get it.

    http://john-goodman-blog.com/files/hlthaff.26.1.w22v1UninsuredandAffordability.pdf
     
  11. Pandora

    Pandora Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    11,790
    Likes Received:
    257
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The people's republic of Eugene
    No

    They are not rights

    We have the right to Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness

    And a few certain constitutional rights too

    Freedom of religion, speech, assembly and the press

    So on and you know the rest :)
     
  12. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,924
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    Most of the uninsured are so by choice, that's so. They're mostly young and healthy, and haven't thought of the implications of some deadbeat crossing the double yellow and putting them in intensive care and rehab for a half million. The young tend to think themselves invulnerable, after all, and that leaves the rest of us paying for that half million in one way or another.

    Some of the uninsured are so because of job losses. Lose your job, lose your insurance, lose your health care, and lose your income to the point you can't afford to buy private insurance.

    As for systems as efficient as ours, practically all of them are more efficient. Health care costs have been going up much faster than the rate of inflation, partly because of new technology to be sure, but also partly because of the army of specialists whose job is to know how to collect from the various insurance companies. The uninsured, who tend to wait until there is a serious problem then go to the emergency, contribute to the problem as well.

    The bottom line is that we're the only advanced nation on Earth that doesn't have universal health care, and we pay significantly more than anyone else.

    Health care, like government, simply is too costly.
     
  13. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    That's not entirely true either. Let's say I have Diabetes, or some other incurable, but treatable illness.

    First, the pre-existing condition clause generally only applies if you had NO health insurance prior. For example in my policy, as long as I had health insurance to the date my coverage began, then I am exempt.

    Second, generally all pre-existing condition clauses, are on a time frame. Meaning that if I had no insurance, then applied for the plan I have, my diabetes would not be covered for 3 months. After that, I would be covered in full, like any other claim.

    The purpose of the pre-existing condition clause is to prevent someone from braking a leg, applying for insurance, sending in one months check, getting $2000 worth of treatment at the hospital, and then canceling the policy the next day.

    But the idea that if you have a pre-existing condition, means you can never get insurance for it, is simply not true. First always have minimum insurance of some sort, and you will never have that problem. You can switch insurance companies 10 times, and provided you have continuous coverage, you'll never have that problem. Second, just buy an insurance policy, wait out the clause time frame, and you are fine.

    We've covered that too. The service here is better than anywhere else. I don't see people flying from the US to go to Canada. Nor do I see people pulling their own teeth. Nor do I see people flying to India, like they do from the UK. Nor do I see people ordering drugs from over seas because they are not offered here, like in France.

    We have the highest quality system, and it requires more money than the long-waits and lack of service seen in cheaper systems.

    First, remove medicare. Second, remove the government controls on insurance. Third, eliminate the tax incentives for corporate health care policies. Instead cut capital gains tax. Finely, and this is the harshest one... eliminate the requirement to service non-paying customers.

    All of these drive up health care cost. Removing all of them would lower health care costs.

    Where do you get this from? I can find nothing supporting this idea thus far. (I'm out of time for now). As best I can tell, the industry was regulated, but prices were set by the companies. In fact, the reasoning for the deregulation, was to try and lower rising costs. Of course their "deregulation" forced (which is antithetical to 'deregulation') the utilities to sell off their power generation plants, which automagically raised costs of power production.

    I'm not really seeing what you are claiming. In fact, prices for electricity are jumping across California, and the government is going broke paying the difference in customer cost and electrical generation cost. That's why Arnold is being forced to raise taxes even when he claimed he wouldn't.

    I would cite Capitalist hospitals in India that get customers from all over the world, looking for cheaper, better, faster, high quality care, as being a purely ideological solution. They do not have oppressive government controls, nor do they have to subsidize a government funded health system, nor are they mandated to service non-paying customers. The result is they provide world class service for a fraction of the cost.

    Failures in ours are generally because people fail to purchase good insurance, or a bad doctor slips through the net. When thousands are fleeing a "Free" system to escape to a country where they can PAY for service... that's a systemic problem.
     
  14. chestnut

    chestnut New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    Messages:
    1,222
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Neither are rights.
     
  15. Ronaldus Magnus

    Ronaldus Magnus New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    NC
    We pay more for better health care. How can this truly be argued? I don't see any 1-3 year waiting lists to see a doctor in this country. I don't see senior citizens waiting for 5 days to see if they can possibly get admitted to the hospital. I see the latest and greatest medicines and procedures available in our country. That is simply not the case in Europe. Again, I ask why do so many people come here to get health care, and we don't see Americans flocking to Canada or Europe for the same.

    Yes, Insurance companies are there for a profit, and they count on signing up thousands of healthy people for every ten sick people, to pay for it. Many have been extremely successful and made profits. The reason why many insurance companies are so expensive, and the reason why health care is so expensive stems from things like: insurance fraud, ambulance chasing lawyers, and illegal immigrants. The number of people that put off going to the doctor and end up in the E.R. is small in comparison to the number of illegal immigrants that flood the E.R.s with everything from the common cold, alcohol poisoning, and pregnancies (especially in the south and border states.) They receive medical attention as does everyone else in the E.R., but the difference is they don't pay for their medical services. This ends up bankrupting E.R.s all over the country, and causes the cost for health services to go through the roof for you and I.

    Remember a couple weeks ago we had discussion about the hospital in Nevada that was closing down certain services, due to a lack of money. You might be interested to know that Nevada leads the nation in percentage of illegals in the work force, they are in the top 10 for total number of illegal immigrants, and guess what they are uninsured. They aren't however without a job but still they don't pay for health services. Many Americans treat it this way as well, they think that the E.R. is free health care and never intend to pay for services received. That is when people like me walk through the door, and get saddled with an unfair bill. Never the less many like myself pay some up front, and set the rest up on a payment plan. I've been to the emergency room several times, and that is the way I have handled it each of those times. Why? Because right now my wife and I don't have health insurance, by choice! Hospitals can't collect because they move from one rental house to the next, they give fraudulent SSN's so you cant report it on their credit, and in many states you aren't allowed to report unpaid medical services on someones credit. Hospitals then hire outside collection agencies to try and get some of their money, but let's face it they probably barely break even on that expense. This leaves who to pay for it? People like us with and without health insurance.

    One last example:
    My wife works with elderly, every week a podiatrist comes in to clip the toe nails of those that have diabetes and other health problems. (they can't get a normal pedicure because of these issues.) This jackass charges $150 to $250 a foot to clip their toe nails and wash their feet. My wife who does their hair, manicures, and pedicures for a very affordable price in comparison to the real world, asked him why it was so expensive? He looked at her told her not to worry about it that medicare was paying for it, and that they didn't have too. We are talking about $300 to $500 for clipping toe nails, and washing feet. Here is a classic example of where the government is out of touch with reality. This isn't some fly by night podiatrist this person has been serving this facility and many others for years now.

    http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2009/apr/14/percentage-illegal-immigrants-highest-nevada/

    http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/_ibd-canadian_doctor_describes_how.htm

    This one is the best....it contains many, many articles on the flaws, and lack of money that is social medicine. This straight from the mouths in many cases of the people that it has happened to.

    http://www.angelfire.com/pa/sergeman/issues/healthcare/socialized.html
     
Loading...

Share This Page