[Vision2020] Health care

Mon Apr 21 22:56:44 PDT 2008

Saundra,

  What exactly did I say that contradicts what you said below? The reason people are going broke is because medical costs are too high, due to greed. It is not because people are dying at a higher rate than they were 30 years. In fact, people are living longer.

  Poorer people are charged more for medical care than those with heath insurance, that is fact, don't believe me, call your insurance company, or any insurance company, and they will tell confirm what I say.

  Best Regards,

  Donovan
  I

Saundra Lund <sslund_2007 at verizon.net> wrote:
        v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}  o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}  w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}  .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}                Actually, Donovan, I think you are mistaken.  While this article is a couple of years old, the stat breakdown still hold according to the ABI:
  http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6895896/

  Note:
  “Costly illnesses trigger about half of all personal bankruptcies, and most of those who go bankrupt because of medical problems have health insurance, according to findings from a Harvard University study to be released Wednesday. . . Most of those seeking court protection from creditors had health insurance, with more than three-quarters reporting they had coverage at the start of the illness that triggered bankruptcy. . . Out-of-pocket medical expenses covering co-payments, deductibles and uncovered health services averaged $13,460 for bankruptcy filers who had private insurance at the onset of illness, compared with $10,893 for those without coverage. Those who initially had private coverage but lost it during their illness faced the highest cost, an average of $18,005. . . The findings indicate medical-related bankruptcies hit middle-class families hard — 56 percent of the filers owned a home, and the same number had attended college.  “Families with coverage faced
 unaffordable co-payments, deductibles and bills for uncovered items like physical therapy, psychiatric care and prescription drugs,” Himmelstein said.””

  The state of health care in this country is a national disgrace, but it really gets tiresome, Donovan, for you to continually fail to recognize that the middle-class is being hit very hard, harder than the poor by all factual reports, with respect to bankruptcy due to medical expenses.

  Furthermore, those parents forced into relinquishing parental rights to ensure that their children have access to appropriate medical care for chronic conditions are overwhelmingly middle-class families with health insurance.  This particular horror is something the poor are actually spared.

  Another instance is the cost of medications.  For those without health insurance, there are many patient assistance programs available.  I know two people taking identical medications:  one gets the medications free through patient assistance programs, and the other with health insurance will pay in excess of $300 per month after meeting a $1500 deductible.  Their annual incomes are about $1100 apart.

  If you have more current factual information, I’m all ears (or eyes, as the case may be).

  You are, however, correct, IMHO, that the greed possible in an unfettered free market is responsible for our US unconscionable health care costs.

  Saundra Lund
  Moscow, ID

  The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing.
  ~ Edmund Burke

  ***** Original material contained herein is Copyright 2008 through life plus 70 years, Saundra Lund.  Do not copy, forward, excerpt, or reproduce outside the Vision 2020 forum without the express written permission of the author.*****

    From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com] On Behalf Of Donovan Arnold
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 7:53 PM
To: Ralph Nielsen; Vision 2020
Cc: Donovan Arnold
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Health care

    Ralph,

    The reason that charity doesn't pay for medical care of the poor is because we charge outrageous rates for medical care.

    No, my band-aid example is grounded in reality, although exaggerated to make a point. Hospitals overcharge the uninsured, that is a fact. The reason they do this is because they know that they will only recover a certain percentage of the actual cost of providing them care. This strategy obviously hurts the poor more than those that are wealthier and can afford health insurance.

    Health insurance companies enable doctors and health care providers to charge fees not otherwise affordable to 90% of the public, and putting the poor into medical bankruptcy. 

    You cannot apply the Canadian system of health care to that of the United States. It would not work. Greed is the simple reason for our health care system being unaffordable to the average citizen, it is that simple. 

    Best Regards,

    Donovan

Ralph Nielsen <nielsen at uidaho.edu> wrote:

Dear Donovan,

I don't know where you get these ideas, but they are not grounded on 
reality. If you imagine that charity will pay for the poor, why are 
over 40 million Americans without health care insurance of any kind? 
And why are millions more bankrupted by doctor and hospital bills 
that their insurance companies refuse to pay? I think your band-aid 
example is absurd.

For some first-hand information on how universal medicare works in 
the Province of British Columbia, please read the first two articles 
on this web site. They are written by an American citizen who lives 
in BC and is familiar with both systems. And please note, Donovan, 
the Canadian system does not benefit the rich while hurting the poor, 
as you claim below. Please get your facts first.

Ralph

Ralph,

Universal Health Care, and Universal Health Coverage are two 
totally different things. Forcing people to buy health insurance 
doesn't cure anybody, it just makes doctors and insurance companies 
even wealthier than they are.

I am 100% against forced health insurance purchasing, because it 
will not help the poor and will just be another tax benefiting the 
rich while hurting the poor.

The problem is not how can we pay for a $60 band-aid, but rather, 
why we cannot reduce the cost of the band-aid to 60 cents, or even 
$6.00. If you bring down the cost of the band-aid, the middle class 
can afford health insurance and charity can afford to cover the poor.

Best Regards,

Donovan

Ralph Nielsen wrote:
I thought it was a very informative program in that it covered a
variety of systems for universal coverage. Unfortunately, most
Americans seem to have been indoctrinated with the idea the 
universal
health insurance is "socialized medicine," and therefore to be
avoided like poison A couple of months ago a repairman at my house
used that term with an air of dislike. So I asked hem what he meant
by that term. He replied that it means that all doctors will be
working for the government.

So I told him about my Canadian brother, who is a self-made
millionaire, and lives in the Okanagan Valley, just north of the
Washington border. About a year ago he had a hip replacement. He 
had
to wait less than a month because he was willing to go to a younger
doctor instead of an older, more popular one. Most Canadian doctors
do not work for the government, they work for themselves. Only the
insurance is paid by the government, like our Medicare, and ALL
residents are covered, not just the rich, as down here. This is 
paid
for by income taxes, which, of course, are based on ability to pay,
and everybody is covered, regardless of income.

Last month there was a provincial election in Alberta, where the
Conservative Party has been in power for 37 years. In February they
called for a provincial election on March 3. I listened on my
internet radio to a 2-hour debate between the party leaders:
Conservative, Liberal, New Democratic (like the British Labour
Party), and a small new party called the Alberta Wild Rose Party,
which sounded like dogmatic libertarians. There were frequent
questions about problems with health care but no one, not even the
libertarian, proposed that their "socialized" medicine be scrapped
and Alberta return to the old American-style system they had 
before.
In fact, it was the Conservatives who had set it up in the first 
place!

Later, on March 3, the Conservatives were not only returned to 
power;
they gained 11 new seats! Wouldn't it be nice if our conservatives
learned something from the Province of Alberta?

Ralph Nielsen

=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet, 
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. 
http://www.fsr.net 
mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

---------------------------------

  Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20080421/f425f81d/attachment-0001.html 