Public Health Care....Pros and Cons...

[RadioRaheem84]

OK, with all of the hoopla surrounding Obama's plan, many right wing radio hosts are clamoring about the public health cares systems of Canada, Cuba and the UK. Most the clamoring is ridiculous considering each plan is different and offer different things. But still, I would like to know about each of these plans and why the would be beneficial for the nation.

First Cuba, I believe that it is a good plan but not a great one. I have seen pics and read reports about the best of Cuban health but I have also read about the shoddy state of some facilities, the lack of medicine and the almost enslavement of some doctors. Is this true? I know that we tend to bias toward Cuba, but it cannot be all roses. There has to be some merit to these horror tales.

Secondly, Canada, is supposed to have a world reknown health care system. I believe it is but still have trouble digesting some of the problems associated with their system. Long lines, red tape, lack of doctors, lack of suppies. Is this true?

Last, Europe i.e. France, UK and Germany. All great plans, probably the best. Yet, again more red tape.

Point is, how do you guys address the concerns of many people when it comes to socialized medicine? I mean, address the concerns of open minded objective people who care about the state of health in America. How should we tell then that public health would be a good thing in light of all the horror stories coming out of the nations with these systems?

I want to show them the movie SICKO but it does seem like he overplayed the Cuban system a bit too highly.

[ArrowLance]

Cuba should just annex the rest of North America and all will be solved.

[scarletghoul]

It's amazing that such a rich and "civilized" country is still debating whether or not to have public healthcare. For most first world countries, it goes without saying that public healthcare is a necessity, even among the rightists

[RadioRaheem84]

Yeah, even Conservative politicians in Europe and Asia understand this as fudamental to advancing a nation. I cannot believe that people in the US see it as a detriment.

What is odd, is that most Europeans dont really see us as a first world nation like they see their countries, they just see us as a really rich nation with a huge lower class, like a Russia or China.

That's what I've gathered from some Europeans. Is that true? Do you guys see us in that light?

[scarletghoul]

Not really, Europe is not exactly the shining beacon of social equality. We still have ghettos and a lot of poverty, its just theres a welfare state too.

[LOLseph Stalin]

One thing I tend to notice with Universal Health Care, at least here in Canada anyway is that there are often longer wait times for major surgeries. Alot of this could be as a result of there not being enough trained doctors and nurses though. Some schools in Canada are actually offering massive incentives for people to enter these fields. This is somewhat disappointing as things like that would just encourage people to go into it for the pay rather than out of genuine interest in helping people.

[Kukulofori]

Yeah, even Conservative politicians in Europe and Asia understand this as fudamental to advancing a nation. I cannot believe that people in the US see it as a detriment.

What is odd, is that most Europeans dont really see us as a first world nation like they see their countries, they just see us as a really rich nation with a huge lower class, like a Russia or China.

That's what I've gathered from some Europeans. Is that true? Do you guys see us in that light?

I'm American and that's how I see us. California and the Northeast is relatively well off (compared to the rest of the US, I mean... still fucked if they break a leg or something) but really we're... a rich state with a huge lower class.

(hey guys nation != state.)

[ArrowLance]

I don't see any important cons when it comes to public health care.

I guess the poor poor rich people will have to pay for public and their big spendy private insurance at the same time! Or even worse, they might have to be brought down to the workers level and accept the same level of health care!

[progressive_lefty]

It's amazing that such a rich and "civilized" country is still debating whether or not to have public healthcare. For most first world countries, it goes without saying that public healthcare is a necessity, even among the rightists

Very true. Australia formerly had a right-wing government under John Howard that had a majority in both houses, but his party never got rid of public healthcare.
I think once you way up all the pros and cons of America's system and the rest of the developed world's public system, how can you not conclude that the problems associated with public health care are better? Americans already spend far more money per capita then other countries. If the move to public health care fails again, then it really just shows how different most (not all) Americans are in comparison to the big outer world.

[scarletghoul]

One thing I tend to notice with Universal Health Care, at least here in Canada anyway is that there are often longer wait times for major surgeries.
I would guess thats because everyone can get the major surgeries they need, not just those who can afford it.

[h9socialist]

The only reason the lines are shorter in the US is that millions of sick people are "doing without."

[Ned Flanders]

The only reason the lines are shorter in the US is that millions of sick people are "doing without."

Exactly. The US health care system is a textbook example of how NOT to organize national health care, it´s expensive, inefficient and unjust. The federal state spends more money on health care then any other country in the world, and still 40 million US citizens are without health care insurance. The only reason they haven´t established universal health care over there is pressure from the capitalists who benefit from the system...surprise, surprise! There is a reason for whenever right- wing politicians in northern europe propose some sort of market friendly "reform" in health care, they always say somthing along the lines "we are not proposing US- style health care" or "this does not involve going the american path..." etc.

[Chow Foo]

Yep

And you know who is responsible for this? The Democrats. Everytime this country and the public decide to move a little more towards the left, it is the Democrats that are in the way It's always the moderate 'blue dogs' that betrayed their voters.

[Sarah Palin]

Pros: The plan, if any, will hopefully allow more working class people access to fine healthcare.

Cons: IT'S NOT ENOUGH. Obama has really let his pragmatism get the best of him, and it's going to end with Americans being fucked over. All he does is talk about his stupid bipartisanism. WTF IS THAT? In ANY OTHER COUNTRY when you win an election, you fucking govern with an agenda!!! You don't say to losers, "Hey, come over and help us make these important laws." They lost for a reason! Whatever watered down garbage of a plan that passes will leave millions of people without care. Obama is one hell of a disappointment. I thought Glenn Beck guaranteed he was communist...?

[LOLseph Stalin]

I would guess thats because everyone can get the major surgeries they need, not just those who can afford it.

Very much so, but one thing that pisses me off is that the rich people travel to different countries since apperently they can't wait like everybody else! Grr! :mad: It's not like poor people can afford to just leave the country and get treated sooner(I guess this can have advantages since it would shorten the waiting list for the poor). Regardless, the wealthy still find a way around these things to get better care. There should be some kind of rule against this.

[Manifesto]

Very much so, but one thing that pisses me off is that the rich people travel to different countries since apperently they can't wait like everybody else! Grr! :mad: It's not like poor people can afford to just leave the country and get treated sooner(I guess this can have advantages since it would shorten the waiting list for the poor). Regardless, the wealthy still find a way around these things to get better care. There should be some kind of rule against this.
Or when the rich donate a wing they automatically go to the top of the list.

[RadioRaheem84]

Regardless, the wealthy still find a way around these things to get better care. There should be some kind of rule against this.

Why should this be a concern considering the situation? My only concern is to bring health care to the poor. If a rich man wants to leave and get "better" care, then by all means let him to free up the line.

What I dont get is, why conservatives in America believe that the long line thing is somehow an argument against universal health care. The only reason why there is no line at all in America is because there are millions of uninsured who don't seek medical attention unless its the emergency wing. Secondly, so because there are long lines, then that means the poor would be better off without any care?

I sweat there is NO logic in right wing arguments.

[LOLseph Stalin]

Why should this be a concern considering the situation? My only concern is to bring health care to the poor. If a rich man wants to leave and get "better" care, then by all means let him to free up the line.

What I dont get is, why conservatives in America believe that the long line thing is somehow an argument against universal health care. The only reason why there is no line at all in America is because there are millions of uninsured who don't seek medical attention unless its the emergency wing. Secondly, so because there are long lines, then that means the poor would be better off without any care?

I sweat there is NO logic in right wing arguments.

That bothers me as well about the right-wing's arguments against it. Why would they care how long the line-ups are? They get good treatment regardless. If the doctors are offered money they're obviously going to go for these people first so why bother even using that in an argument? The real argument is how to make the line-ups as short as possible while still providing the poor with the care they need. Another tactic that seems to sometimes work towards refuting the arguments of the right is Cuba, considering they have what many would consider one of the best health care systems in the world. Their doctors are well-trained and are able to do a good job with what they have even if they don't have all the latest technology like some right-wing nuts claim.

[GPDP]

The long-lines argument made by the right-wing ignores one crucial feature of the American system: there are indeed long lines in the present system. However, instead of being lines for those insured waiting for care, they are lines for those not insured waiting for the money needed for care.

The man lying in the floor of the hospital, bleeding to death because he is uninsured, is surely in such a line.

[RadioRaheem84]

Another tactic that seems to sometimes work towards refuting the arguments of the right is Cuba, considering they have what many would consider one of the best health care systems in the world.

That concerns me considering I have heard evidence to the contrary. I know I shouldn't use right wing sources but I have read accounts and have seen pictures of SOME Cuban hospitals which are dilapidated and in need of supplies. I know that the right wingers are using these photos and accounts as an attempt to discredit the entire Cuban system and for that matter (illogically, IMO, for why would you condemn all universal health care systems based off of one) universal health care in general, but what do we say about some of these disturbing accounts.

Not to mention the other accounts of people waiting for months, lack of doctors, supplies, etc. associated with universal health care? Are we to say that this is just the outcome of a universal health care system but everyone is insured or that we can keep a private system where the health care is superb but only the privileged see a doctor?