My HMO just raised my premiums 43 percent yesterday. Get the boards of directors, the shareholders, the insurance companies, the executives in Gucci shoes and Learjets, the doctor/golfers and the profit motive out of health care. National Healthcare today. National Healthcare tomorrow. National Healthcare forever.

If you think healthcare is bad now, just put it in the hands of the government.

Yeah. The government is doing such a great job with schools, illegal aliens, roads, etc

so yeah, that will be great when they take over healthcare.

And do you think if the government provides it, it will be free?

__________________
PROUDLY REVILED BY THE LOONY LEFT SINCE 1999!!!!

"I done told you once you son a bitch I am the best that has ever been."

you liberals make me sick to my stomach.

"If you think healthcare is bad now, just put it in the hands of the government."

>>>Baloney. Just ask the Western Euros and the Canadiens.

PS - Whenever a dunce like you says "the government is doing such a great job with schools, illegals, etc.", I just say "look at the great job the government is doing with the military".

If you think the Europeans or Canadians have better health care, you are badly misinformed: the waiting period in those countries for even simple surgeries averages in YEARS. People wait two years to get hip replacements - this for a painful condition, but it's not fatal immediately, so you have to wait. Lots of people have actually died in line to get surgery. I'd rather pay the premiums and be able to get health care than have to wait in line forever to get really bad care.

If you don't believe me, go here and watch this video:

http://onthefencefilms.com/video/deadmeat/

It's only 25 minutes - it's interviews of a bunch of Canadians talking about their experience getting treated for illnesses. Turns out that pets in Canada are getting better health care than the people. Why? Because Canada allows private insurance for pets, and people can buy better care for them. In fact, Canada's system would be MUCH worse if the U.S. nationalized health care. Right now we serve as a safety valve - lots of Canadians come here and just pay to get care, taking pressure off their system.

"If you think the Europeans or Canadians have better health care, you are badly misinformed: the waiting period in those countries for even simple surgeries averages in YEARS."

>>>I see you've been drinking the Chamber of Commerce kool-aid again, eh buddy?

Everyone on this post is misinformed. I am in medicine. There are advantages and disadvantages to each system depending on who you are. Canada and western Europe have entirely different systems from each other.I will try to make this simple and short yet it is quite complex. In the United states we have HMO and private insurance. It was an ideal situation in the 70's and 80's. Now that medical care has gotten so complex risen in cost and all people are treated equal those who can pay pay big and cover everyone else. One half my patients including my self have private insurance. Yet most have huge deductibles and then pay only 80% after that. One month in the hospital will land you at least a 120,000 bill and that does not include your surgeons bill. For example on that type of billI I would owe the hospital 29,000 after my insurance paid. If someone has no money in the US they have trouble seeing a physician but if something goes wrong(car wreck,life threatening disease) they will get admitted and the hospital gets no money so that why everyone has to pay more.Also we do transplants on old people open heart surgery on 84 year old men (people want the latest greated healthcare and they want to live forever so its very expensive. The Canadian system is both social and private. In other words they will provide basic level care but if you are 80 and you want a bypass surgery and you want it paid by the government you might have to wait.You can get private insurance and get the same level of service we have except its less because you are not paying the bills of others when you pay your portion. I live in a border state with Canada and it is a myth they do not flood the borders to come here. They have good medical care and basic care is covered(you have the freedom to get additional insurance if you choose if you are the type that will want every possible thing done when you are 85 years old. Most people do not have to wait any longer than in the US. In the US people with private insurance do not realize they are paying for about half of the patients who do not pay.including a 90 year old whos family wants everthing done and they linger for months racking up 500,00 bills. Canada would not do extreme medicine on someone that age unless that person paid for or provided them selves with insurance. . The US system takes more advantage of the person who pays and the Canadian government pays enough medical care that someone can get basic services but each person will pay for things like transplants or unproven but hopeful treatments. Canada has no national debt! NONE

Now there is a solution to this and I will tell you I think It will work We can all watch and see if this state goes under or is an example to follow by watching it. Massachusetts has just passed a law requiring everyone to have health insurance.(I pay double for my care to cover uninsured) It will begin July 2006. All hospitals write off and get billions due to uninsured and then pass the cost to you. In Massachusttes they spent over 20 billion paying for the non insured. They have a budget to use this money for working people below poverty will get help with their premiums.(family of 4 making less than 21000 year.) everyone else will have to have health ins(just like you have to have car insurance.People that do not get it will have it taken from their check.Because of this law medical costs are already going down(believe me hospitals are always fearing bankruptcy) By subsidzing only the poorest they will save about 10 billion and the privite payers and people with medical care will no longer have to pay twice as much for their own bill. They did not use taxes but took the money lost and using just half hospitals worked witht he stae to set this sytem in place. Now health insurance,HMO and pharmaceutical companies are probably the wealthiest sector right after oil companies. Their CEO oftem make over 100,000.000 not including bonus. Glaxo pharmaceuticals(I worked for them for 3 years 1985-1988)they made a billion dollar the first year ZANTAC was released. Even considering research,developement and trials the mark up on this drug alone would frighten you. Massachusetts is setting the price they will apy for drugs and its working.You can probably google and find out the details but our hospital gave us a presentation and if this stae is successful others will follow. They did not want to wait for the federal government to sort it out.Hospital adminstrators and physicians nationwide think it will be a success. The most likely reason a working person might suddenly become bankrupt is because of a health crisis.That is someone WITH insurance because you pay for 50% that ate uninsured. I thin the Mass. design will out do what America,Canada,France,Italy all now have. It is unique,puts the responsibility on each person and protects them from having to pay twice the amount to cover the deadbeats. Try googling this or I willl bring home the info from my office and scan it if you want more information.

__________________
BLIND FAITH IN BAD LEADERSHIP IS NOT PATRIOTISM

One error I made was it takes effect 2007. I notice if you google "Massachusattes requires healthcare insurance for all" articles from all the newspapers came up . Almost all were positive and felt it hindered people that "work" the system and get free health care while you and I pay enormous amounts.

__________________
BLIND FAITH IN BAD LEADERSHIP IS NOT PATRIOTISM

There are sensible alternatives to HMO's.

The company that I work for provides health insurance to its employees. It was costing a fortune. A couple of years ago they announced that employees have a sencond option. That is, rather than pay the employee share of the health insurance we could opt for the company to establish a health savings account in the amount of $1500.00 for each single employee and $2500.00 for employees with families and pay the full price for a catastrophic health policy for employees and family members.

At the beginning of each fiscal year, $1500 and $2500 respectively, is put into each employee's account on top of whatever is left from the previous year's deposit. If an employee leaves the company, the money in the account is theirs.

The result is that we tend to shop for medical services rather than just go in without regard to cost, and we tend not to go to the doctor when it really isn't necessary and the company is saving a fortune on health care coverage which has been reflected in our pay.

__________________
"It's not alive, It's not alive, It's not alive. Because I said it isnt', there's your proof jerk." ...lexi

"As far as your logical fallicy shit - shove it. I am a woman."...naturemomma

That is not a solution for most americans. You just described the type of insurance I have. I put $5000 of my own money in a HSA. I then bough catastrophic insurance with a 5000 deductible. I f I get in a car wreck or breast cancer(I am trying to think of the highest likelihood for someone my age) and I had a hospital bill of 200,000. My hsa would pay my deductible then I would still have to pay 20%. I spend 800$ a month on this insurance since my husband and I are both self employed. In the event of a healthcare issue I would probably need about 30,000 in cash .Please keep in mind i have already put the 5000 out of pocket into my HSA(granted its pre tax.) I could handle a crisis because of my income but this is not a feasible option for 85% of americans. This is a survivol techniche used by people with high incomes to avoid a crisis that could lead to bankruptcy.

__________________
BLIND FAITH IN BAD LEADERSHIP IS NOT PATRIOTISM