Mr Neutron
Well-Known Member
NEWS FLASH
Guess what, pregnancy is NOT a disease!!!
Guess what, pregnancy is NOT a disease!!!
Free at last...
- Thread starter Mr Neutron
- Start date
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
pro tip: pregnancy is a health concern.
pro tip #2: not all health concerns are diseases, or even viruses for that matter.
pro tip #3: better to keep quiet and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt (apply it to posts like the one you just made)
txpete77
Well-Known Member
Prenatal and delivery care is very expensive. My son was born naturally about 10 years ago at the cost of $11K for delivery, and about $5K for prenatal care. My daughter was born two years later for a cost of about $6K total. The difference is that my insurance policy with my son covered childbirth, while the policy with my daughter did not. What was the difference? I paid out of pocket for my daughter, as my insurance plan at the time did not cover childbirth (this is the norm with individually purchased health insurance). I had a vasectomy later on, which was covered by another plan (a group plan that also covered childbirth). I did have to pay a $75 or $100 copay, if memory serves...
Another thing I've thought about is what the HHS didn't do in this... Why did HHS not apply the same to surgical sterilization? Why did they not allow the insurance carriers to remove childbirth coverage from an insured if they did obtain a free prescription for birth control? If it's good for the goose, it should be good for the gander.
Regardless, this should be between the insurance companies and their policy holders, not the government. If the policy holders do not like this, then they should find another provider - not pressure the government to force a business to change it's prior agreed terms with their customers. I don't know why insurance companies don't normally cover this without copay, but I'm sure they do. Heath insurance providers run a very tight ship when it comes to these things, an arbitrary decision can change an already slim profit margin (4.7%) by points.
Oh contraire mon frere . Righties don't kill doctors. Homicidal nut cases do.
Mr Neutron
Well-Known Member
Back in the stone age, before Johnson's Great Society, the health insurance that most people had only covered catastrophic care. For accidents and debilitation disease. Routine, normal office calls (btw, doctors made house calls then, also) were paid for out of pocket, because they were affordable. The poor were taken care of by charities.
Why has laser eye surgery continued to advance, even though the costs have come down. It is not covered on insurance, it is paid for out of pocket, therefore it is a very competitive industry and that keeps the cost down.
If you cannot or will not see that the rise in health care costs correlate to the intervention of government regulations, well... you can lead a horse to water but...
Why has laser eye surgery continued to advance, even though the costs have come down. It is not covered on insurance, it is paid for out of pocket, therefore it is a very competitive industry and that keeps the cost down.
If you cannot or will not see that the rise in health care costs correlate to the intervention of government regulations, well... you can lead a horse to water but...
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
homicidal nut cases that profess right wing beliefs.
I can agree with that, but you don't see 80% of the republicans in congress shooting doctors do you? Being "a righty" doesn't make you a killer.homicidal nut cases that profess right wing beliefs.
angelsbandit
Well-Known Member
"and would you rather someone have a morning after pill, an abortion, or an expensive fucking baby?
short-sighted ideologues. fuckin' a, man"
At what point do people take responsibility for their own actions? If someone jumps off a bridge should others pay their bills as well?
Having sex is a conscious decision, and should be paid for by the one who makes the decision to have sex and not everyone else.
Nothing is free, your wife not being required to pay a co-pay leaves everyone else to pick up those costs. Why should others pick up part of your wife's costs?
　
short-sighted ideologues. fuckin' a, man"
At what point do people take responsibility for their own actions? If someone jumps off a bridge should others pay their bills as well?
Having sex is a conscious decision, and should be paid for by the one who makes the decision to have sex and not everyone else.
Nothing is free, your wife not being required to pay a co-pay leaves everyone else to pick up those costs. Why should others pick up part of your wife's costs?
　
BendBrewer
Well-Known Member
If this prevented one abortion, would you support it?
What if it prevented 1000?
What if it prevented 1000?
HighLowGrow
Well-Known Member
If someone jumps off a bridge should others pay their bills as well?
Sure, but only if that person is an illegal alien of course.
Having sex is a conscious decision
What if she was unconscious?
Sure, but only if that person is an illegal alien of course.
Having sex is a conscious decision
What if she was unconscious?
Mr Neutron
Well-Known Member
ROTFLMAO... thank you, I needed that : )
mame
Well-Known Member
Can't see it because it's not true; Canada, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the Uk... ALL have more government intervention in their healthcare systems than we do and ALL of them pay less than we do - and Americans being fat doesn't even come close to making up the difference, either.
Hell, the UK pays less than the rest of them because they not only have socialized insurance, but they have socialized medicine - doctors are employees of the government... If anything, that shows that the trend is in favor of MORE government intervention in healthcare and not less.
Oh and, most if not all of the countries named are ranked higher than the U.S. in quality of care - not just in cost of care or availability.... I could go on and on but the point is clear, government intervention in healthcare reduces costs. You may not agree that universal healthcare is the responsibility of the government(constitutional questions, idealogy, etc), and that's fine, it's a valid opinion and of course you're entitled to your opinion - but not your own facts.
Mr Neutron
Well-Known Member
Are Canada, Germany, France, Italy, Spain or the UK... the US?
IF and I repeat IF what you say is true, that doesn't mean the same would work here. I know people from some of those countries and their opinions on whether their system works better or not, differs amongst them. I suspect that depends on personal experience and I really could care less what they do in other countries.
My post recounts the way it used to be here and that is a far cry from where we are. Why?
With the exception of Canada, those countries are almost ONE nation. They have been trying to share a common currency. Is that the road you want to see us go down? The North American Union? The Amero?
Socialism works for them, great. I want no part of it, I'd like to give liberty a chance.
BendBrewer
Well-Known Member
I just hosted somoe friends from Denmark. They don't pay a dime for HC. I asked about the wait times and they told me they can always get an appointment the same day. Just because America doesn't do it it doesn't mean it wouldn't work. Fact is, America has some of the best hospitals in the world but we have a poor HC system overall. There is no reason for us to be ranked 37th or something in the world. That's despicable.
Why should keeping people alive be such a profit based business?
Why should keeping people alive be such a profit based business?
jeff f
New Member
thank God we will finally eliminate unwanted pregnancy. i will bet no teenage girl will ever get pregnant again, ever, anywhere.
cuz that birthcontro stuff has been tough to get for so many years now.
i think it all stemmed from the Goddamn catholics. they dont believe in birth control. those filthy bastards have been responsible for girls getting pregnant for centuries. it dates back to the crusades.
yippy, no more abortion or teenage pregnancy.....yippy!
oh brother.
i wonder what its like in the mind of a liberal. utopia must be awesome. just a few more tweeks and we will get there....
cuz that birthcontro stuff has been tough to get for so many years now.
i think it all stemmed from the Goddamn catholics. they dont believe in birth control. those filthy bastards have been responsible for girls getting pregnant for centuries. it dates back to the crusades.
yippy, no more abortion or teenage pregnancy.....yippy!
oh brother.
i wonder what its like in the mind of a liberal. utopia must be awesome. just a few more tweeks and we will get there....
Mr Neutron
Well-Known Member
I was just getting ready to "like" your post and reply with my agreement, then I read the last line. I don't believe "profit" has to be a dirty word when it comes to health care. Like I said earlier, it worked before and it can work again.
txpete77
Well-Known Member
In any good or service, you have three main components: cost/affordability, quality, and availability. You can pick two of them, but can never have all three. I'm not sure if the quality elsewhere is as high as you state (for example, why does the Saudi royal family and others choose the United States when they have a major surgery that needs to be performed?). From what I've read, the availability in Canada and the UK is atrocious - to the point that pets and farm animals receive the same care in a much faster time frame (I remember reading about a cat that received a MRI hours after the vet ordered one, compared to the weeks/months it can take in Canada. I read the denial rates in the UK are higher than they are here, along with a longer wait time to service as well.
If Canada's system is so good, why do they place restrictions on privately funded healthcare activities? It's like saying that our product is so good you'll never want to use our competitor's product, so we're going make our competitor's product illegal...
Do you ever wonder why the governments who enact these entitlement programs make them mandatory? If something is a good product, it can and will stand on its own.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
by everyone else, do you mean the insurance company she pays every month with her own money?
mame
Well-Known Member
Found here, via the Commonwealth Fund:
The six countries are: the U.S, Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom.
Healthy people, especially young people, often go without insurance which makes the risk pool higher for those who do choose to have insurance and they pay more because of that; It'd be fine if they just had to pay a little more, but because of the lack of preventative care, access for the poor, and taxpayer funding that goes towards emergencies of those who are uninsured it ends up costing the U.S. at least twice as much for healthcare than every nation with universal coverage - and our coverage is already over 80%... So we could be paying less as a nation and have universal coverage OR we can be "free" to pay twice as much, for a lesser product, that's less available to the masses.
HighLowGrow
Well-Known Member
- and our coverage is already over 80%... So we could be paying less as a nation and have universal coverage
Canada is taxed up the ass for their socialized medicine. And why would a doctor over there have any incentive to be a more educated and better doctor than the next? Remember they are employees of the government.
For you stoners - It's like the government saying, "here is an oz of some dirty brick brown weed for everyone. You all get the same weed. That's it."
OR we can be "free" to pay twice as much, for a lesser product, that's less available to the masses.
What's the lesser product? I would rather have the choice to choose who and where I go.
For you stoners - It's like the government saying, "We have dirt weed, mids, and skanky danky. You can choose the grade and the quantity."
Canada is taxed up the ass for their socialized medicine. And why would a doctor over there have any incentive to be a more educated and better doctor than the next? Remember they are employees of the government.
For you stoners - It's like the government saying, "here is an oz of some dirty brick brown weed for everyone. You all get the same weed. That's it."
OR we can be "free" to pay twice as much, for a lesser product, that's less available to the masses.
What's the lesser product? I would rather have the choice to choose who and where I go.
For you stoners - It's like the government saying, "We have dirt weed, mids, and skanky danky. You can choose the grade and the quantity."