TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Massachusetts to require universal health care coverage
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Massachusetts to require universal health care coverage

post #1 of 23
Thread Starter 
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/0....ap/index.html
I'm surprised at the number of respondents to the poll who are against such legislation. This is long overdue. Millions of U.S. residents have no health insurance whatsoever, and this plan sounds like it might work.
post #2 of 23
I have no problem with socialized medicine.. but unless they mandate the insurence companies base premiums on income and not health I wouldnt vote for it.. I cant get health insurence because I make just over the line for state assistance and private coverage would cost me 300-400 a month at least I only ave 1300 a month
post #3 of 23
My biggest problem with the concept of socialized medicine is the big, looming question: "Who is going to pay for it?" I would be interested in seeing more in depth what the fiscal impacts of that bill will be to the state, and even to other states where the big insurance companies may raise rates to off-set the government controlled insurance in Massachusetts.

Before y'all get the notion that I can't possibly understand how hard it is to be uninsured or underinsured (being that fiscal conservative that I am ), please know that I do. Intimately. My company pays for my insurance, but it sucks. The yearly physical, that is supposed to be covered completely, will end up costing me not quite $300 (because my doctor's office didn't send the bloodwork to the "correct" lab). My husband has no insurance, because he works independently from home, and to add him to my insurance is around $900/month. Like I said, my insurance sucks.

My issues aren't with the idea that there is a healthcare problem in the US, but rather with the "Who pays for it?" and "Who runs it?" questions that have yet to be sufficiently answered for me.
post #4 of 23
Wow, so even with this universal health care thing, people would still have to pay for it....I hope that never happens in Canada!

I believe that Tommy Douglas was right when he came up with free universal medical care. Every single person deserves medical care reguardless of how much or little money they have and it should be a basic necessity that one doesn't have to pay for.
post #5 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb
My biggest problem with the concept of socialized medicine is the big, looming question: "Who is going to pay for it?"
Actually, the universal health care system we for instance have here is a lot more cost effective than the current US system. There has been a lot of talk about these things here in the recent years because of the funding problems in health care. The studies show your system still somehow manages to be more expensive. Don't ask me how, I don't remember.

I'm going to try and dig up something about it in English, but I'm not sure if I'll find anything. You just have to take (or not take) my word for it.

IMHO universal health care is something every country should make a priority of. It's a question of human rights.
post #6 of 23
I am by no means an expert on Canada's health care system, but 10 years ago my neighbor was a former Canadian nurse. She couldn't hang onto a job because the hospitals kept closing, due to funding. Is it better now?

I know my view may not be the most popular, but in the US there seems to be so MUCH public assistance that I feel there is never an incentive to get out of poverty. The government provides food, housing, medical care......The list goes on and on. Why work or get educated?
post #7 of 23
I am worried if it is the government paying for health care. But I thought in Massachusetts it was going to be the businesses required to provide health care?!? I can't seem to get the article...(dial up stinks!)
post #8 of 23
I am also wondering where the money for this is coming from. The article states most is coming from the government and state. I would think eventually the well will run dry. Are taxes going to increase? Are health care premiums for those in existing plans going to increase quicker than they already have been?

While I agree everyone should have affordable health care, I don't think this has been well thought out.

Coincidentally, Connecticut vetoed a bill this afternoon to require large retailers to pay for health insurance for their employees. Many of these employees are currently covered by the state sponsored welfare health insurance.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/con...n_legislature/
post #9 of 23
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deb25
I know my view may not be the most popular, but in the US there seems to be so MUCH public assistance that I feel there is never an incentive to get out of poverty. The government provides food, housing, medical care......The list goes on and on. Why work or get educated?
I imagine such a system would be a real boon to the so-called "working poor", who don't qualify for Medicaid.
Germany has a mixture of mandatory public and private health insurance. The public insurance schemes' premiums are income-based (mine is 17.4% of my monthly income right now; my husband's is the same, but his employer pays half of that). The entire system needs a major overhaul, mainly because of the >10% unemployment rate here, but there are very few people without health insurance. The latter are generally people who had private insurance and lost their well-paid jobs, and thus can no longer afford the higher premiums. Probably a law will be passed requiring the public insurance schemes to cover them, and another requiring people of all income levels, i.e., the rich, to have health insurance, so that there's more money in the "pot" to cover people with low incomes. As things stand now, non-gainfully-employed spouses and children get automatic coverage, with no increase in premiums. The system is far from perfect (what system is?), but people aren't dying because they can't afford medical treatment.
post #10 of 23
I've always heard that places that had universal healthcare systems suffered in other ways...like the quality of treatment or free education for children, etc. Maybe this is completely false as I have never really looked into it much.
post #11 of 23
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolarityBengals
I've always heard that places that had universal healthcare systems suffered in other ways...like the quality of treatment or free education for children, etc. Maybe this is completely false as I have never really looked into it much.
I believe that some countries with tax-financed health care have very long waiting periods for operations, or age requirements, e.g., under 65, for certain procedures.
post #12 of 23
I just read on a blog that the premiums for the people will be about $2,400 per year. I don't know too many poor people who can afford $200/month in new expense.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-esk...c_b_19066.html
I just found this link on a dogpile search...I have no info about how correct it is (sorry).

And it says there is a $150 per year fine if you don't get the insurance. My dd is turning 24 next month...she doesn't live in Massachusetts, but if she did this would not help her any!

And I work at a clinic where people get sliding scale fees for mental health care. None of our truly poor patients are paying us $2000 per year! And there is a sliding scale clinic for medical needs near me, also. I doubt the people who have become accustomed to free or almost free care would appreciate this bill. But for the working poor, it may help.

I think businesses should be required to offer health insurance, otherwise its like the gov't is paying that benefit for them!
post #13 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deb25
I am by no means an expert on Canada's health care system, but 10 years ago my neighbor was a former Canadian nurse. She couldn't hang onto a job because the hospitals kept closing, due to funding. Is it better now?

I know my view may not be the most popular, but in the US there seems to be so MUCH public assistance that I feel there is never an incentive to get out of poverty. The government provides food, housing, medical care......The list goes on and on. Why work or get educated?
My mom is a registered nurse and is now working more in admin and she has never had a problem finding or keeping a job in the industry.

I don't know how it is in larger areas of Canada, like Toronto, but I know I have never had to worry about becoming sick or how I would pay for it.

Granted, there can be longer wait times to see specialists but atleast I won't loose my house or go with out.
post #14 of 23
Yay!!!

If you've ever had a family member who became seriously ill while your family didn't have any health insurance, you understand why this is good. I'm sure there are problems with how they've chosen to implement it, but its a step in the right direction!
post #15 of 23
Thread Starter 
What I'd like to hear is how universal health insurance is funded in countries that have it, and what problems have been encountered,
post #16 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat
What I'd like to hear is how universal health insurance is funded in countries that have it, and what problems have been encountered,
I would also like to hear of any countries that have made the switch from a private health care system to a universal, publicly funded system and how the transition was.
post #17 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beckiboo
I think businesses should be required to offer health insurance, otherwise its like the gov't is paying that benefit for them!
First of all, why should businesses bear the brunt of the costs? The only reason businesses have carried it was because during or right after WWII, they could not raise wages. They added it as perk to get around it. One of our big issues here in the US is coverage for someone who becomes seriously ill. Because they can no longer work, they lose their job and their coverage in one swoop. Also, individuals are at the mercy of the business policy makers to determine what plan. This is also why we have so many people not covered. A lot of the smaller businesses just can't afford coverage.

The second part of the debate that I don't hear about is what is acceptable minimal coverage. In the 90s there were attempts to curb medical costs with HMOs, but people were upset because their one-in-10 million disease wasn't covered, sued and won. There are only so many dollars, no matter who pays for it. Do we cover 2 rare-organ transplants or 1,000,000 immunizations?

There was an episode on Scrubs the other night where the chief of medicine replaced a poor person with a rich person in an experimental drug program. The poor person died but the rich person was able to donate enough dollars to reopen a prenatal care program. These are the types of questions we need to address when we discuss who pays for what.

As to why the US spends so much for less care, we tend to not pay for the preventative care but the catastrophic care. Medicaid (the program for poor people) won't pay for education and preventative care for a diabetic, but will pay for an amputation. We don't always have a vested interest to reduce waste and mismanagement of funds - instead it is up to the insurance companies and they don't have our best interests at heart.

Health coverage is one of the stickiest moral issues we have. There is a resource constraint but there is a life depending on it. Who lives and who dies is at the heart of every decision we make on this issue.
post #18 of 23
It is great to have your healthcare funded in NZ, for example, we have ACC which is Accident Compensation Corporation and they pay for any emergency and if you need to have time off work, they will pay 80% of your wages and so on. Also we have public health care for any surgery.
The downfall is the waiting list. My brother ruptured his eardrum when a girl jumped on him in the swimming pool and he went deep, fast. He had to wait 2 years to get the surgery to repair it. My mother has been waiting several years to have an hysterectomy - she has a fibriod the size of a football. It is not considered an emergency, so the surgery was cancelled, as was the majority of surgeries. I believe, right now the waiting list has around 4400 people on it, after all the cancellations. People can go private if they want to but most don't, it costs too much money, when they can get it for free if they don't mind waiting. As for myself, I am considering getting medical insurance, because god forbid if something should happen to me or my family, I don't want to wait several years before they can do something, when I can go private!
post #19 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiwideus
People can go private if they want to but most don't, it costs too much money, when they can get it for free if they don't mind waiting.
It's the same here. The only difference between public health services and the private sector is that in a public hospital you'll have to wait for non-critical operations for some time and you won't be offered a cup of coffee in the waiting room. The quality of the tretment is the same. I would never go to a private clinic.
post #20 of 23
As long as I would be able to keep my current coverage I would be for it.
post #21 of 23
The government provides food, housing, medical care......The list goes on and on. Why work or get educated?
__________________
Well I am UNABLE TO work and I have NO money. My family has money set away for me from my Mom's stocks. THEY pay OVER $700.00 a month for my insurance. i have co pays from $20.00 to $40.00. I am ONLY allowed so many visits to NON medical doctors and only 4 visits to a phys therapist.

IF they gave me MORE visits and charged less for Co Pays AND their own fee, I could get better and get a job. I am NOT on welfare or disability and doubt I can get it!
post #22 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharky
I have no problem with socialized medicine.. but unless they mandate the insurence companies base premiums on income and not health I wouldnt vote for it.. I cant get health insurence because I make just over the line for state assistance and private coverage would cost me 300-400 a month at least I only ave 1300 a month
MY private coverage costs almost $800.00 a month and I do not get very much for it.

My medical vists are 20.00 and I ONLY get 4 phys therapy visits (no way enough to help my neck).

It keeps going up and what they give me gets less.
post #23 of 23
I had absolutely no health insurance of any kind for ten years of my life, and neither did my parents. My mom was in the ICU for several months during this time, and it has basically financially ruined my entire family. Is this right????? Think about it. We weren't poor by anyone's standards before it started and so totally ineligible for any sort of public assistance. Afterwards, everything was gone. House, college savings, cars, everything. Now my parents are both retirement age, have absolutely no savings or pension or retirement anything, and my mom, who is in reality too sick to work, has to have a crappy job that she hates just for the insurance. And now they are both sick. Permanently.

Why? Because of privatized medicine. I don't think that every little illness should be everyone's problem, but why should people's lives be changed forever because one person had a totally unpreventable illness????? Never mind the emotional pain and horribleness of the disease. That's bad enough. Add on top of that being worried about how you'll pay. Have you ever met someone who couldn't afford to save the life of someone they loved, even though it could be done with medicine? That should never happen. It does. We have the power to stop it. And never forget that no matter who you are or what kind of insurance you think you have now, it could be you.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Massachusetts to require universal health care coverage