In article
4ax.com>,
Hardpan yahoo.com> wrote:>>In article
e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
>>turtoni fastmail.net> wrote:>>>On Aug 27, 12:56=A0am, Hardpan
yahoo.com> wrote:>>>> On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:21:36 -0700 (PDT), turtoni
>>>>
fastmail.net> wrote:>>>>>On Aug 26, 5:26=A0pm, "jjs" wrote:
>>>>>> "turtoni"
fastmail.net> wrote in message>>>..
................
>>There is no way that one can have the type of medical coverage
>>which I would consider reasonable. Neither the money nor the
>>personnel are there. One cannot repeal the laws of nature.
>No one is talking about building a "bionic man" here. Would be nice
>to have an appendix removed without paying $30,000. dollars though.
There are ways to reduce it; it is government action
which makes it that expensive. We should have free
of low-cost clinics instead of the current abuse of
hospital emergency rooms. People go overseas to get
surgery done, because the hospital does not have to
charge for this abuse.
>>>What's the incentive to work hard to get your medical insurance? Why
>>>not just sit at home and get a hand out? That would seem to be
>>>natural, right?
>>Most people are Marxist when it comes to what they do not have.
>The problem is that in other western countries, they have basic
>healthcare needs ready when they are ill, at any age.
This restricts healthcare to what the government
bureaucrats will allow. In other words, even if
you can afford treatment, you cannot get it.
>In the US only those who can afford it or have a good job, have
>affordable healthcare. The rest do not.
>>The present plans are prepaid medicine, not insurance.
>>Insurance should be for rare events; you pay more than the
>>"average" to be able to handle catastrophies. This is what
>>medical insurance should be.
>>Even Medicare is welfare, in that what one gets our has no
>>relation to what one has put in.
>But Americans have to wait 65 years to began to be paid for it.
Government welfare has no place in a free society.
>In the meantime the system is counting on lots of people less
>then 65 dying, else it would go broke.
I have news for you; the country is broke.
>>Universal healthcare MUST result in rationing by government
>>bureaucrats; civil servants are neither.
>Healthcare *is* rationed now in the US. If you don't have the job or
>the $$$ you either don't get any care at all or you can go broke
>paying for it.
Using that "definition" of rationing, houses, cars, boats,
restaurant meals, etc., are all rationed. They are not.
Rationing is interfering with the market.
>Even then the healthplans they have now, are watered down from what
>they were just a few years ago. And they cost 30 percent more at the
>least, for the most similar plan that you _had_before.
That 30 percent is due to government regulations.
>Yes, thats right. You pay more and more each year for healthcare
>no matter what plan you have, if you have one, while those filthy
>lying bastards in D.C. pay nothing at all, year after year.
THAT I agree. Any Congresscritter who proposes of votes
for a health plan should be limited to the coverage of
that plan for the average person. If a plan is enacted,
he or she should have to be in a voluntary pool to pay
damages to those who cannot get alternative treatment
which they would have been able to afford if Congress
had not enacted their socialist plan.
>Hell, we even get to hear all about the pResident getting a
>rectal colonoscopy here in the USA, all paid for by the
>taxpayers here in the land of the slaves, and home of
>the knaves.
The President should be an exception, but consider how
much medical care would cost if everyone had Kennedy's
treatment. It would exceed the national income by far.
And yet Kennedy is for government healthcare.
>Ah, home sweet home, that's the polished-up "new" America for you!
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@
stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
