Gov't doesn't run most services well, nor should they. Gov't's role is to enact legislation and enforce it and to serve as watch dogs and that's about it.
Obama Health care Reform
- Thread starter DaSleeper
- Start date
Gov't doesn't run most services well, nor should they. Gov't's role is to enact legislation and enforce it and to serve as watch dogs and that's about it.
Right, which is why professionals run health care, same with fire and police and they all follow legislation enacted by the peoples representatives.
Not sure why some Americans think Obama will be signing death warrants for the sick.
Simply making it easier for a single Mom working two jobs to get some sort of health coverage for her kids.....wow what sort of evil is that?:roll:
Obama at least has some guts to get this far, he is fighting the large medical
drug companies. These interests along with the Doctors own and control the
hospitals and clinics, the prescription drugs and the medical insurance plans
as well. No they didn't get a public option this time, but getting a foot in the
door is more important, progress will come once the plan begins over time.
Saskatchewan saw the same thing happen. Premier Lloyd actually brought
in the Tommy Douglas plan. It cost the CCF the election and the provincial
Liberals came to power promising to get rid of it. By the time they came to
power though the people got used to medicare and the Liberals pulled back
and once the public saw the value, they through the Liberals out and put the
CCF back in. Once people find out medicare is beneficial, and they get used to
it, they will embrace it. They will also find out just what lies they were told by
the Republicans, and that party will be reduced to a rump in Congress.
drug companies. These interests along with the Doctors own and control the
hospitals and clinics, the prescription drugs and the medical insurance plans
as well. No they didn't get a public option this time, but getting a foot in the
door is more important, progress will come once the plan begins over time.
Saskatchewan saw the same thing happen. Premier Lloyd actually brought
in the Tommy Douglas plan. It cost the CCF the election and the provincial
Liberals came to power promising to get rid of it. By the time they came to
power though the people got used to medicare and the Liberals pulled back
and once the public saw the value, they through the Liberals out and put the
CCF back in. Once people find out medicare is beneficial, and they get used to
it, they will embrace it. They will also find out just what lies they were told by
the Republicans, and that party will be reduced to a rump in Congress.
That is exactly what Canadian government does when it comes to health care, and that is what is meant by government running the system.
While government pays for it, government does not micromanage the way doctors run their practice, doctors are pretty much left to run their practice as they see fit. All government does is decide which services it is going to cover and how much it is going to pay for them.
This is part of our problem here is Canada.. Too much Government interference when it should be private run while under health care act..
BC has that for Blood, and X-Ray Clinics but has not gone far enough yet.. We need to push a bit further for more private health care clinics run institutions.. Not the pay for fee type, just the private, not government run type..
Perhaps MRI and CT Scans can be next..
Health Care: Americans are growing tired of what has become the typical Washington response to our nation's problems: Grow government and spend more money. The latest version of the Senate bill does just that while leaving 23 million of America's uninsured without insurance. The bill increases taxes by $518 billion, cuts Medicare by $470 billion, and imposes an unfunded mandate on Florida's Medicaid system resulting in $3.5 billion in additional state spending on Medicaid. Senator LeMieux.
The government of course does not tell the doctor how he/she should practice medicine, but the goverment as you said can set the payments it will pay a doctor per patient seen, and exactly what treatments it will and will not pay for based upon cost, not how good the treatment might be. A person diagnosed with cancer wants treatment now, not in 2-3 months or when ever the government feels like paying for it.
The reverse of this is true according to the latest polls.
As health care reform bill advances, public support slips / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com
Zogby International
Last edited:
"They will also find out just what lies they were told by
the Republicans, and that party will be reduced to a rump in Congress."
How about we start out with the word "Change" and open administration. Democrats pushing their agendas thru on weekends evenings, behind close doors. Been like that all along, I do not see change, just new faces robbing us. Take more from us and all we can or allowed to say is thank you sir, take more. :x
the Republicans, and that party will be reduced to a rump in Congress."
How about we start out with the word "Change" and open administration. Democrats pushing their agendas thru on weekends evenings, behind close doors. Been like that all along, I do not see change, just new faces robbing us. Take more from us and all we can or allowed to say is thank you sir, take more. :x
But an important part nonetheless. My wife has never been approached by a bureaucrat telling her what she should or should not do regarding a patient. As long as she bills within the fee schedule, she is left pretty much alone.
There is nothing wrong with government paying for health care, ironsides. Results worldwide have shown that single payer system is the most efficient system (with perhaps some private component included). USA does not have a single payer system. It spends 2 or 3 times as much on health care as any other country (per capita) and has poor results to show for it, lower life expectancy, higher infant mortality than most developed countries.
"There is nothing wrong with government paying for health care, ironsides."- THAT is debatable, first of all the gov't paying means WE pay (which is as it should be) but in the chain starting (or ending) at our pockets and including gov't., insurance broker, insurance company, insurance adjuster, I think at least one "middleman" could be eliminated and in my opinion that could be the Government.
These polls are very misleading and politically motivated. The numbers themselves may be reliable, that a majority of Americans oppose the health care reform bill. However, when probed deeper as to why they oppose the bill, many of them oppose it because it doesn’t go far enough, because it doesn’t have a public option.
The appetite for reform is still there, just that people do not agree what kind of reform. Some would like even more reform (with a public option), that is why they oppose the bill. The bill is opposed by both the left (dailykos is strongly opposed to the senate bill) and the right, which tells me that it is right smack in the mainstream of American public opinion.
Indeed, any bill Congress passes will suffer the same fate, some will think it goes too far, others will think it doesn’t go far enough. But at the end of the day, Democrats were given the huge majorities so that they can govern, not so that they can on their backsides and do nothing.
If they are going to lose the next election, it is far better that they lose it because they governed, they passed health care reform, rather than lose it because they did nothing. After all, what is the use of the political capital if you don’t spend it?
We don't have insurance companies, insurance brokers or insurance adjusters JLM, I don't know where you got that. We have eliminated the middlemen, it is only the doctors and the government.
And if you think that government should get out of health care and that we should switch to American type of system, with insurance companies, brokers and adjusters, you are in a hopeless minority there, most Canadians would oppose that.
