Is the NHS really 'Evil and Orwellian'?

[ImprobableJoe]

I have seen this in the movies on TV. It's absolutely false. If you get injured here in the states such that you have to go to the emergency room, you will be taken care of. They will send you a bill. If you have insurance, you just have to forward the bill to the insurance company to pay (if you have your insurance card on you, then the hospital will forward the bill for you.) If you don't have insurance you have to pay the bill by whatever means available to you. It's the latter scenario that have so many people up in arms claiming that the system is broke. There has been so much litigation against the medical profession that the cost of health care has grown beyond what the average person can safely afford. Just for an example: If you needed open heart surgery back in 1950, it would cost the average middle class person a months wages. Now... plan on 2-3 years worth of wages. People like to blame the insurance companies (and yes there is fault there), but the true underlying problem are the lawyers.

Would you stop spreading that lie please? It makes you look bad. Here's thegovernment report... lawsuits are less than 1% of healthcare costs. To claim that it is the driving force in cost increases is a flat-out lie. Stop it already... I know you are just repeating falsehoods you've heard, and not intentionally being dishonest, but you should check your claims before you repeat them

 

[ImprobableJoe]

However, beyond that. I see three responses to my statement, and I don't think they could have been any more evenly spread in their reaction. Which doesn't make me much wiser.

Just listen to me, and you'll be fine. :lol:

There's a bit of truth even in Q-Hack!'s post: you will get emergency care without a credit check. The problem is that you don't get any follow-up care, you don't get to stay in the hospital until you are well, none of the things beyond making sure you don't die on the emergency room floor, unless you can pay for it. If you break your leg, they'll put a cast on it and kick you right back out even if you need physical therapy after... I doubt they will even take the cast off for you, since that's not emergency service. If you have a heart attack, they'll do CPR, but you're on your own for any sort of medication or surgery to prevent you from dying next week.

And that's one of the REAL things that drives up costs. Instead of giving someone without cash or insurance the medicine to prevent future heart attacks, the only time that guy can get help is during a heart attack. What's more expensive, trying to save someone's life in an ER two or three times, or a bottle of pills?

 

[Gnomesmusher]

Exactly. It's the American way to do a quick expensive fix when there's a problem instead of long term prevention. But then again, a recent poll says that 45% of Americans believe "Death Panels" are real, so it seems thinking isn't our strong suit. That's depressing.

 

[kouchpotato]

If you had said "the military industry is one of the best examples on how money is spent in the least efficient way", I would have agreed with you. However, you used the term "useful." To which I will respond: No government will last without the backing of a strong military. This is History 101. The USA spends money to insure that we can maintain our freedom. I wouldn't call it the least useful way to spend money.

*facepalm*

Your freedom isn't in danger by anyone. Since 1945 the United States has had an I WIN card, the atomic bomb. Nobody is going to invade you. If they tried they'd be reduced to a trinitite crater. Spending HALF THE DEFENSE BUDGET of the entire world is not defendable. If they cut that spending in half nothing bad would happen to America. If they cut it to one tenth nothing bad would happen.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Exactly. It's the American way to do a quick expensive fix when there's a problem instead of long term prevention. But then again, a recent poll says that 45% of Americans believe "Death Panels" are real, so it seems thinking isn't our strong suit. That's depressing.

Well, the long term prevention is cheaper and more efficient... and in America's capitalist system, "cheaper and more efficient"="can't be allowed," because there's less opportunity for the top 1% to steal even more money from the American people. It is those same millionaires who are behind all these lies about health care. They PREFER an inefficient system that fails to meet the standards of countries that spend half as much. A healthy middle class that has healthcare, job security, and prosperity cuts into gigantic corporate profits and ridiculous bonuses. They can't allow that to happen.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

*facepalm*

Your freedom isn't in danger by anyone. Since 1945 the United States has had an I WIN card, the atomic bomb. Nobody is going to invade you. If they tried they'd be reduced to a trinitite crater. Spending HALF THE DEFENSE BUDGET of the entire world is not defendable. If they cut that spending in half nothing bad would happen to America. If they cut it to one tenth nothing bad would happen.

Well, a bunch of military contractors would be really angry when the wealth transfer ends. Other than that, no biggie.

 

[curiousmind]

First of all, how is a fair healthcare service for everyone possibly evil??
Surely your income shouldn't effect you basic rights to general health?

And secondly how is it Orwellian???
The idea of the NHS isn't fascist or authoritarian, doesn't involve propaganda or any of the things that the word 'Orwellian' describes.

I really don't get where she's coming from on this one...

 

[benoitms]

Here is my primary concern. Why should I pay for your fat ass who is too lazy to get up and get some exercise. .

Because maybe one day the same fag guy will be paying for your kid's lever transplant... That you health company will not permit "Sorry not on your basic heath plan" It's name solidarity...
Benoit

 

[benoitms]

I was also seen in hospital in Sicily for a broken foot. This was not a good experience. I had to wait more than 7 hours to be seen. They gave me what was supposed to be a walking cast. It was so thin, that by the end of the day it was breaking up. I was not given crutches or a cane to help with walking. Had to have the entire cast redone when I got back to the states. I suspect that if I had been a member of the "family" I would have had better care. One of the last times I had to be seen by a doctor outside of the USA, was in Columbia (I needed a few stitches.) I was seen by a doctor that was on staff for an oil company. Not really socialized medicine, but I didn't have to pay for it. In this case he would have been paid no matter how he treated me.

The Italian government (Thanks Berlusconi) is trying to cut down expenses in health care and other primary needs to focus on more important issues like: Hookers, speed boats, Viagra, nice houses and money on a offshore bank for the Prime Minister... :?

Benoit

 

[benoitms]

Yep I have a friend who was sue by a girl he just save here life because the cut for the tracheotomy was 1/4" longer than the average one... She was involve in a big car accident involving a lot of booze... Now the guy is practicing in Canada...
Benoit

 

[benoitms]

Your freedom isn't in danger by anyone. Since 1945 the United States has had an I WIN card, the atomic bomb. Nobody is going to invade you. If they tried they'd be reduced to a trinitite crater. Spending HALF THE DEFENSE BUDGET of the entire world is not defendable. If they cut that spending in half nothing bad would happen to America. If they cut it to one tenth nothing bad would happen.

I'm always amaze buy US army: Tanks with air conditioning that use 1000 L for 100 KM. Super Hy-tech airplanes who finally just serve to photo a guy running in the mountains... Kevlar vest who cost a fortune but the making company cute down the expenses so even a 22 caliber can go trough... And the famous M16... So many useless gadgets so much waist of money... But Bush proved that there is always the need of a powerful army to invade a armless country and get stuck in the mud for 5 years...
Benoit

 

[Giliell]

The Italian government (Thanks Berlusconi) is trying to cut down expenses in health care and other primary needs to focus on more important issues like: Hookers, speed boats, Viagra, nice houses and money on a offshore bank for the Prime Minister... :?

Benoit

You know, Italy is a proof for the common idea that a lot of intelligent people can act very stupid together.
I mean, yes, anybody might make the mistake of electing Berlusconi once, but three times?
But he's also saving your court system a lot of money by excluding himself from it :lol:

About sueing and costs of that: A lot of blame lies with courts and insurance. At least in Germany a court can refuse a lawsuit if they think it to be baseless. A case like the one you mentioned should be filed under W like "wastepaper".
There's also a thing here called "Legal protection insurance". It is generally a good thing to have one, because lawsuits are expensive and if somebody has done you wrong and ows you money he can just sit and wait if you manage to pay in advance to claim it.
BUT: They'll only pay your expenses if you sue somebody and most of them will pay regardless of why you're suing somebody. They will NOT cover anything if you are sued, and if you lose you have to pay everything. So people go on suing other people on the grounds that they can only win: If they win the suit then the other party has to pay everything, but if they lose, well insurance pays, so why not try your luck?

 

[benoitms]

My friend got so mad of this story, even if he didn't loose any money, that he decided to move to Canada... I'm agree that judges should be more "intelligent" in determinate if a complain is valid or not...
Benoit

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Guys... malpractice is less than 1% of America's healthcare costs, and haven't seen any growth in a decade or more, last time I checked. Lawsuits are NOT the problem. Health insurance executives make tens of millions of dollars a year, and get bigger bonuses for charging more for fewer services. THAT'S the problem.

 

[Q-Hack!]

*facepalm*

Your freedom isn't in danger by anyone. Since 1945 the United States has had an I WIN card, the atomic bomb. Nobody is going to invade you. If they tried they'd be reduced to a trinitite crater. Spending HALF THE DEFENSE BUDGET of the entire world is not defendable. If they cut that spending in half nothing bad would happen to America. If they cut it to one tenth nothing bad would happen.

Wow... just wow...

Do you really believe this? Wasn't it 11 Sept. 2001 that America was last attacked? I don't remember us turning Afghanistan into a Trinitite creator. No, the only thing our nuclear arsenal is designed for, is to ensure that the other nuclear capable countries don't decide to go crazy. Its called MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction. While we do spend a small amount of our defence budget on maintaining our nuclear arsenal, most of the money is spent on conventional warfare assets.

Just for the sake of discussion, lets go ahead and cut the defence budget down to one tenth the size. What would happen? It would force our military home from all parts of the world; defence of the homeland is the top priority after all. We could no longer afford pay the salaries of a 2.9 million person force, so 2.5 million people would now be without a job. Oh, and that's not counting the number of civilians who rely on the defence industry, so you can probably double that number. North Korea would, almost immediately, march over the DMZ and take over South Korea. Iraq would fall into full fledged civil war (granted we are barely keeping that from happening now.) Israel would be wiped off the map... though they would probably last longer than the South Koreans. Japan doesn't have an effective military and would be completely defenceless (the North Koreans don't like them either.) The economy in Germany would suffer as the area around Heidelburg and Ramstein are considered to be "little America" We dump a lot of money into those economies just being there. I could go on, but I hope you can see that the United States can no longer go back to the isolationist concept of pre WWII.

I don't know, maybe we should cut the defence budget down to 1/10th the size... Upwards of 5 million people, in the US, wouldn't have a job and millions of people, around the world, would either die or loose the freedom they now cherish. But at least I would have free health care... Personally, I can't think of a better way to piss off the entire world.

This may be callous of me, but I would much rather spend the money on defence. We just have to make sure that we spend it on the correct things. ie. We don't really need another 100 F-22s, however another 100 Predator UAVs sound like a good idea. Not only are they cheaper, but they are better at the kind of warfare being fought today.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Do you really believe this? Wasn't it 11 Sept. 2001 that America was last attacked?

Yeah, and those trillions of dollars of defense spending did NOTHING to stop it. Don't you feel a little foolish insisting on even more spending on something that does NOTHING to keep us safe? We could cut the defense budget in half without the loss of a single person, or negatively affecting our defensive capability in any way at all. We could cut it by 3/4 by not attacking countries that have no capacity to attack us in any meaningful way.

Oh, and by the way... 9/11 was, in the grand scheme of things, fucking nothing. Another 9/11 is no threat to the existence of our country, or our way of life, except for the fact that Americans are by and large cowardly drama queens. Yeah, it was a tragedy, and everyone who died that day should still be with us... but if that was the best the terrorists can do, color me 110% unimpressed. Forget about spending billions to fight that with military force, that's just a stupid waste of money.

I'm sick and tired of hearing how we don't have the money to save hundreds of thousands of American lives right now, because we're wasting money avenging the deaths of a few thousand who died almost a decade ago.

 

[Q-Hack!]

Would you stop spreading that lie please? It makes you look bad. Here's thegovernment report... lawsuits are less than 1% of healthcare costs. To claim that it is the driving force in cost increases is a flat-out lie. Stop it already... I know you are just repeating falsehoods you've heard, and not intentionally being dishonest, but you should check your claims before you repeat them

Ah yes, the CBO report of 1991... Got anything more recent?

Maybe this one from the CBO in 2004 which is completely counter to the report in 1991?
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/49xx/doc4968/01-08-MedicalMalpractice.pdf

Or maybe this one from the CBO in 2006?
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/71xx/doc7174/04-28-MedicalMalpractice.pdf

What was that? Something about doing your research? Here I will help you out; this is the list of all their reports for the last 90 days.
http://www.cbo.gov/publications/past90days.cfm

You have to cut the CBO a little slack, they write there reports based on the current political trends. (The director is appointed, jointly, by the speaker of the house and the president.) Currently the boys in the think tank that is the CBO claim that its going to take a multi faceted approach to reduce health care costs. A tort on malpractice claims being one of them. Although, in fairness, they conclude that the biggest advantage to be gained is by capping premiums on health insurance.

It's actually kind of interesting how the reports during a Republican controlled Congress differ from a Democrat controlled Congress. Not saying either one is right or wrong, just interesting.

 

[Q-Hack!]

Yeah, and those trillions of dollars of defense spending did NOTHING to stop it.

It's called wisdom. You get it from experience. Prior to 911 the US Military was not looking inward for threats. The military didn't monitor civilian air traffic, because they didn't want to give the impression that they were spying on civilians. Guess what... now they do.

Don't you feel a little foolish insisting on even more spending on something that does NOTHING to keep us safe?

I am going to put this into the category of differing opinions. Do I feel foolish? No. That's like the Christians, who think that telling me I am going to hell because I don't believe in their god (or hell), will have some sort of effect on my psyche. I think the defence budget is doing a lot to keep, not only us, but other countries safe. You don't. We can leave it at that.

We could cut the defense budget in half without the loss of a single person, or negatively affecting our defensive capability in any way at all. We could cut it by 3/4 by not attacking countries that have no capacity to attack us in any meaningful way.

In 1991 Congress shorted the defence budget by about 40% from the previous years. In order to make the budget balance out, all the services cut manpower by about 50% on average. It was not a good time to be in the military. Getting parts to fix equipment was difficult. How we went into the first gulf war was not a good situation. For instance, did you know that the US Army only deployed with 120 rounds of ammunition per soldier? That was eventually fixed, but it is those kind of problems that crop up with budget cuts.

Oh, and by the way... 9/11 was, in the grand scheme of things, fucking nothing. Another 9/11 is no threat to the existence of our country, or our way of life, except for the fact that Americans are by and large cowardly drama queens. Yeah, it was a tragedy, and everyone who died that day should still be with us... but if that was the best the terrorists can do, color me 110% unimpressed. Forget about spending billions to fight that with military force, that's just a stupid waste of money.

What was it you said to me a few posts back... Ah yes, "another display of anti-social attitude on your part" and "hatred towards other people. Very nice."

 

[kouchpotato]

Wow... just wow...

Do you really believe this? Wasn't it 11 Sept. 2001 that America was last attacked? I don't remember us turning Afghanistan into a Trinitite creator. No, the only thing our nuclear arsenal is designed for, is to ensure that the other nuclear capable countries don't decide to go crazy. Its called MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction. While we do spend a small amount of our defence budget on maintaining our nuclear arsenal, most of the money is spent on conventional warfare assets.

9/11 was no threat to American sovereignties or American freedoms.

Just for the sake of discussion, lets go ahead and cut the defence budget down to one tenth the size. What would happen? It would force our military home from all parts of the world; defence of the homeland is the top priority after all. We could no longer afford pay the salaries of a 2.9 million person force, so 2.5 million people would now be without a job. Oh, and that's not counting the number of civilians who rely on the defence industry, so you can probably double that number. North Korea would, almost immediately, march over the DMZ and take over South Korea. Iraq would fall into full fledged civil war (granted we are barely keeping that from happening now.) Israel would be wiped off the map... though they would probably last longer than the South Koreans. Japan doesn't have an effective military and would be completely defenceless (the North Koreans don't like them either.) The economy in Germany would suffer as the area around Heidelburg and Ramstein are considered to be "little America" We dump a lot of money into those economies just being there. I could go on, but I hope you can see that the United States can no longer go back to the isolationist concept of pre WWII.

Israel has a massive military. They're not in danger. They also have nuclear weapons. With a reduced budget the US could still keep troops in South Korea. Iraq is in this state because you went in and fucked it up.

I don't know, maybe we should cut the defence budget down to 1/10th the size... Upwards of 5 million people, in the US, wouldn't have a job and millions of people, around the world, would either die or loose the freedom they now cherish. But at least I would have free health care... Personally, I can't think of a better way to piss off the entire world.

The Government could use the money not only for healthcare, but to fix many of the problems in America and make more jobs.

This may be callous of me, but I would much rather spend the money on defence. We just have to make sure that we spend it on the correct things. ie. We don't really need another 100 F-22s, however another 100 Predator UAVs sound like a good idea. Not only are they cheaper, but they are better at the kind of warfare being fought today.

I'm not saying 'don't spend any money on defense' but to spend less on defense and more on important things. How many American lives does the massive defense budget save? They couldn't stop 9/11, odds are they can't stop another attack. Socialized health care would save 22,000 lives a year.

 

[Giliell]

Guys... malpractice is less than 1% of America's healthcare costs, and haven't seen any growth in a decade or more, last time I checked. Lawsuits are NOT the problem. Health insurance executives make tens of millions of dollars a year, and get bigger bonuses for charging more for fewer services. THAT'S the problem.

Psst, neither of us lives in the USA
I just find this practise annoying. As I've been the "victim" (not medicine-related) of such jurisdicial malpractise and have endured the stress and anxiety of the threat of having to pay around thre months salaries if a judge is stupid enough to believe those idiots, I'm a bit freaked out on those issues.
As I said, I want a balance between doctors feeling threatened by lawsuits and patients being left alone.
No comment on the military, for the sake of common politeness.