Rationing Health Care - it's a lie!

Robster said:
I have to agree with skeptigirl. Health care isn't being rationed. The money that we pay to HMOs is rationed back to us, after they skim some off the top. In the mean time, they put it in the stock market and hope to make more money, and if they don't, you pay more and more next year, never less if the market goes up. If you have extra money to supplement what the HMO will pay for, you can get past the problem, at least sometimes.

The next question is who would do a more efficient job of rationing that money. insurance agencies and HMOs, you or the government?
Click to expand...

I'm glad you pointed out the connection between the stock market and the insurance industry. That's a point that doesn't come up much in these discussions. If they can make a great return on their investment, they don't need to raise premiums to cover claims and make a profit. If the stock market goes down (which I think people are finally realizing can actually happen), you've got a healthcare crisis.

To answer your question, then, I'm certainly glad we kept Social Security out of the stock market.
 
NWO Sentryman said:
Britain has huge waiting lists, contrary to whatever lies michael moore spouts. Sometimes people are taken off the list to deceive the public into thinking that waiting lists are getting shorter.
Click to expand...

I see....I must have missed that, what with all the waiting list information published in the press and everything. Perhaps you could provide a link to your source?
 
GreyICE said:
Oh, here's another anecdote for you. The privately run American healthcare costs more than any other system in the world, and delivers worse health care than quite a few.

Oh wait, that's not an anecdote, that's a fact.
Click to expand...

Have a reference for this fact per chance?
 
Architect said:
I see....I must have missed that, what with all the waiting list information published in the press and everything. Perhaps you could provide a link to your source?
Click to expand...

according to bbc news, over 1% of the english population is on an NHS waiting list.
 
Professor Yaffle said:
And...?
Click to expand...

well, it is known to be incredibly bureaucratic, with people having to wait months, if not years, to get vital surgery.

Imagine that sort of Bureaucratic nightmare X5. If the CIA is so bureaucratic it cannot do the job right, then i fear for any healthcare system in the US
 
NWO Sentryman said:
well, it is known to be incredibly bureaucratic, with people having to wait months, if not years, to get vital surgery.

Imagine that sort of Bureaucratic nightmare X5. If the CIA is so bureaucratic it cannot do the job right, then i fear for any healthcare system in the US
Click to expand...

Care to provide some sources for these insights. Our perceptions are miles apart and I use the NHS regularly, so some back up information is required.
 
Delscottio said:
Here are the officail figures, I haven't looked at them as yet but I'll be surprised if they are horrific

http://www.performance.doh.gov.uk/waitingtimes/index.htm
Click to expand...

A quick look at the first XL file seems to show very few people waiting more than 3 months to first OP appointment. I know that is my exerience. I was referred for an OP appointment in psychology last year. I received a letter stating that the waiting time could be up to 13 weeks but in fact it was more like 6 weeks. And I wasn't an urgent case. And when my son was referred to a paediatrician the waiting time was about 5 weeks.

And cases are prioritsed by urgency. For example both my mother and my mther in law have recently had operations to remove their gall bladder. With my mam there was no urgency and she waited about 3 months (and that was to schedule a date that didn't clash with her holiday - she would have been able to have it sooner) whereas with the MIL, she collapsed at work, they did some investigations and she had the operation the following day.
 
Is there a site that has the US waiting list information? similar to the one above for the NHS.

I've had a look around but not much information is knocking around. That in its self raises a few questions.
 
I read something a while back comparing USA and Canada that said that Canada had slightly longer waits for elective procedures than the US, but shorter waits at emergency rooms.
 
Rolfe said:
Which part of Britain do you live in, then?

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

I love this! Asking that question as if he has no right to talk about your health care system because he/she is not from the UK. You hypocrite. No one on this board is more vocal about the US health care system than you.

So tell me Rolfe, What part of the USA do you live in?
 
The Painter said:
I love this! Asking that question as if he has no right to talk about your health care system because he/she is not from the UK. You hypocrite. No one on this board is more vocal about the US health care system than you.

So tell me Rolfe, What part of the USA do you live in?
Click to expand...

The question to NWO is relevant because of the outrageous claims made with NO supporting evidence. Rolfe, however, is legitimately criticizing the USA based on facts, statistics and knowledge. One doesn't need to be a USA citizen to realize that the USA health care system is on the road to collapse and that the British health system is much, much better.
 
I mean, the bureaucracy involved for caring for 300 million people is mind-boggling. Given the obesity epidemic in the US, the high rates of AIDS and other ailments, there would have to be tonnes of people on the waiting lists that would dwarf britain's by comparison. While i have used the NHS for dental treatment in Northern Ireland. How much does health insurance cost in the US? then multiply it by 40 million. Shocking amount of money isn't it? i'm pretty sure it will make the defence budget look small by comparison.

I mean, Britain has a bed shortage with regrds to the hospitals.

I confused waiting lists with the lack of beds in britain's nhs hospitals.

Sorry about earlier, but the image of michael moore's agitprop trumpeting free healthcare sticks in one's mind.

to sum it up in heinlein's words: "there ain't no such thing as a free lunch"
 
Last edited:
NWO Sentryman said:
I mean, the bureaucracy involved for caring for 300 million people is mind-boggling. Given the obesity epidemic in the US, the high rates of AIDS and other ailments, there would have to be tonnes of people on the waiting lists that would dwarf britain's by comparison. While i have used the NHS for dental treatment in Northern Ireland. How much does health insurance cost in the US? then multiply it by 40 million. Shocking amount of money isn't it? i'm pretty sure it will make the defence budget look small by comparison.

I mean, Britain has a bed shortage with regrds to the hospitals.

I confused waiting lists with the lack of beds in britain's nhs hospitals.

Sorry about earlier, but the image of michael moore's agitprop trumpeting free healthcare sticks in one's mind.

to sum it up in heinlein's words: "there ain't no such thing as a free lunch"
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but you appear to have misunderstood the nature of this site inasmuch as it supports critical thinking and, inter alia, there is an implicit understanding that you cite sources and the like.

You have tried to state that we suffer from excessive waiting lists however you failed to cite a source besides a vague comment about the BBC. Other posters have, in turn, given you links which show a completely different pricture. You've now done a kind of truther-esque bit of handwaving and moved onto beds, again with no links.

I think we're quite entitled to ask, therefore, whether you withdraw from your previous assertion or not. Alternatively can you please provide a proper argument.

Moving along, you also overlook the fact that most of Western Europe has a UHC - albeit on a number of different variations - and that the total population being served is not, therefore, massivly dissimilar to the figures you set out for the US. As Rolfe has pointed out here before (numerous times) there is no reason why the US could not operate a comparable state-by-state system with reciprocal care for those caught whilst travelling, etc.

Incidentally, I'm not sure that quoting Heinlein, who's political views are fairly well understood, is the damning blow you might have hoped it to be.
 
Architect said:
I'm sorry, but you appear to have misunderstood the nature of this site inasmuch as it supports critical thinking and, inter alia, there is an implicit understanding that you cite sources and the like.

You have tried to state that we suffer from excessive waiting lists however you failed to cite a source besides a vague comment about the BBC. Other posters have, in turn, given you links which show a completely different pricture. You've now done a kind of truther-esque bit of handwaving and moved onto beds, again with no links.

I think we're quite entitled to ask, therefore, whether you withdraw from your previous assertion or not. Alternatively can you please provide a proper argument.

Moving along, you also overlook the fact that most of Western Europe has a UHC - albeit on a number of different variations - and that the total population being served is not, therefore, massivly dissimilar to the figures you set out for the US. As Rolfe has pointed out here before (numerous times) there is no reason why the US could not operate a comparable state-by-state system with reciprocal care for those caught whilst travelling, etc.

Incidentally, I'm not sure that quoting Heinlein, who's political views are fairly well understood, is the damning blow you might have hoped it to be.
Click to expand...

well, i retract my statements on healthcare and the beds. it is just i cannot bear to be wrong.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom