Why be against universal healthcare?

[MoonWater]

It's all about money. Many of our congressmen/women are most likely in the pockets of the Insurance companies and Big-Pharma....

no doubt, but that doesn't explain why so many members of the general populace are against universal healthcare.

 

[MoonWater]

I find it funny that you people are coming up with arguments against universal healthcare that directly contradict what actual people from countries with actual universal healthcare have already told you about the way it actually works. Are you guys just refusing to listen? Or what about the examples I gave from my own life about how private insurance has actually limited my available options whereas universal care would have given me greater freedom?

universal care has nothing to do with controlling who gets treatment and everything to do with making sure everyone gets treatment. With private insurance there are already limits on how much treatment is covered. With universal care those limits would be removed. You guys are seeing problems in universal care that in truth only exist in our current private system and, as has been told to you by people from countries with universal care, are problems that would be solved BY universal care, not created by them.

Why do you guys continue to spout arguments that directly contradict what people with real experience with universal care have been telling you? It's like refusing to believe a glass of water is safe to drink despite the fact it's been thoroughly tested and proven to be not only safe but better for you than the muddy glass of water you are currently drinking.

Still waiting for an answer to this. Anyone want to take a crack at it.

 

[Revoltingest]

no doubt, but that doesn't explain why so many members of the general populace are against universal healthcare.

Universal health care needn't be so bad.
But Obamacare is something else.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

no doubt, but that doesn't explain why so many members of the general populace are against universal healthcare.

One word "socialism".....Now what I mean by that is if you paint socialism as evil and present it to the people as such, who really don't know any better, then you can demagog Universal Healthcare. We have every opportunity to adopt Universal Healthcare in this country....and in fact...we should for a whole host of reasons but many conservatives, be they in the right wing media, various conservative groups and lobbyist or even our own congress won't allow such a thing to be a reality in this country....even though many of the government services (state and even federal) are already "socialized...."

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Universal health care needn't be so bad.
But Obamacare is something else.

I have health insurance through my employer. It hasn't changed under Obamacare. In fact I've benefited from it immensely. My daughter, who's under the age of 26 and on my health insurance, gave birth and benefited from Obamacare. She also has a pre-existing condition.....and either would not have been covered if she tried to get her own insurance or paid more for her premium....and in most cases would be charged more due to the simple fact that she's a woman. I say Obamacare is better than the alternatives...namely her giving birth in the hospital with absolutely no health insurance....that we would have wound up paying for anyway...and probably paid more....

 

[MoonWater]

I have health insurance through my employer. It hasn't changed under Obamacare. In fact I've benefited from it immensely. My daughter, who's under the age of 26 and on my health insurance, gave birth and benefited from Obamacare. She also has a pre-existing condition.....and either would not have been covered if she tried to get her own insurance or paid more for her premium....and in most cases would be charged more due to the simple fact that she's a woman. I say Obamacare is better than the alternatives...namely her giving birth in the hospital with absolutely no health insurance....that we would have wound up paying for anyway...and probably paid more....

indeed, I have a close friend and a brother who can't get insurance due to their "pre-existing conditions" and won't be able to at all until obamacare comes more fully into effect in 2014. Indeed I myself am due to be dropped from my dad's health insurance soon and will be under a very tight window to find my own coverage or risk being denied due to my own "pre-existing conditions".

Still though, is it really true that health insurance companies tend to charge women more for their premiums? What possible justification could they have for such a thing?

 

[Revoltingest]

I have health insurance through my employer. It hasn't changed under Obamacare. In fact I've benefited from it immensely. My daughter, who's under the age of 26 and on my health insurance, gave birth and benefited from Obamacare. She also has a pre-existing condition.....and either would not have been covered if she tried to get her own insurance or paid more for her premium....and in most cases would be charged more due to the simple fact that she's a woman. I say Obamacare is better than the alternatives...namely her giving birth in the hospital with absolutely no health insurance....that we would have wound up paying for anyway...and probably paid more....

The net beneficiaries of a program are generally happier about it than those who pay for it.
(My family will see tax increases, but no benefits from Obamacare.)
But the benefits which you & yours enjoy could be had from a simpler & better program.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

indeed, I have a close friend and a brother who can't get insurance due to their "pre-existing conditions" and won't be able to at all until obamacare comes more fully into effect in 2014. Indeed I myself am due to be dropped from my dad's health insurance soon and will be under a very tight window to find my own coverage or risk being denied due to my own "pre-existing conditions".

I went through the same thing, though I lived without insurance for a long time after I was dropped. Lots of crossed fingers and never seeing a doctor even when kidney problems became a lot worse. It was only when a friend of the family wanted to see me because she was concerned about my declining health, and refused payment from me, when I was able to begin getting better.

Then I got married and received health coverage under my new husband's military TriCare insurance. Right away. No pre-existing condition. No probationary period. The minute paperwork was signed I was able to see a doctor.

I hope you don't have to go through the hard times like I did.

Still though, is it really true that health insurance companies tend to charge women more for their premiums? What possible justification could they have for such a thing?

Because they see women as needing more health maintenance through child-bearing years, menopausal years, and post-menopausal years. Whether it's watching our bodies adjust through these phases, and understanding various health risks that accompany them.....from anemia, to endometriosis, to cervical cancer screenings, to pregnancy screenings and ultrasounds, to hormone therapy, to screenings for bone loss after menopause. Health care simply does not view men to have the same amount of necessary screenings and maintenance plans.

Don't feel too bad, though. Life insurance companies tend to charge more for premiums for men than women because they see males dying younger overall and therefore carries a higher risk.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

The net beneficiaries of a program are generally happier about it than those who pay for it.
(My family will see tax increases, but no benefits from Obamacare.)
But the benefits which you & yours enjoy could be had from a simpler & better program.

That's the thing about insurance, no one thinks they benefit from it, until they do. My house has never caught fire, so from a very narrow superficial perspective, I pay taxes but don't benefit from the fire dept.

Sure, we could have had a simpler & better program. Single-payer.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's the thing about insurance, no one thinks they benefit from it, until they do. My house has never caught fire, so from a very narrow superficial perspective, I pay taxes but don't benefit from the fire dept.

I'm more familiar with insurance than most, & I have health insurance independent of Obamacare.

Sure, we could have had a simpler & better program. Single-payer.

True dat.

 

[Aquitaine]

One word "socialism".....Now what I mean by that is if you paint socialism as evil and present it to the people as such, who really don't know any better, then you can demagog Universal Healthcare. We have every opportunity to adopt Universal Healthcare in this country....and in fact...we should for a whole host of reasons but many conservatives, be they in the right wing media, various conservative groups and lobbyist or even our own congress won't allow such a thing to be a reality in this country....even though many of the government services (state and even federal) are already "socialized...."

Could it be said that the US Military is a "Socialized" section of the government?

 

[Alceste]

Could it be said that the US Military is a "Socialized" section of the government?

Probably not without confusing most of the American right.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Could it be said that the US Military is a "Socialized" section of the government?

I've asked before what people thought about TriCare and its usefulness and necessity as the one health care option for active military servicemembers and their dependents.

I remember the difference between giving birth when I was a military wife as opposed to not being a military wife. Our co-pay as a civilian back in 1998 was close to $800. That was for a non-invasive natural birth with no anesthesia and we were released within 24 hours of giving birth.

Our co-pay as a military wife in 1997 was $15. I've talked with other military wives who had the range of births from natural to scheduled Caesarian birth. I was in the hospital for four days afterward for monitoring of me and my son.

Getting prescriptions was a breeze. I'd schedule an appointment with a doctor on staff. I'd go in and see somebody, and if I needed a prescription, I'd go to the pharmacy where they'd call my name, I'd show them my ID, sign on a single dotted line, and walk away without any co-pays.

Our of all the health problems I've had, I would be scheduled to go into surgery from time to time. CT scans. MRI scans. Military co-pay would typically be zero, or $10-$15.

As a civilian, we have hospital bills still trying to pay off that is the size of some mortgages.

I have asked if TriCare has been bankrupting the nation or our military. I honestly don't know what impact it makes on the budget. But I do know that I have yet to hear anybody complain about TriCare in the military.

The only complaints I've heard is the level of care in VA hospitals. But not TriCare.

Go figure.

 

[Aquitaine]

Probably not without confusing most of the American right.

I generally get the impression that many of the "anti-socialist" and "anti-government" Americans are also very fond of the Military, along with it's colossal budget. Yet they don't want Healthcare or Welfare etc.

It leaves me somewhat confused. Perhaps it's because I'm not an American, but an outsider looking in.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

I'm more familiar with insurance than most, & I have health insurance independent of Obamacare.

I am also more familiar with health insurance than most, and I wasn't aware there is such a thing as health insurance in the U.S. which is independent of Obamacare. Is your insurance exempt from the requirement of 100% coverage for preventive care, no barriers against pre-existing conditions, and no lifetime maximums on essential benefits, for example?

True dat.

Hey, we agree! Does that mean we're both wrong?

 

[Alceste]

I generally get the impression that many of the "anti-socialist" and "anti-government" Americans are also very fond of the Military, along with it's colossal budget. Yet they don't want Healthcare or Welfare etc.

It leaves me somewhat confused. Perhaps it's because I'm not an American, but an outsider looking in.

It's not as confusing once you understand that it's dependence and social responsibility they despise, not excessive spending.

 

[Aquitaine]

It's not as confusing once you understand that it's dependence and social responsibility they despise, not excessive spending.

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Visionary28]

It's not as confusing once you understand that it's dependence and social responsibility they despise, not excessive spending.

Should not all humans strive for independence. Why would one desire to rely on the assistance of others or worst of all their government. Dependence comes with a personal cost on the individual over time. What the government or others give they may also choose to take away. Social responsibility is a general and vague term that seems to be a reaction to a perceived injustice to the less fortunate. Those who are "well to do" are responsible for creating equality by paying there "fair share". Another words one who earns and keeps to much money is not showing social responsibility. Spending should be the decision of each individual. A person should decide what the majority of their personal money is used for, not their government or elected politicians. It is easy to be socially responsible with other's money.

 

[Valjean]

But with independence comes a life "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short."

If we all pull together, like one big family, can't achieve a much better quality of life than an individual could achieve going it alone?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

But with independence comes a life "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short."

If we all pull together, like one big family, can't achieve a much better quality of life than an individual could achieve going it alone?

Independence =/= competition, except under Corporatism.