Why is health care a right ?

[lottie244]

I'll tell you why. Because of the billions and billions of tax dollars, yours and mine, that fill the coffers of the medical univesities and colleges throughout this country and the world. We actually subsidize medical degrees in this country, produce zillionaire doctors and still can't get decent healthcare and still have to put up with doctors bilking the healthcare systems and defrauding insurance companies and the government. Now, it's a complex system, but you need to learn about the National Institutes of Health, how much money flow to them, how it is used, where it goes, and how many enrich themselves at the public trough. Sure medical schools cost a lot but the find out how they are subsidized and how a lot of loans are forgiven and how struggling med students from low income families get screwed by the system.

Find out about the upper echelon and how they are taught first about financial planning and insurance schemes and lastly about bedside manners. That's why health care should be a right...you pay for it in more ways than one...and no one will tell you.

[Snow]

1. Uninformed bullshit n/t

[Fleshdancer]

2. why bother responding at all if you don't elaborate on why it's

uninformed bullshit?

[Mikimouse]

3. Care to expand on that?

Just curious where that came from?

[gratuitous]

5. Whoops, need a little more than "n/t"

Are you saying that medical schools don't receive government money? Or that the students going through those schools don't receive government-guaranteed loans and never default on them?

Or are you saying that just because someone's education and lucrative career were begun with your tax dollars and mine they have no continuing obligation to serve the public?

[Snow]

16. ~sigh~ Very well....

"billions and billions of tax dollars, yours and mine, that fill the coffers of the medical univesities and colleges throughout this country and the world"

I've worked at such places most of my life, and the coffers are often far from filled.


"We actually subsidize medical degrees in this country"

Especially those of us with children in medical school

"zillionaire doctors"

Total nonsense. Do you have any idea what the typical primary care doc or ER doc makes?


"still can't get decent healthcare"
And that's got what to do with your previous statements? I would argue nothing!

"doctors bilking the healthcare systems and defrauding insurance companies and the government"
Now that's beyond uninformed bullshit.

"You need to learn about the National Institutes of Health, how much money flow to them, how it is used, where it goes, and how many enrich themselves at the public trough."
Indeed. An activity I would advise the poster to engage in, while avoiding pejoratives such as 'public trough'. The NIH has problems in some, not all areas, but that doesn't make them swine.

"how they are subsidized"
Mostly by state taxes

"how a lot of loans are forgiven"
In Nebraska, for example, your loans can be forgiven if you take a position practicing primary care in an underserved area in rural Nebraska.

"how struggling med students from low income families get screwed by the system."
And how is that? I saw many who have made it through quite successfully. No arguing it's a struggle, but people do make it through, and poor kids can get quite a bit of help.

"Find out about the upper echelon"
More pejoratives

"they are taught first about financial planning and insurance schemes and lastly about bedside manners."
Absolutely bullshit! I teach physicians, residents and fellows - there's like 5 hours of financial stuff in year 4 - bedside manner, working with patients starts in the first 2 weeks.

Now, if you'd like to be actually informed on this instead of doc-bashing because you think they're raking in the dough, take a look at these:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=950721

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=967210

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=985261

And then come back & we'll talk.

[gratuitous]

29. Who was "doc-bashing"? I just asked a couple of questions

I apologize if I didn't discern all of your subsequent post from your initial "n/t" offering, and further that I put you so far out that it required your heavy sigh before avoiding my questions.

[Mikimouse]

35. Some interesting non-answers...

"billions and billions of tax dollars, yours and mine, that fill the coffers of the medical universities and colleges throughout this country and the world"

<I've worked at such places most of my life, and the coffers are often far from filled.>
**So have I, and the profits are often hidden, or distributed in the form of perquisites to make sure that the books are clear**

"We actually subsidize medical degrees in this country"

<Especially those of us with children in medical school>
**That's an answer?** Oh, and by the way, there are also issues of social capital involved that transcend actual monetary subsidies**

"zillionaire doctors"

<Total nonsense. Do you have any idea what the typical primary care doc or ER doc makes?>
**On salary, or including the kickbacks from referral fees? Those can especially nice if one can do the referral to another member of the partnership. Also, let's please differentiate salary from the other perquisites that many physicians don't have to pay for, especially in the hospital environment, as well as the differentiation of ER physicians from Trauma Care Specialists, who do make a great deal more.**


"still can't get decent healthcare"
<And that's got what to do with your previous statements? I would argue nothing!>
**not an answer, as far as I am concerned**

"doctors bilking the healthcare systems and defrauding insurance companies and the government"
<Now that's beyond uninformed bullshit.>
**I would be willing to bet that when the same type of statement was made about people on welfare, you probably supported the 'Welfare Queen' image and fought to reform the system. It is a fact that most of the people who were and are still on welfare need to be there, being either too young, too old, or disabled. So, if we take the same types of statistics that were used to indict the entire group of welfare recipients, then it logically follows that those physicians who are caught every year cheating Medicare and Medicaid, or insurance of other types probably represent the entire group of physicians in this system, no? Thus, the argument presented by the original poster is germane.**

"You need to learn about the National Institutes of Health, how much money flow to them, how it is used, where it goes, and how many enrich themselves at the public trough."
<Indeed. An activity I would advise the poster to engage in, while avoiding pejoratives such as 'public trough'. The NIH has problems in some, not all areas, but that doesn't make them swine.>
**The poster never said they were swine. NIH and the FDA have also recently been in the spotlight for being in bed with the pharmaceutical companies, something that I have seen first hand. The manipulation of data in many of the publications in nationally recognized journals is astounding and slanted to provide the results that the pharmaceutical companies want, and that is not without reward for the P.I., and you know it, I suspect.> The original poster is vindicated in this. I would suggest that you take a look at the evolution of breast cancer treatment in the US. There was strong evidence presented in 1960, that the Radical Mastectomy was not necessary, but because the 8000 patient study came from a woman (gasp!), and a Canadian to boot (gasp again!), it was dismissed out of hand (see Dr. Vera Peters-Canadian Radiologist). Changes only occurred in the routine treatment (even though there were multiple replications of Peters' work, first by the English, French and Danish, and later by the Italians) after the TAXPAYER funded research was done in the US, by no fewer than seven teams of researchers, all of who did a great job of reinventing the wheel, but only after the expenditure of many millions of dollars of TAXPAYER money.**

"how they are subsidized"
<Mostly by state taxes>
**They are still subsidized, and where do those state taxes come from?**

"how a lot of loans are forgiven"
<In Nebraska, for example, your loans can be forgiven if you take a position practicing primary care in an underserved area in rural Nebraska.>
**I would say that it is a pretty good deal, getting one's loans forgiven. I sure am glad to know that other professions can also benefit from those types of programs (NOT!). So, we could assume that the entire loan amount could be added to the new graduate's first year salary, and that taxes would be paid on it?**

"how struggling med students from low income families get screwed by the system."
<And how is that? I saw many who have made it through quite successfully. No arguing it's a struggle, but people do make it through, and poor kids can get quite a bit of help.>

**That is, if they get into the schools in the first place. The fraternity is somewhat exclusive**

"Find out about the upper echelon"
<More pejoratives>
** non-answer**

"they are taught first about financial planning and insurance schemes and lastly about bedside manners."
<Absolutely bullshit! I teach physicians, residents and fellows - there's like 5 hours of financial stuff in year 4 - bedside manner, working with patients starts in the first 2 weeks.>
**If this is absolute bullshit, as you so eloquently put it, then please explain why many medical schools are offering, and indeed advocating an additional MBA which is embedded in the med. school curriculum? I remember, with some disgust, when the University hospital affiliated with Texas Tech. proudly unveiled this new program. Also, please provide a definition of bedside manner, because what I consider bedside manner and what you might define as such, are probably two different species. The physicians I have worked with over the years have few if any people skills and have not really been too keen on acquiring any.**

<Now, if you'd like to be actually informed on this instead of doc-bashing because you think they're raking in the dough, take a look at these:>
**Condescension isn't the order of the day. Simply based on your credentials, which another poster was kind enough to post, I would say that defending your position is a necessity. I would however, caution you about the tone you use with others whom you perceive to be 'less informed' than are you. Listen to the arguments, you may be surprised at how informed people around here actually are.**

[Snow]

69. Did either of you look at the threads I refered to?

Those are a considered, well-researched, thoroughly discussed and well-balanced discussion of these problems. This is what DU does well, and Silverhead's three threads are a top-notch example of that.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

8. And how do we know that you're "informed"?

[depakid]

12. He's a respected epidemiologist

FYI.

[Ripley]

18. Doesn't give him the right to trash someone's legitimate critique.

I don't think anyone is saying ALL doctors or medical professionals are bad, greedy monsters in on a scam. But you'd have to be really dense to not believe the AMA and FDA are running a pretty big Corporate welfare racket on our government, tax dollars and media.

Guess what the number one cause of death in America is today? Not heart disease, but DOCTOR/HOSPITAL MISTAKES kill more Americans each year. Ever hear that on cable?

[Mikimouse]

19. Your Point?

I am not impressed by the words, and if the extent of the argument is that the original post is simply 'uninformed bullshit', then I might argue that it is a hollow statement. I worked in healthcare for 25 years, am published, and will defend to the death the anti-Social Darwinistic perspective on health care. My grandfather was also a physician, and given the choice of staying behind the Iron curtain or having a very good paying job in California in 1964, he opted to stay in Hungary, stating as his reason "You are not physicians here, you are businessmen, I am going back to my patients." He is remembered as one of the best loved physicians of the nation, having treated patients FREE (gasp!) throughout his career when they couldn't afford to pay him.

[depakid]

21. Just that he's informed

If he wants to elaborate, he'll say so himself.

[Snow]

22. I did - look up at post 16 n/t

[Mikimouse]

36. Bring it..

n/t

[Swamp Rat]

24. Mikimouse, I like your perspective. I'll bet you have excellent bedside

manners as well. I've met both great doctors and Social Darwinists like Senator Frist. The latter group worries me every time I get sick, especially since I lost my health insurance and employment 3 years ago.

[Mikimouse]

37. I am my grandfather's grandson...

too bad dear old Dad never appreciated that fact. He never could understand why I shunned the idea of med. school to work more closely with my patients. Thank you for the very kind words, they are more than appreciated. I loved my patients and in my subsequent career have devoted myself to studying the interface between the system and the people.:hi:

[cosmicvortex20]

27. I agree...there is no right to others labor for any reason.

Last I checked, involuntary servitude was called slavery.

[Deja Q]

41. I know you're speaking about your own post...

Unless you care to elaborate and defend your position, which isn't a position at all if you start to think about it - it's a baseless attack.

[wuushew]

4. Article I Section VIII?

it seems to me healthcare is a natural extension of the general welfare clause.

[CaTeacher]

7. I believe in health care for all--

but I think that if we call it a "right" some people reflexively get upset.

How else can we say it? An idea: I believe it is a responsibility of every civilized society to ensure that all citizens have adequate health care.

Something along those lines.

[phantom power]

6. It's a right, if and only if we choose to make it one

Sometimes, people talk about "rights", as if they were laws of physics. Every "right" we possess exists by agreement.

The reason that many people don't have healthcare in this country is that, as a country, we have *not* made a committment to implement that as a "right".

In Canada and Brittain, for example, there is an actual, functional *right* to healthcare, because those countries have chosen to build it into their government.

Here in America, we haven't done that, and so healthcare is not a "right".

[Jackpine Radical]

10. Rank sophistry.

The argument is obviously about whether our society should consider healthcare to be a right. Do you believe you have a right to breathe? Breathing is nothing but a privilege that the rest of us have (for some inewxplicable reason) extended to you.

[phantom power]

17. Well, you're right:

I'm alive because we've all agreed (mostly) to not indiscriminately kill each other.

I don't get your hostility. I'm in favor of making health care a right, I'm just pointing out that calling something a "right" is an empty statement, unless people agree to do things like organize a system to give that right meaning, expend resources on it, etc.

Do you disagree, or do you think that calling it a "right" makes it real, just by saying it?

[Jackpine Radical]

20. Sorry--that was just a cheap shot,

not real hostility. (I have a weakness for cheap shots). I did think that raising the issue of the definition of "right" was something of a distraction in this context, though, since we were implicitly discussing whether health care should be a right.

And let me now add, after reading Ribofunk (#15 below) that your discussion of rights here probably has more merit than I realized when I made the post.

[info being]

9. It's in the category of "We hold these truths to be self-evident."

Some things don't need a rational argument. It's right because it's right. To not save a life when you have the ability to is murder.

[Mikimouse]

13. But, but, but....If we actually have to start adhering to...

the Hippocratic Oath, we won't be able to afford all of the luxuries that we are currently entitled to, by virtue of the length of time we spend in Med. School, and how hard we work to get there! THAT'S NOT FAIR! (sarcasm off).

[KT2000]

11. Let's not forget

that tax dollars flow into private corporations as well.

There are other reasons that health care should be a right and that is the fact that corporations are getting away with murder when it comes to environmentally caused illnesses. A town polluted with cancer causing emissions is rarely held liable for the medical bills they create. Corporations do not pick up the bill when the uninsured need medical care. When it comes to the health of children they have strong lobbies that fight against stricter laws to protect children's health.

Cancer rates continue to increase for children; more are being diagnosed with brain damage, i.e. autism, learning disabilities and birth defects.

Corporations fight environmental laws, which are in fact our public health laws, and are never held accountable. To throw people afflicted on the trash heap of the uninsured is what they are getting away with now.

[SemperEadem]

58. and that's the repuke's plattform

the right to life doesn't apply to those of us not swimming in amniotic fluid.

[Jackpine Radical]

14. And don't forget that we fheavily subsidize drug research

and then release the results to profit-making companies.

[On the Road]

15. Personally, I Think It's a Mistake to Call Health Care a Right

I would rather say that a government has an obligation to the welfare of its citizens, including their health. There's a big difference.

The government props up the current system in many ways and allows money to be unfairly distributed. One way is by subsidizing research with public money and allowing pharma companies to make monopoly profits on the resulting drugs. Part of it is subsidizing education for MD students who will make upper-class money. Part of it is allowing the AMA to limit the number of doctors to keep wages high and to professionalize functions that do not need to be performed by doctors.

There are reasons for all of these, but the effects are undeniable.

[eridani]

70. I'd say health care is infrastructure, myself

You should have the right to it for the same reason the fire department will put out fires in houses worth $100,000 just as readily as they put out fires in million dollar houses. You don't get a choice about paying taxes to cover the service--everyone pays even though few will ever have any property of theirs catch fire.

You decide on what should be paid for by the public the way you solve problems of transportation, namely by getting together, studying and arguing about it. Light rail or more diamond lanes? Kidney transplants? Chiropractic? Hash it out in public.

I don't think doctors are the problem. Private insurance is the problem, because they make money by eliminating actual sick people from their risk pools. It's like having a fire department which agrees to put our fires except in those census tracts which they have determined are more likely to have fires.

[MichaelHarris]

23. I'll address a few of the issues here

since I know them well. First its a fallacy to suggest that med students can default on their loans. The reasons being in any state they work their salaries will be garnished to recover federal loans. Secondly, if they do not pay back the state loans their records are held by the medical school therefore making it impossible to change jobs, get board certification, and state board certification. They are under more pressure than any other person with higher education to repay the loans. There is zero change of defaulting on a medical school loan. Plain and simple.

Secondly, NIH. NIH does sponsored research, paid for by taxpayers. Very few doctors are employed to do that research. Its mostly Ph D's and lab technicians. Md's come into play during the human testing phase. At that time alot of the cost is picked up by the drug company itself. NIH has very little to do with medical school. What little it does is sponser a few medical students, in the MD/PhD programs at some medical schools with grant money for their research. Thats it.

On loan forgiveness. If a doctor works in a physician shortage area he or she may be eligible for a % of loan forgiveness, depending on the location. You may "bullshit, thats not right" Do you want to move your family to a desert town in northern Arizona where the standard of living is poverty level? Do you want to treat patients who have absolutely no income? Are you willing to treat native American acholism and related diabetes for little or no income for 3 years? My guess is you would answer no.

On doctors bilking patients. Its impossible to do. Fees are set by the insurance companies and Medicare and Medicaid, not doctors. My wife may charge you 50 dollars, but she actually gets 28. You paid your vet more than that for your cats cough.

I take great offense at your post. My wife, who has NEVER turned down a patient looses 15 dollars for every Medicaid.Medicare patient she see. This at a time when doctors all over the nation refuses to see them. Yes, we are going broke, and yes we are paying her student loans.

Your post is no less of an attack than that of an uneducated freepers.

[shraby]

25. If this country can afford to give

health care aid all over the world, the least it can do is provide health care for all of it's citizens. Nuff said.

[MichaelHarris]

28. thats a noble reply

but it doesn't speak to any of the points brought up in the original post.

[cosmicvortex20]

32. If I was your wife...

Id toss the medicare cases down to the next doc. If noone takes them, maybe then the politicians will start to understand the folly of their ways.

[MichaelHarris]

34. she doesn't have the moral fiber

to do that. See she came from a very poor family. Paid her way through undergraduate. Got loans and grants for medical school and we struggle to make the payments on those. But according to the theme of this thread, she should cut her salary, see more patients, be kinder, and work for free.

[Medium Baby Jesus]

49. Here Here

I also work in healthcare and I bristle at uninformed knee-jerk posts like post #1

[lottie244]

51. If you believe that NIH has little to do with Med schools, stop the grants

and see what happens. You folks out there know damn well that Fed grants fund a lot of the salary of instructors and huge grants are given to so-called 'cream of the crop' MD's in whose name research projects are conducted. The direct and indirect costs of Fed grants keeps these schools in business. I am not knocking the funding of medical schools. I am merely making the point as to why access to good health care should be a right that is on par with a good public education because we the taxpayers pay for it.

[MichaelHarris]

71. at any point

will you be naming these "cream of the crop" MDs, research grants, or any amounts given to the medical schools? Is it just going to be blind accusations with no facts? I've already seen that platform.

[Baltimoreboy]

26. We subsidize schools for everything

Is everything a right?

[MichaelHarris]

30. if the argument of subsidizing schools for

everything we're true then this post could very well be about free legal advice, free vets for our pets, and free architects.

[Baltimoreboy]

31. Nearly every school gets federal funding

A few have withdrawn for religious reasons.

[MichaelHarris]

33. but what services

should be given away free after one graduates?

[noiretextatique]

38. no one is suggesting giving away services for free

even some doctors aren't pleased with managed healthcare particularly when their best judgement as medical profesionals has to take a backseat to and MBA's best judgement.

[MichaelHarris]

most

doctors aren't pleased with managed healthcare. I don't think I know one that is. A doctor could go on for hours telling you stories about how they have to "fudge" a patient's records to make sure they can perscribe the best treatment/medication for a patient because if they report the real reason some insurance company would refuse the charges. Now certainly my wife nor any of the doctors here could tell you that because they would NEVER falsify medical records to make SURE a patient got the BEST treatment. Those may be some of the little "scams" that anger some but when you see your doctor with asthma and he or she says I'll give you this medicine but we'll chart it for something else because the insurance will pay for it, thus saving you hundreds. Next time that happens, try saying, "thank you doc". Sure beats calling all of them blood-sucking bastards.

[noiretextatique]

39. some things simply should not depend on how much money you make

health care is one of them. it's in the best interest of the country to have a health care system that doesn't excude people because they don't have money.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

43. I think that is the point.

And health care should be a right for Americans because America is rich. If this were Somalia, I wouldn't agree, but in America, we should be able to at the minimum, care for the sick.

[Baltimoreboy]

53. At the minimum, what about the maximum?

How far do we go to help the sick? If you are 80, can you get a heart transplant? If your operation will extend your life a year, but will cost $2 million, do you get it?

Do you envision any sort of limits?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

61. That's why we elect Senators and Representatives, to work out the details.

If we can establish the broad principle that health care is a right, the details can be worked out, changed according to circumstances, etc.

[Mr_Spock]

77. Good 'ol devils advocate is at it again. Do you agree with anyone here

ever?

[EndElectoral]

40. A constitutional amendment making health care a right!

No, Bush pushes for Gay marriage amendment.

Now there's a priority! Jeez....

I never thought that Al Sharpton would make Bush look like an idiot, but he did!!!

[vetwife]

42. To provide for the common defense and general welfare

That is our birthright. I believe a few fellows drew that up some time back and its in the Bill of Rights......

[KittyWampus]

44. You Got There First! Common Defense & General Welfare-

Epidemics threaten society as a whole.

We are NOT just individual atoms bouncing around in a vacuum.

Our individual health and well being directly impact those around us.

Not having preventative medicine ends up with emergency room procedures that are much more costly and much less effective.

[cosmicvortex20]

46. The general welfare excuse of course has no bounds...

Anything could be construed to promoted the general welfare... Im sure Hitler tried to convince everyone that oppressing Jews was in the country's general welfare.

Without defining beforehand what exactly constitutes "the general welfare", its a useless floating abstraction.

[Mikimouse]

47. Please clarify the use of the term 'excuse'...

I would argue that abstractions are necessary in such a context. If one tries to define all of the possibilities, we have no time for anything else.

On edit: Doh! academics can't type!

[cosmicvortex20]

55. One can take the time to at least attempt clarity.

They could have said specifically what categories of "general welfare" they were refering too.

[vetwife]

48. Well so does Common Defense....That dog won't hunt ...

They say we got WMD's and we preemptively struck and there was no WMD's so where is the Common Defense.? They were not a direct threat. No...You could fly literally a 747 through some of the holes in the consitution but where the problems is, general welfare can be as constitutional as the Common Defense . That was not directed to you Mickimouse. The one arguing about general defense and common welfare.

[cosmicvortex20]

52. Your proving my point...

Without having your definitions clear up front, you can stretch words to mean anything.

[lottie244]

54. At least I caught the interest of some. Maybe you will learn more about

just where and how your tax dollars are spent. An informed public is the greatest defense against tyranny.

[MichaelHarris]

72. please show us

any pie charts, graphs, photos of evil doctors?

[Mikimouse]

57. I'm with you, no clarification in necessary...

we're cool.:pals:

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

45. A difficult issue in my opinion. Should there be limits to healthcare?

Personally, I think it's the government's obligation to do as much as possible to make a certain amount of necessary healthcare available to every single citizen. But if health care as an absolute right becomes open-ended, there is potentially no limit. It's not easy to quantify that amount of care which is justified. What is healthcare? Extending life? Improving the quality of life within limits? Treating the potential for genetic diseases in certain predisposed individuals before they fully manifest themselves? Prolonged stress can have ravaging effects on the body. Is every citizen suffering from stress to be afforded a regular psychiatrist if it can be proved that psychiatric counseling can prevent physical stress and related health problems? To do so might reduce the percentage of some suicides in the population and other health abuse such as alcoholism, drug abuse, and murders. Is every overweight person entitled to a full-time health instructor, dietician and trainer if it can be shown that being overweight damages one's health? What about preventive care? Diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and many cancers could be prevented or reduced through proper diet, exercise, and the use of many new drugs now undergoing clinical trials. Fantastic new experimental drugs such as EUK-189 which mimics superoxide dismutase and is able to cross the blood-brain barrier and the revolutionary ALT-711 which is a protein-carbon crosslink breaker are being proven right now to have a positive effect in slowing the aging process in the body. Aging is a major health problem. Is the ultimate goal of healthcare for humankind to end aging and deterioration of the body? That would be ultimate healthcare. What about the right to receive the full panoply of hormone replacement therapy which helps in maintaining good health? Many predict that anti-aging medicine will become one of the major focuses of healthcare in the new century as revolutionary new drugs now in the laboratory come to market.

Your post references "decent" healthcare. But who decides what amount of care is "decent" and what amount is unreasonable? Will there still be the haves and have nots, rich people in the future who enjoy slower aging and live to 150 and those who can only afford to receive the kind of care that lets them live to half that age? We are on the edge of that kind of revolution in medical research, in my opinion, and those will become real issues before the century is over.

I'm all for some form of socialized medicine within reasonable limits. But making healthcare a Constitutional right (if that is where you are going) might open up a real can of worms. Of course if people stopped warring on each other and if governments declared war on disease and human suffering instead, everything might become possible.

[Pobeka]

50. We should have a right to AFFORDABLE health care.

I think that's the key message here. That's what's gone crazy wrong with health care -- it's entirely about profits, in what is for the patient essentially a monopolistic system (who has time to shop around for the best antibiotics when they are sick?)

If we had a government which was more concerned about getting the cost of health care down instead of lining corporate pockets, we wouldn't be looking at these huge increases.

[cosmicvortex20]

56. Provided by whom and at whos expense?

[lottie244]

59. You are already paying for it, read the original post.

Get what you pay for.

[cosmicvortex20]

62. Id rather pay for what Im getting... which is nothing.

[vetwife]

60. Kerry/Edwards Healthcare Plan..let me tell you a story

We are on federal benefits from the military..OK? They try to pull (Hospitals) that BS of charging say maybe 700.00 for a simple ER visit (no tests)and the VA says no can do, it exceeds the maximum limit and you have to pull back. They then pay (when you can get them to) the hospital about 136.00 and the rest gets scrapped and the Hospital gets what the Federal government decides is fair. Now. Why is it poor Joe Blow down the street can't get that same healthcare because believe me the Senators and Congress and Presidents get that kind of cut off....The taxpayers are paying at the pumps, homeowners, tax galore for bombs, and bullshit and this cut off seems fair in some ways and unfair in other ways. By that I mean get the priorties straight. Provide for the ones who can't pay and quit spending money on BS like stated in my CD a multi million dollar rainforest in Iowa in an ominbus spending pork bill.The money is there......We have already paid into it and they are building rainforests, T-Ball golf courses for 5 year olds and shopping centers in California. Get the CD and you will see where all the money is going. It was researched and proven and that December bill was full of pork but I think healthcare and lowering the cost is more important than teaching 5 year old how to play golf. Better to feed them and treat their illness. !

[cosmicvortex20]

63. All politicians inject pork... I dont expect this administration to be

different. I trust politicians about as far as I can throw em.

[vetwife]

64. What do you suggest? I don't think they are going anywhere.

There used to be an old saying Pick a crook and vote for him or her. I personally think Kerry is the man to put some integrity back in the WH. I will send him ! As far as paying for nothing because that is what you have is beyond reason to me. That is saying that you believe in Taxation without representation. When you see your kid suffering, or lose a leg or another vital organ and have to sleep under a bridge because the costs were too high. I think you may change your opinion. I suggest you see the movie John Q.

[cosmicvortex20]

67. Sorry, I dont buy into hollywood philosophy

and I dont know that I would say I think any politician has integrity.

As for paying for nothing... I would hope the cost would be zero.

[many a good man]

65. Its not a constitutional right, its just right

Because we can afford to. We just have our priorities messed up.

Over the last two centuries we have defined a large role for government to advance the health and welfare of its citizens. The health "system", though mostly private, is the main way the health of the commonwealth is protected. Government has the responsibility to make sure this system can deliver.

Remove the hyberbole, and I hear the author send a message that our tax dollars are subsidizing the for-profit system and thus we have already paid for our health care. Our tax dollars should go toward giving US affordable health care, not lining the pockets of Big Pharma and Insurance...

[vetwife]

66. I second that emotion ! But I still feel its constituional !

[cornfedyank]

68. what is the alternative?

is it sustainable?

[Bridget Burke]

73. You're leaving out the bean counters.

The HMO's & the insurance companies have increasing amounts of say over medical care for all of us. Many doctors are unhappy with the situation.

[lottie244]

74. Keep it going. Maybe we can all learn something.

Anybody look up the budget of the NIH yet? FDA?
Anybody look up the amount of money going to the major med schools and Ivy League schools in the form of direct and indirect cost grants?

[MichaelHarris]

75. no

we're still wating for you to post the facts and figures that bolster your claims.

[Snow]

76. If you're willing to teach, maybe we can....

but I see nothing except leading questions, unsupported opinions. Again, if you would like to learn something and have an honest discussion, read through Silverhead's threads referenced in post 16.

[cosmicvortex20]

78. How about we make that number zero...

No welfare for medical establishments, doctors, etc...