doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Presidential candidate supports INDIVIDUAL RKBA

Chuck, This did not happen in California. There is a "good Samaritan" law here. Very strongly written and upheld many times by the appellate courts. This case would be dismissed by the judge soon after it was filed.

Jake

Thanks, Jakearoo - there are all too many 'urban legends' about malpractice, and too many anecdotes about UHC being passed off as facts.

Ignorance, Jack? Fact? You reference an OLD study (1997) in which the author seriously cherry-picks his examples: Brazil, Cuba, Lithuania, Mexico, Russia, Trinidad and Tobago . . . please, Jack, give us a break! Which of those countries have universal health care plans you want to hold up as models? Let's try apples to apples, Jack: same countries you've SPECIFICALLY mentioned as being at the top as far as health statistics go, and/or countries where you claim "personal experience" with their system. So . . . UK, France, and Italy. And let's move ahead to 2004, the most recent year for which I can find good data on worldwide murder rates per 100,000. In 2004, the US was actually a good bit better than cited in the article: only 5.5 murders per 100,000. Compared to Jack's models of universal health care:
France: 1.64
Italy: 1.23
Scotland: 2.56
England and Wales: 1.62
Now let's move on, to the rest of Western Europe, where I'm sure Jack would agree most of the best universal health care is available. All figures are either from 2004 or the most recent year available:
Worst rate: Portugal, 1.79.
Best: Norway, 0.78.
So . . . the US murder rate is 3 times the WORST murder rate in Western Europe (except Scotland--bloody Scots!) and 7 times the LOWEST murder rate.
You can even throw in the former Iron Curtain countries. Albania is the worst, at 5.68--and the only country in Europe west of the former Soviet Union with a murder rate higher (but barely) than the US. Then you drop down to Bulgaria (3.08), down to Poland with a former Iron Curtain low of 1.64.

Jack, I certainly hope your research on universal health care is better than the piece of outdated garbage you chose to refute my demonstrably accurate statement about stricter gun laws and lower homicide rates--ESPECIALLY SO WHEN APPLIED TO THE SAME COUNTRIES YOU WISH TO HOLD UP TO US AS HEALTH CARE MODELS.

"Outdated Garbage?" Very nice Lar. Jake

Hello all, I am back with fact.
From the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences. US government programs account for 45% of all health care spending but cover less than 25% of the population.
Article entitled "Why isn't Government Health Care the Answer" from the Free Market Cure. WHO study used something called "fairness in financial contribution" as an assesment factor in their global rankings, marking down countries with high per capita private or fee paying health treatment.
Harvard School of Madicine and the Canadian Institute for Health study. 31% of US health care dollarswent to administrative costs.
Cato Institute study shows that regulatory compliance costs pulic 340 Billion dollars in 2005. The biggest part of that money went to compliance with malpractise law, FDA and facilities regulation.
From an article titled "The Uninsured: Access to Medical Care" from the American College of Emergency Medicine. In 1986 the Emergency Medical Treatment Act and Active Labor Act required all hospital ER's to treat emergency patients regardless of ability to pay. This is an unfunded mandate and now over 50% of all emergency care goes unpaid. This cost is then transferred to the insured resulting in skyrocketing health insurance premiums.
From the Institute of Medicine. Between 1993 and 2003 emergency room visits increased 20% and 425 ER's closed.
I also had a chance to read about the British and Canadian plans. Two years ago, in response to much complaint, the British enacted a maximum 18 week gaurantee. This say that from the time you are referred to a specialist you will be tested and treated within 18 weeks. This may be why one of my customers sister in law died from cancer before she received her diagnosis six months after she saw her GP. Also choice in GP's is limited and choice in specialists seems not to be an option. The Canadian plan seemed to be pretty good. The only problems I saw there were limited access to specialists and specialty treatment and Canadiam facilities have not been able to keep current with technological improvements. I don't see a US system being any better.

Thanks for a very helpful and informative post, Peter! Let's look at your points one at a time:

Not at all surprising, considering that Medicare/Medicaid covers everyone over 65 (a rapidly growing cohort), plus the poor and the disabled - the populations which have the most cost-intensive health issues. The private insurers have always cherry-picked the healthiest populations. So we've really had government-run health care for years - and it works pretty well for old-timers like me. But it leaves out a lot of the folks who are paying for it.

Free market Cure is a blatantly anti-UHC website, hardly a 'source' for unbiased information.

Um - what's wrong with that? Should only the rich get optimum health care?

That's a much higher figure than I've seen elsewhere; but it certainly confirms that our health care dollars are being devoured by paperwork! I'd appreciate a link - it could be another good source for supporting UHC!

Another indicator of a broken US health care system. Again, I'd appreciate a link to the source.

An excellent article! You might have also included their conclusion: "ACEP advocates for expansion of health care coverage for the uninsured and underinsured and has taken a leadership role in building a national consensus for universal health coverage."

Again, a broken system that the American College of Emergency Medicine wants to fix by going to universal health care.

That's not bad, I had to wait that long to see a specialist about my cancer, too. Of course, it had to be an approved specialist within my insurer's 'provider network.'

Why not? Americans have done other things better. Maybe we could copy the French UHC, which allows free choice of doctors.

I think some kind of hybrid UHC plan might be the answer here in America, allowing people to keep what they have if they like it, but creating a universal pool to cover the uninsured and achieve economies of scale and increased purchasing power and efficiencies that help everyone. Or, just keep things somewhat as they are but allow the uninsured to sign up for the plan that members of Congress have (Obama's plan?). I don't know what the specific answer is, but I agree with Jack that we should be able to learn from the other major nations, all of whom have UHC, to learn what seems to work best and what doesn't, and make it work for us.

One thing is for sure. If we continue to do what we've always done, we'll continue to get what we've been getting.

It's time for change.

Jack, the WHO study is saying that the ranking the US received was not based on an accumulation of pure statistics but biased by the use of a fictional formula. The US should rank much higher based on the stats. This makes me wonder if the WHO has an agenda and can be considered an unbiased source.
I also realize that at least two of those studies were done by organizations with a definite viewpoint but they bring up good points. I am using what I found to try and show how government and the insurance industry have led us to the very unsatisfactory place we are at. Do we really want these same entities to have the right to tax us and probably perpetuate the mess?
Marklart, you bring up a point that relates to a report I read today. I believe it was the US Bureau of Trade. They are claiming that the dramatic run up in prescription costs in this country is due to the fact that countries with UHP are using their bargaining power to get drugs cheaply. The pharmaceutical companies are taking it on the chin in these countries so they charge us more to make up for it. There was even mention of trying to require these other nations to pay a form of reparations to the US.
Jack, I would give you the sources if I knew how. They are all easily available if you go to wikipedia and search for any health care topic you wish. The articles are informative and every study or statement is credited and linked directly to the source. There is a huge amount of information available without a lot of searching. Peter

Craig,
You're right. I believe it was in Oregon.

Bought my last pair of glasses today under our company's health plan. They paid for free glasses every other year up to $200.00 Had my last dental checkup last week (all was good) under my company's dental plan. We had to give up both of these (as decided by my union) as of March 1st. Still have full health insurance. Now we have to pay $70.00 per month for our health care. 100% of everything was guaranteed by our contract when I retired in May 2006. I receive a full pension every month so I shouldn't have to work again. Waiting til my SS kicks in at 62 in September of next year. Guess I am one of the lucky ones. But, everyone should have a health plan for themselves and their kids........ As far as crime is concerned, if we could take Cincinnati out and drop it in the middle of the ocean, we could down dramatically on this country's crime rate. A murder every third night and a shooting almost every day.