Attacks on the NHS

[Telstar5]

Ah yeah, I forgot about that...

I'm guessing that the government in the states is paying back this debt by budgeting properly. It would only mean reallocating certain funds and maybe introducing a national insurance system like ours to get it to 'pay for itself'. Hey, we're in trillion-pound debt, yet we are spending money on an expensive illegal war, a healthcare system, schools, police etc etc... but then again, socialist morals are more popular here than in the states.

[GMG Tim]

Trillion is the new billion.

We'll just throw a trillion at the major banks to bail them out.
Then we'll throw out another trillion for the economic stimulus.
And while we're at it, maybe a trillion for national health care.

[Telstar5]

Throwing trillions at banks was necessary, I think you'll agree. If we let the banks go bust, we end up with people losing their homes and then, hooray, it's 1930 again. Like wise, if the government can find money to throw at bankers, then they can find money to throw at national healthcare.

I think they should have given that trillion-dollar/pound package to every man, woman and child in each country to spend on whatever they like. That would get the economy moving, most likely... although the total amount would probably equal £5.47, enough to buy some cigarettes at least

[Silverwind]

Banks take care of the public's money.
Banks go bankrupt and the public loses allot of their money.
A trillion dollars of public tax money goes back to the banks.

Wouldn't it make more sense to stop using banks? Or hang someone?

[WarHampster]

I'm all for a socialized banking system, but country founded on free market blah blah blah.

[GMG Tim]

I think if you let banks fail because of their greedy practices, the country will be sent into turmoil, yes, but eventually will recover and be stronger.

I don't see the local 7/11 that's going out of business getting a government bail-out, it lost out to the am/pm across the street. Competition my friend, competition.

Ghost

[WarHampster]

Completely different situation when it comes to banks... of course competition is good, but when a bank goes bankrupt an unacceptable number of people lose a lot of money to everything.

[Gan]

Hey Telstar, today I talked with a woman that majored in social science and have learned quite a bit about Obama's plan and America's current health care system.

While you were ranting, raving, and getting infuriated by America's current system; you missed some major things about Obama's idea.
Here are a few pros and cons of Obama's ideas:
Pros:
- Cost will vary according to citizens, it will be more affordable.
Cons:
- American's will lose their right not to have health care. Yes, this is very important. When I was a baby, my parents had very little money and the times were hard. They could of paid $500 for health care, but put it into savings and went on a limb. Thankfully no problems occurred and they had an extra $500 which came in very useful.
- The government will control the health care, not the state. This is exactly what the United States Constitution was against when written. That the government shouldn't get too much power.
- A waiting list, very long.

You know... now I'm starting to think that our current system is not so bad. You see, it's not that most citizens can't afford it; it's that they choose not to get health care. In fact, most citizens can afford and get health care.
You know when you sliced your tongue and your mother called the insurance company? If we had national health care, you would be put on a long waiting list as your injury isn't very important.

I don't think that the Republicans are going all rebellious over a bit of control... I think they realize how this can damage the country and are willing to stand up for what they believe in.

If you want a prime example of what will happen if passed, check out Canada's health care system. Here's a chart with a few facts:

Parliament unanimously passed the Canada Health Act in 1984 and established a single-payer, publicly-financed health care system. To ensure a true government monopoly (is there any other kind?) Canadian provinces outlawed private health insurance.

Surgery postponed indefinitely for 1,000 Kelowna patients
- Cathryn Atkinson, April 8, 2008 [Globe and Mail]
Majority of Que. dentists quit health-care system
- March 27, 2008 [CTV.ca]
Why Ontario keeps sending patients south
- Lisa Priest, February 22, 2008 [Globe and Mail]
Will Socialized Health Care in the US Kill Canadians?
- Don Surber, March 3, 2008 [Acton Institute]
Wait times for surgery, medical treatments at all-time high: report
- October 15, 2007 [CBC News (Canada)]
The Ugly Truth About Canadian Health Care
- David Gratzer, Summer 2007 [City Journal]
Cancer patients question why PET scan not covered
- May 28, 2007 [CBC News]
BC Medical Association: Waiting Too Long for Hip and Knee Surgery Costs $10,000 Per Patient-Maximum Wait Times Should Be No Longer Than 6 Months
- June 28, 2006 [CCN Matthews]

Here's the site for a ton more problem occurrences: http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/socialized.html#canada


-Gandolf

[WarHampster]

Under Obama's plan, you WOULD NOT be forced to use the public health care plan. You can use any health care you want, or choose to not use any at all (which would make no sense, considering the public option would be FREE).

In fact, most citizens can afford and get health care.

You're kidding, right?

[Telstar5]

You know... now I'm starting to think that our current system is not so bad. You see, it's not that most citizens can't afford it; it's that they choose not to get health care. In fact, most citizens can afford and get health care.
You know when you sliced your tongue and your mother called the insurance company? If we had national health care, you would be put on a long waiting list as your injury isn't very important.

An acute injury like getting my tounge sliced would go on a waiting list, yes, but we are talking about a waiting list in minutes rather than weeks or months like the anti-nationalisation people in the states are talking about.

Hey Telstar, today I talked with a woman that majored in social science and have learned quite a bit about Obama's plan and America's current health care system.

I wish your woman good luck in getting a medical job in the USA. Profit in an insurance company comes from spending less, and one of the most expensive things to keep around are employees.

It might be worth mentioning that the NHS is the world's 3rd most biggest employer. 1.3 million jobs, with many more positions available every day. It would certainly help out with getting people in the states off of the welfare system (which is much worse than ours, I have to say).

[Gan]

I wish your woman good luck in getting a medical job in the USA. Profit in an insurance company comes from spending less, and one of the most expensive things to keep around are employees.

She's not going to be in the medical field.


-Gandolf

[Telstar5]

Ah okay, my mistake. But still, what about all them jobs? It could be what America needs right now, seeing as the free market has fucked itself in the last two years with a major global recession.

[Gan]

I am unsure wether or not national health care would provide more jobs, though then comes the question if more jobs would be good or worse for the nation.
I would have to research into a few more things.
By the way, if everyone is getting poorer, even the rich; where is all the money going?


-Gandolf

[Telstar5]

Debt.

[WarHampster]

then comes the question if more jobs would be good or worse for the nation.

How is it possible that more jobs could be bad for a nation?