The pundits keep saying that having compulsory health insurance would be fair because after all we have compulsory car insurance. But there is a big difference I have not heard anyone mention. One has a choice about owning a car. You don’t have much choice about existing.
I suppose health insurance under the plans they seem to be set on passing have to be compulsory to be effective, but the cost of it sounds as if it will be very much higher than a lot of people can possibly afford. After listening to the president plug his plan Sunday I think it sounds like only a partial part of the reform that is needed. I think we should have a plan closer to that of the rest of the developed countries. I think we should have a single payer plan directly from the government. I trust the government a lot more than I trust big insurance companies interested only in their bottom line. People keep saying that the government will ration care or have bureaucrats making medical decisions. What do they think the insurance companies are doing now just to make more money. There are thousands of horror stories about insurance companies failing to meet their obligations to their customers.
Why can’t we handle our health care like all the rest of the developed countries in the world do? So what if it’s a form of socialized medicine. It takes care of everyone. I believe in the big picture it is a cheaper way because the cost to individuals has to be added to the cost to the taxpayers when figuring the total cost involved.
All the rest of developed countries in the world have universal coverage. Nobody goes bankrupt or dies for lack of health care. If they all can do it, why can’t we? I think we Americans don’t see or understand much beyond our borders. Are we blind or stupid or just assume we always know better than anyone else?
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 22
www.nopom.info
So long as I have been on Gather I have been offering my novel, free, to anyone who is willing to read it. I gain no money at all by its being read. There are no ads in the web pages of the novel nor in the MP3 version also available. The ideas described in this novel are available no where else.
For those who request that I not add the link to that novel to my comments I attempt to comply with their wishes.
Now would you care to read the novel and show me that I am wrong to provide that solution for the many problems we face as a society?
Would you prefer that I ignore the suffering in the world rather than try to do something about it?
If you haven't read the book then you don't know what it suggests.
My count of the number of times, by the way, is three. I don't have an infallible memory, however, so I could be in error on the count.
What then?
And for me, I would much rather pay taxes and live a full life than not and die for lack of medical care. Just sayin'. Money in your pocket doesn't mean much when you - or your family members - are dead.
Example: "...all of those other developed nations have a lot smaller population than we do."
Followed by: "So, it's probably a lot cheaper to insure everyone there."
Is there something she doesn't understand about COST PER PERSON? It is more likely that a large population would be cheaper per person due to economies of scale, but certainly having a smaller group will never LOWER the cost per person.
An even worse example: "Also, a lot of them have restrictions to whether or not foreigners can receive health insurance even if they become citizens."
A foreigner is NOT a foreigner when they become a citizen. DUH!
This suggests that we should treat naturalized citizens differently from "Real Americans." Sarah Palin would probably agree.
Allowing health co-ops or public health insurance would lower costs, not only for the ones in the public option, but for the ones with private insurance. Sure, those private insurance companies wouldn't be able to give their stockholders the 6-10% share payouts or give the CEOs those $20 million "golden parachutes" or bonuses, which is why they oppose the public option.
Forcing families who can barely afford to pay the bills to buy health insurance or face fines? If they can't afford private insurance, how are they going to pay the fines? Or maybe we should just turn them into criminals and send them to jail, where, ironically, they will get health care at public expense.
You are right, Ruth, auto ownership is optional ... life is not. The thing that interests me is that we must have auto coverage that pays for others in the case of an accident, but as a nation, we do not think we need to offer medical coverage to all. This isn't only about litigation (if so, the liability limits would be much higher) -- it is about the right thing to do.
Health insurance is not the same as auto insurance.
We must all write all our elected federal officials and tell them. A health plan without the public option is no good and will only make insurance companies richer.
Write the President
http://www.whitehouse.gov
Write both your Senators
http://www.senate.gov
Write your U. S. Representative
http://www.house.gov
All links to .gov sites and set to open in a new window.
If you want to follow the progress of any legislation go to the library of
Congress site. named thomas.gov after Thomas Jefferson
Http://www.thomas.gov
All links set to open a new window.
As bad as it is, it could be worse, so let's speak up and speak out. If the corporations are afraid of a government insurance department, then that is what the citizens of this country need as part of any plan passed into law. It has only been proposed as one of the choices available. It's not manditory so what is so bad about it?
Ruth, thank you for this clearly written challenge to the disinformation being put out right now. And Cena W., thanks for the useful links.
Lets all use that last one, don't take Fox News, CNN, CBS, or the radio hate-mongers words for what is going on in Washington DC. You can know the truth for yourselves.
The "press" is not Liberal.
I do not know how except via emails and begging and demanding we will keep our legislators and our President from buckling against the "For Profit Only " passing of a health care bill without a public option.
Sandy - You hit the nail on the head. If the Medical industry is against it, it must be good for the people and we should back it. Unfortunately it is becoming clear to me that Obama's plan is letting insurance companies keep too much power. And he doesn't put enough enthusiasm and push behind the public option which in my estimate is a poor substitute for a single payer plan but the only choice we seem to have. I like Obama very much but I think he is being much too accomodating to the shrinking Republican Party. He tried very hard to get positive input from Republicans and they chose to say no to every bill proposed. It's past time pass them by and get a good Democratic bill passed. The dissenting Democrats are a bigger problem. There must be ways to twist arms by pointing out they won't get the support of their party the next time they are up for election. If, as is reported, 70% of Democrate are in favor of the public option, the districts they represent must include a lot of those people.
I personally think we should start charging CEO's of insurance companies who find ways to not pay for healthcare but take premiums from people who believe they are covered until the insurance is actually needed, and who die as a direct result of refused services, with murder.
If they did, that means you would have a right to someone else's work, which is clearly inconsistent with the principles of liberty.