Socialized Healthcare Working Much Better Than the Current US Healthcare System

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Nov 26, 2011
3,818
62
0
#21
Find me anyplace in the thread you have admitted to being an advocate for alternative medicines, and show me how you have explained this viewpoint colors your view of healthcare.

Dishonesty entails omission, as well as commission.
You are truly grasping at straws you false accuser. You don't appear to be very vigilant either.

My intent in posting in this thread was to clearly state that a "Universal Health Care Program" is legalised theft.

Not only that but a "Universal Health Care Program" FORCES people to pay services they may not like or want. As an example of that I used the term "allopathic" as it pertains to a description of most modern medicine. I also gave an example from my own personal experience of a "cure" for my issue with ecsema which did not feed those who sold me their treatments. I certainly know I am not the only one.

One can make assertions without having to explain in detail how one formed their conclusions. You don't strain at gnats, you invent them.
 
Oct 30, 2014
1,150
7
0
#22
The agenda to implement a forced universal healthcare program is clearly a business agenda for it forces people to buy a product.

Most modern health care is based on an allopathic model which only really deals with the symptoms of toxicity and starvation. Allopathic medicine is very profitable and is backed by gigantic drug producing business enterprises. These enterprises fund special interest groups which in turn influence the political process and the media. These enterprises pay doctors a commission to push their products.
Paying taxies renders tax funds public money. There's a difference between ''public expenditure'' and ''forcing people to buy a product''. Do you believe that public spending on the military is forcing people to buy death? Do you believe that public spending on maintaining roads (let's consider people who don't drive) is forcing people to buy bitumen? Do you consider that public spending on education is forcing people to buy education? Do you consider that public spending on foreign aid is forcing people to buy help for others? Do you consider that public spending on government employee wages is forcng people to buy government administration? Do you consider that public investment in oil is forcing people to buy oil?

If you apply the logic ''socialized healthcare is forcing people to buy a product'' then you have to apply it to any situation where public money is used to directly or indirectly buy ANYTHING.

Look, taxes are used to buy stuff and pay for things. That's the nature of taxation. What those taxes are spend on is up to you.

As for the agenda to implement socialized healthcare being a business agenda, the agenda to force people to buy privatized health is an agenda that COSTS YOU MORE AS A TAXPAYER and COSTS YOU MORE AT THE POINT OF SERVICE.

If you calculate the amount the US gov't spend on healthcare, with public funding, and look at post 1 which shows the cost per capita at point of service, you'll see that you already feed the medical business massive amounts of money. In fact, because of privatization, your healthcare is MORE expensive than if it were publicly funded.

Look at the UK's healthcare costs. Why are they less than half the price of America's, per head? Why do the UK gov't, though having a fully socialized healthcare system, spend less per person from public funding for healthcare than the US do per person?

It's because medical companies/pharmaceutical companies have no choice but to work WITH the NHS if they want any substantial business at all in the UK. This gives the UK government power to negotiate prices, and ultimately has driven down the cost of healthcare when compared with nations where privatized healthcare is the primary source.

The UK government also nvest in their own medical production, medical research and fund medical education and bursaries heavily. This means less cost overall, because they have less need to buy from privatized companies whose main functions are to turn a profit, and it means free healthcare at the pint of service.

It's absolutely logical that if medicine is about profit, it will cost more.
 
Last edited:
Nov 26, 2011
3,818
62
0
#23
Human.... Speak for yourself. I personally pay LESS than most people regarding health care because I eat well and exercise. I also put money aside for emergencies. It is people like you that want to FORCE people like me to buy a product known as "health insurance" where I pay for services I don't particularly need or want.

People like you come up with all sorts of rhetoric in order to justify your support for legalised theft.

You ask this question...

Do you believe that public spending on the military is forcing people to buy death?
As a matter of fact I do. The military does kill people and blow things up and the funding of the military makes such possible. Jesus said that, "my kingdom is not of this world" and that is why His servants did not pick up arms as fight. They loved their enemies and compelled them to repent and be reconciled to God.
 
Oct 30, 2014
1,150
7
0
#24
Human.... Speak for yourself. I personally pay LESS than most people regarding health care because I eat well and exercise. I also put money aside for emergencies. It is people like you that want to FORCE people like me to buy a product known as "health insurance" where I pay for services I don't particularly need or want.

People like you come up with all sorts of rhetoric in order to justify your support for legalised theft.

You ask this question...



As a matter of fact I do. The military does kill people and blow things up and the funding of the military makes such possible. Jesus said that, "my kingdom is not of this world" and that is why His servants did not pick up arms as fight. They loved their enemies and compelled them to repent and be reconciled to God.
I agree with you, and it feeds into my point -- I'd rather my government buy medicine than bullets. The NHS isn't health insurance, it's a socialized medical system paid for with general taxation, and it means that per head, health costs from public funding are less than half that of America, whose citizens have to pay at the point of service or buy expensive health insurance, on top of their government's healthcare spending from general taxation.

I don't want to force you to buy health insurance. I want you to pay your normal rate of tax and see your government implement fully socialized healthcare, because it'll be cheaper and lighter on taxes than the current system that exists in the US.
 
Last edited:
Nov 26, 2011
3,818
62
0
#25
I agree with you, and it feeds into my point -- I'd rather my government buy medicine than bullets. The NHS isn't health insurance, it's a socialized medical system paid for with general taxation, and it means that per head, health costs from public funding are less than half that of America, whose citizens have to pay at the point of service or buy expensive health insurance, on top of their government's healthcare spending from general taxation.

I don't want to force you to buy health insurance. I want you to pay your normal rate of tax and see your government implement fully socialized healthcare, because it'll be cheaper and lighter on taxes than the current system that exists in the US.
NHS does force people to buy a product. They payment is simply extracted through taxation.

Why do you want to see "my government" do what YOU want? It should be none of your business. I don't campaign for "your government" to FORCE you to do things.

This is the problem, it is people like you who want to FORCE your operational idealism on others via statism. That is tyranny. Mind your own business and leave other people alone.
 
Oct 30, 2014
1,150
7
0
#26
NHS does force people to buy a product. They payment is simply extracted through taxation.

Why do you want to see "my government" do what YOU want? It should be none of your business. I don't campaign for "your government" to FORCE you to do things.

This is the problem, it is people like you who want to FORCE your operational idealism on others via statism. That is tyranny. Mind your own business and leave other people alone.
I don't have either the public popularity, citizenship or legal power to force you to do anything. ''The problem'' seems to be a figment of your imagination. What I do have is information and experience from living in a country with fully socialized healthcare. Information regarding its cost effectiveness when compared with privatized healthcare systems, and it's ratings as the best healthcare system in the world from international panels of experts.

The planet is globalized, this is the internet and last time I checked, I can say whatever I want on it, but I'm not forcing or trying to force anything on anybody -- I couldn't if I tried.

Whether or not either of us believe the NHS forces people to buy a product is sort of a secondary consideration to the actual premises of the problem at hand -- people in the US are a little bit fed up of paying astronomical amounts for healthcare. A socialized system, as has been shown, can be less strenuous on public funds per capita than the privatized/insurance system that exists and can offer relief from the burden of privatized healthcare.

As I've said before, you're defending the private system, yet a higher percentage of your taxes fund healthcare in the US than do mine fund the NHS. The NHS actually works out cheaper for the government of the UK, per capita, than your current healthcare system does for the government of the US, per capita.

Yet you still have to pay A LOT for a procedure.

Take a heart bypass. In America that costs over a hundred grand, and it either comes out of an insurer's pocket or a civilians, (though the healthcare is subsidized in ways). In the UK, a heart bypass is paid for by the government and costs less than half the price, because hospitals are not out to make profits, doctors are not out to push shiny-packaged designer drugs from pharmaceutical companies that are no different to the generic brands, and because other costs and public doctor's and surgeon's fees aren't about profiteering.
 
Last edited:
Nov 26, 2011
3,818
62
0
#27
I am an immigrant to the U.S. and I lived under a socialised medical system for over 30 years. YOu are not the only one with such experiences. Your experience is your experience but it does not add anything to the issue I have raised.

The fact is, you are promoting the implementation of a universal healthcare system. Such a system is a FORCED program and is premised upon the idea of legalised theft.

No-one is "entitled" to heart-bypass surgery. If I go around your house and take money from your wallet without your consent it is theft, even if later I then go and pay for something on behalf of someone else. Theft is theft. If I vote in an official who does the stealing on my behalf it does not make it any less of a theft.

You are upholding the idea that it is legitimate for the state to steal from one and give to another. It doesn't matter how you dress it up in order to rationalise it. Theft is theft.

Sure you can criticise the unscrupulous profit motives of insurance companies, you can criticise back room deals and all sorts of dishonesty. Yet one not ought promote one evil in order to prevent another.
 
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
#28
THE GOP IS NEGLIGENT AND DEMOCIDAL WITH RESPECT TO U.S. HEALTHCARE.

But let's start with the very common personal story of Laura Johnson as it lends a face. READ: GOP Governors Deny The Poor Health Care In Opposing Obamacare's Medicaid Expansion

^ Did you read that? That's a typical story that played out all over the U.S. and still does in states not implementing Obamacare or an equivalent alternative!

The U.S. health care system is possibly the most inefficient in the world: We spend twice as much per person on health care as other advanced countries who socialize their healthcare, but we have worse health outcomes that include a lower life expectancy.

For example, Australia's at 8.5% of GDP with an 81.5 year life expectancy while the U.S. is at 16.2% GDP with a 78.1 year life expectancy (see CEPR). They pay much less per person on average but get a much better outcome per person on average.

Look at the per capita ranking: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...

If we WERE in Australia's position; our healthcare costs would be completely under control, we'd have a healthy labor population that lived longer, new long-term disability applications would dramatically decline (they have risen to constitute 4% of the annual U.S. budget), etc...

If the GOP changed their position on this one issue (e.g. healthcare) away from offering poor people a tax credit so they can buy a plan they can't afford to buy making it the GOP proposition absurd for tens of millions of people, they would have the moral high ground and gain all those votes from poor Americans that can't afford to vote for them presently because to do so would result in dramatic suffering, crippling, etc... leaving them on costly long-term disability.

The GOP position on health care is negligent and democidal and so immoral.
 
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
#29
Lawful government taxation to address issues of great national concern (e.g. national defense, air traffic control, healthcare, etc...) does not correlate to a burglar breaking into your house and stealing your money. You've made a false correlation and assertion.

Even IF one is not entitled to adequate healthcare in a nation that certainly can provide it, and I'll argue that you're wrong with respect to that too, it's not wrong or immoral for a nation to provide it to its citizens.

In fact, there are many desirable benefits to having a standardized health care system that include standardization, the creation of an economy of scales, common accessibility, a healthy domestic labor force, material reductions in long-term disability applications, fewer people entering jails and prisons stealing to eat and survive due to becoming homeless because of physical problems that financially destroyed them in a nation that's family structure is unraveling, etc... etc... etc...

This is not a left wing versus right wing issue. This is a HUMAN issue (read Imago Dei).


I am an immigrant to the U.S. and I lived under a socialised medical system for over 30 years. YOu are not the only one with such experiences. Your experience is your experience but it does not add anything to the issue I have raised.

The fact is, you are promoting the implementation of a universal healthcare system. Such a system is a FORCED program and is premised upon the idea of legalised theft.

No-one is "entitled" to heart-bypass surgery. If I go around your house and take money from your wallet without your consent it is theft, even if later I then go and pay for something on behalf of someone else. Theft is theft. If I vote in an official who does the stealing on my behalf it does not make it any less of a theft.

You are upholding the idea that it is legitimate for the state to steal from one and give to another. It doesn't matter how you dress it up in order to rationalise it. Theft is theft.

Sure you can criticise the unscrupulous profit motives of insurance companies, you can criticise back room deals and all sorts of dishonesty. Yet one not ought promote one evil in order to prevent another.
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,780
2,943
113
#30
In Canada, Universal Health Care is our highest national value for the government to support. Everyone has the same access, and landed immigrants and permanent residents have the same rights and access to all health care needs. (READ: My American DIL who was without insurance for 6 years because she could not afford the premiums in the US)

The US health care system is all about profits. I was on an expensive RA drug called "Rituxan" which cost $2000 an infusion and I needed them twice, every 6 months. It was all covered by my extended health care. An American friend of mine was on the same drug, and it cost her insurance company $75,000 for the same two infusions!

This means it cost $71,000 more for the same drug, which was MADE in the USA! That is scandalous. I won't even get into how my RA friends get every possible scan, test, monitoring every time their pinky finger hurts them, and it turns up nothing more than what a good doctor diagnoses in Canada using a little wisdom.

I am glad that we pay more for health care than arms as a country, and that we care for everyone. Canadians make no apologies for a system that is working much better than the American one ever will.

And as for paying $50,000 out of pocket for an operation, it is no wonder the leading cause of bankruptices in the US is medical care.

"Bankruptcies resulting from unpaid medical bills will affect nearly 2 million people this year—making health care the No. 1 cause of such filings, and outpacing bankruptcies due to credit-card bills or unpaid mortgages, according to new data. And even having health insurance doesn't buffer consumers against financial hardship."

Medical Bills Are the Biggest Cause of US Bankruptcies: Study
 
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
#31
Excellent post. However, not all socialized healthcare models are equivalent. Many issues correspond to healthcare including provider choice, human rights respecting liberty, religious freedom, etc...

Is socialized healthcare "better" if it destroys personal liberty and religious freedom and uses the government judiciary and penal institutions to severely persecute anyone that maintains their natural human rights? I would say NO, OF COURSE NOT!!!

But that's a record the left has acquired in the process of implementing their ideology which is constructed on authoritarian interventionism from a position of relativist and conventionalism.

My point is that the best healthcare model isn't a leftist or rightist model but rather a correct one that meets the healthcare, budget, and human right requirements (and as a Christian I'm going to say in a godly way).

So while the GOP is completely broken down ideologically, epistemologically, and practically in reality with respect to U.S. healthcare for tens of millions of people; we need to not error in simply replacing a broken paradigm with an immoral authoritarian one.

;)

I'd like to make a case for socialized healthcare, as a person who's been part of a society that has it for my entire life. I believe in it, I've seen it, used it, been part of it, and now I'd like to talk about it. I'll dive right in.

One of the main reasons many US citizens are skeptical about socialized healthcare is its cost to the taxpayer. Yet Americans, currently, pay, per person, the highest prices in developed nations for healthcare.

View attachment 97559

The American government also spend more per capita on healthcare than any other developed nation.

View attachment 97558

You would think therefore that American healthcare would rate among the world's best. The contrary is actually true. According to a report by the Commonwealth Fund based on findings by an international panel of experts from the World Health Organization, the US ranks among the lowest in terms of quality of care, access, efficiency and equity, while the NHS, the socialized healthcare system in the UK, was placed at the very top of the list -- the best health service in the world. This rating has been made possible by some of the cheapest taxpayer costs per capita in the world, free prescriptions for every single UK citizen regardless of circumstance, free eyecare at every stage except for the purchase of certain upmarket focal frames and free treatment in both hospitals and local surgeries at the point of contact. Also note that in comparing the lower-middle class and poorest of citizens, Uk citizens are actually given more tax exemptions and tax free earnings (something the lowest earners in the US do not benefit from, as they are taxed 10%).

View attachment 97562

While many Americans also shy away from the idea of socialized healthcare due to horror stories such as those of 'death panels', patients waiting on ridiculous waiting lists for emergency procedures and lying in lobbies for hours with blood coming out their ears, these stories are most often entirely fabricated. AS Dr Alan Maryon-Davis, President of the UK Faculty of Public Health states "The horrific thing about the American system is that there are tens of millions of people without health insurance. We spend less on health in terms of GDP than America but if you look at health indices, especially for life expectancy, we generally have better figures than they do in America."

American pro-privitization lobbyists also often argue that many UK citizens are against the NHS. In fact, in British Future's latest ''State of the Nation'' report, here, an overwhelming majority of Britons of all classes and colours indicated that the NHS is the one thing above all that makes them most proud to be British. The NHS was formed from the calling of the British people for more affordable healthcare in a time when only the richest could really afford it (I remember my father telling me that my grandfather avoided the doctor because it cost too much money to go. He died of cancer, diagnosed at stage three when it was already in several of his internal organs -- an indirect result of his inability to pay). The NHS is a source of immense national pride here in the UK for these very reasons; it gives access to all people, regardless of financial ability.

Finally, as a counter to claims that the NHS' procedures are outdated or obsolete and its doctors undereducated and employed on the basis of necessity rather than academic achievement, the NHS has in fact one of the highest standards for employment of any UK institution; UK medical schools Oxford and Cambridge Universities are placed 2nd and 3rd in the world for medicine by topuniversities.com, second only to Harvard overall in 2013, while in the 2014 rankings UK University ''Imperial College London'' joins the top four along with Harvard, Oxford and Cambridge. The Times World Ranking puts Oxford medical in the number one spot in the world, and most graduates remain in the UK. The NHS has also recieved funding to expand its already substantial research and development facilities in what is set to make it arguably the most advanced, forward moving medical research body of any country in the world.

Socialized medicine can and does work. I can testify personally to it.

Also note below a doctored version of the above report, presumably by those against the NHS. The original above, is from the Independent.
 
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
#32
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
#33
I'd like to make a case for socialized healthcare, as a person who's been part of a society that has it for my entire life. I believe in it, I've seen it, used it, been part of it, and now I'd like to talk about it. I'll dive right in.

One of the main reasons many US citizens are skeptical about socialized healthcare is its cost to the taxpayer.
Nope. . .that's propaganda.

The concern is the quality of the healthcare and the waiting lists for medical procedures.
 
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
#34
Medical bankruptcy is a severe problem for those who experience it and a growing national problem as more than 2 million low-wage working adults in the U.S. per year, and their families, that are completely financially devastated. They worked for companies that have no adequate healthcare coverage, are self-employed and low-income earners who cannot afford the enormous cost of an HMO family plan, etc...

And it's not like they file their bankruptcy and everything's resolved. Just the opposite. Now they're poor, sick, and bankrupt and since they can no longer work full time go on social services and/or disability for the indigent ultimately costing society much more than if they had received an early diagnosis and been treated properly to avoid the entire situation in the first place.

Every ten years that's about 25 million wage earners in the U.S.. It's a really BIG deal that the GOP "tax credit" charade cannot address.

Person for person, health care in the U.S. costs about twice as much as it does in the rest of the developed world. In fact, if our $3 trillion health care sector were its own country, it would be the world’s fifth-largest economy. This is entirely unacceptable in a nation that has about 50 million people living under the poverty line.

 
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
#35
Nope... that's propaganda. Polls show that people care about BOTH. It's incorrect to say people are not concerned about the cost of healthcare when poll after poll and the politicians they elect state that they are.

Interesting article: More Obamacare, less health-cost concerns: study

Nope. . .that's propaganda.

The concern is the quality of the healthcare and the waiting lists for medical procedures.
 
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
#36
The article's author doesn't know squat about insurance companies. He/she needs a lesson in the industry. The article says essentially the same thing I said, but doesn't show any understanding of what it means. No offense, but apparently neither do you.
Does anyone understand anymore that insurance is about pooling and covering unkown risk?
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,670
13,128
113
#37
sure, Americans spend way more money on healthcare and get among the worst value per dollar spent among developed countries..

but our doctors are among the highest paid of all countries too, so does that count for something?

what i mean is, if you are not a doctor, does it count for something?

:p
 
Dec 1, 2014
9,701
251
0
#38
My free health care consists of three things:

Prayer, Exercise and Hard Work.

Once in a while a cold beer helps out as well. :cool:
 
K

kennethcadwell

Guest
#39
Health care is a big and sad issue facing the American public, and through the years any attempt to change it for the better for the middle to low class families has been blocked by private banking and private doctors.
I will take some flack for this because some do not want to realize this, but Obama when he first became president in his first term had a plan for 100% government paid health care system. No premiums, no doctors/hospital bills, and no prescription costs for the average everyday American. This was blocked by private doctors spreading fear and false propaganda that people would not be able to pick their own doctors or hospitals if they approved it. This was completely false and was only blocked because they the private doctors would no longer be able to charge more then the standard hospital doctors to do the same procedures......
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,670
13,128
113
#40
Does anyone understand anymore that insurance is about pooling and covering unkown risk?
not just about "covering" risk -- about smothering it with premium cost, so that insurance brokerages are guaranteed a maximum profit while minimizing their own risk of losing policy holders to other, cheaper brokerages.

insurance companies employ very skillful mathematicians to solve a min/max optimization problem, minimizing potential loss to the company awhile maximizing potential profit. they are not concerned with your health at all beyond wishing you or your descendants who would acquire your debt to continue to exist and continue to pay premiums to them.

on a very basic level, i think that monetary profit and healthcare should not co-exist in this way. for that reason alone i favor socialized medicine - but there are plenty of economic reasons to favor it as well, in any nation which is wealthy enough in relevant resources to accomplish it.