Re: Comments on House Healcare Reform Bill

**UGLY** · 07-30-2009, 03:29 PM

It is only relevant because of the misrepresentation of the numbers. They use those numbers and suggest that these are people without insurance who want insurance, and that is not the case. As for illegal aliens why would we pay for them to have insurance, and while most have jobs most don't have jobs that provide insurance.

I see, because we pay for some of those who are uninsured we should just go ahead and pay for all of them.

**UGLY** · 07-30-2009, 03:30 PM

There are an estimated 10-12million illegal aliens in this country.

**ODH** · 07-30-2009, 05:05 PM

Thinking about it a little bit, it seems like it should be easy to get the number of people without insurance.
We know the number of people in the US from the census (are illegal aliens counted in the census? probably not for the most part), I would think the insurance industry would be able to come up with the total number of people they provide health insurance for. Subtract one from the other and that is your number of uninsured.

When you start playing around with qualifiers like, they are under 35 and can afford but chose not to pay for it, then you leave the numbers open to politics.

I don't know if Obama is doing that with his number of 45 million uninsured.

**UGLY** · 07-30-2009, 05:13 PM

Let me just say that I agree with most of the conservatives when they say that this will lead to a single payer social medicine. No company can compete with the Government, and the Government can not control its cost. If it ends up to be social medicine and we get what they have in the UK and Canada we will regret it.

**Ground&Pound** · 07-30-2009, 06:58 PM

If anyone listens to XM or SIRIUS, Pete Dominic on POTUS spends a lot of time on this topic. Today he had a guest on from the UK who claims that their system has been getting a bad rap here in the states.

The way he explained it, their system sounds better that our current system for everyone except those with here with the very best coverage.

He said the UK pays 9% of their nation budget to cover everyone.

We pay 16% of ours just to cover Medicare and Medicaid.

Plus, in the UK you can still buy private insurance if you'd like.

BTW, the UK and Canada systems are not the same.

**arm-spin** · 07-30-2009, 07:27 PM

I'm pretty sure most people in Canada want to keep their system, not go to privatized health care. Each system has its benefits.

**RYou** · 07-30-2009, 07:32 PM

[QUOTE=Ground&Pound;251389]

Plus, in the UK you can still buy private insurance if you'd like.

QUOTE]

Tis true. The population purchses the supplementary health insurance because it allows them to see the medical professional they and to not to be on a waiting list for surgery, etc. It's basically, go to the head of the class insurance. Procedures that are denied for whatever reason by the social insurance are available under the private insurance.

The reason for the difference in cost is the cap on physician personal income on those serving the social programs. Here, there is no cap on doc income, the system tries to cap the value of the service reimbursement.

**Ground&Pound** · 07-30-2009, 07:54 PM

(Again....according to the UK guy)

All his private insurance gets him is a private room in a hospital instead of shared room.

He also said that anyone can see any doctor.

Also, the waiting lists (que) is not nearly as bad as reported here.

And, there is no wait for serious life threatening illnesses.

Overall, he made a good arguement.

**ODH** · 07-30-2009, 08:41 PM

I heard similar comments about the Canadian system.
And if government controlled healthcare is so horrible and cannot control its cost, why are there more senior citizens deciding not to use Medicare.
Also, why do I constantly hear about how Medicare only reimburses up to a certain perecetnage of money to the providers? Sounds like they are the only health insurer with enough power to demand lower costs.

Thread Tools

Display