Home

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
  Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next  Last >>
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> In the News -> Politics

View latest: 24h 48h 72h


Fox




 
 
 


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 2:29 pm
amother wrote:
As I brought up, there are current members of the GOP who espouse overtly racist views and there's still significantly less coverage about that than AOC dancing in a video. So no, I don't believe the fear of her is of her politics. I think the noise we hear about her is sparked by the same sentiment that made so much noise about a caravan is sparked by the same sentiment that inspired a horde of red-hat MAGA kids to jeer and mock a Native American veteran over the weekend. It's not about their politics.

Please specify which elected officials who are members of the GOP espouse overtly racist views. Then contrast the response of the GOP to the response of the Democrats to the views of Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib. Let alone the high-ranking Democrats who pose, smiling, with Louis Farrakhan.
Back to top

amother




Vermilion


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 2:42 pm
Mommyg8 wrote:
I don't know enough about the differences between the English and American economic systems to have an true opinion, but from the little I know it seems to me that the US is only very slightly behind Europe in the amount of taxes they pay (if that). Especially if you live in a high tax area such as the tri-state area (which many imamother posters do). When you add up federal, state, local, property and sales tax (just to name a few, there are more hidden taxes) I am questioning if we do, in fact, pay less tax than Europeans do.

The problem with socializing our health system the way I see it is that so far, any attempts in America to do so have been a colossal failure. Think Medicare, think the VA system, think Obamacare. If you are not aware how bad all three of these systems are, I will take great pleasure in enlightening you. Even medicaid is only ok in certain locations, if you live in Anytown, USA you may get subpar care. Maybe there are unique issues in America that are not there in England and Canada. I don't know enough about this, though...

Another issue - I have read stories about the medical care in England and Canada. I am happy for those posters who were happy with their care, but I'm guessing you're happy until you're suddenly not...


Obamacare was only a colossal failure to those who weren’t dependent on individual insurance. For those of us who tried to buy a policy on our own (covering 70% of your medical bill for the low, low price of $1700 per month for 4 people) and then discovered that pregnancy is a pre-existing condition and I’m actually uninsured and will have to pay for prenatal care and my hospital bill by myself, it was a light of the tunnel leading out of a horrific nightmare. Sorry it inconvenienced you, but it made many others’ lives bearable.
Back to top

Mommyg8




 
 
 


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 2:54 pm
amother wrote:
Obamacare was only a colossal failure to those who weren’t dependent on individual insurance. For those of us who tried to buy a policy on our own (covering 70% of your medical bill for the low, low price of $1700 per month for 4 people) and then discovered that pregnancy is a pre-existing condition and I’m actually uninsured and will have to pay for prenatal care and my hospital bill by myself, it was a light of the tunnel leading out of a horrific nightmare. Sorry it inconvenienced you, but it made many others’ lives bearable.


This has nothing to do with me, this has to do with people I know who were supposed to be helped by Obamacare and the current laws, but were actually not.

But I'm confused as to why you didn't buy health insurance before you got pregnant. I know in my time we were careful to have health insurance at all time and specifically if we knew there was a possibility of pregnancy.

Another question - if the price of your insurance was so low (sarcasm intended) then why get insurance at all? You can pay for the doctor and hospital yourself and still come out ahead (presuming you don't have a baby every year).

Which highlights the real problem - who is actually paying for all our expenses? I don't want to pay for YOUR medical expenses, you don't want to pay for MINE. So who is actually going to be paying for all this?
Back to top

Mommyg8




 
 
 


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 2:56 pm
leah233 wrote:
I'm not so against socialized medicine but there is no way the US can be compared to Europe or any other place that has it. Those places aren't nearly as litigious as the US is. In the US doctors can pay one third of their gross income for malpractice insurance. In the US doctors have all sorts of expensive unnecessary tests done to avoid getting sued. Therefore the cost of socialized medicine in the US would be way beyond the cost of implementing it any other county.

Who is going to pay for it? How?


This. This is the real issue.
Back to top

Sebastian




 
 
 


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 3:05 pm
My main issue with the ACA is that I don't think healthcare is the job of the federal government. In theory, I wouldn't mind a gov run system as long as a private option was allowed and available (like Israel and unlike Canada). I think it's something that needs to be left to the states though.

SS and Medicare are a HUGE part of the federal budget btw so it's not like they're being run well by the government either.

Since the ACA many skilled doctors don't take insurance period and ppl without out of network benefits (almost everyone) end up paying cash. I'm not sure how insurance helps them.
Back to top

amother




Mauve


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 3:09 pm
amother wrote:
I don't see anyone from here going to another country to have anything done (other than cheap plastic surgery in Mexico which is a hazard and a whole 'nother story).


false.
Back to top

amother




Fuchsia


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 3:26 pm
Sebastian wrote:
My main issue with the ACA is that I don't think healthcare is the job of the federal government. In theory, I wouldn't mind a gov run system as long as a private option was allowed and available (like Israel and unlike Canada). I think it's something that needs to be left to the states though.

.


The healthcare debate du jour in Canada is the expansion of the private sector. As I stated earlier, 80% of Canadians have supplementary health insurance. These insurance plans cover services that are not included in the public plan. About half of Canadians support a private option for all care. There is a strong push towards a dual track system such as Australia's. Canadians overwhelmingly support universal health care (recent polls peg the number at 94%!) and are continuously focused on improving the system.

Healthcare policy is set at the federal level, but managed and administered at the provincial/territorial level.
Back to top

iyar




 
 
 


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 3:42 pm
imasoftov wrote:
Why, of all the 537 elected US officials are you specifically worried about *her* resembling Hitler? I'm not suggesting someone else, but why her? I'm not making fun of you, I'm trying to understand you.


Imasoftov, I'm not the amother you addressed your question to, but let me tell you why I'm scared. When we observe the meteoric rise of an unknown young politician whose name is suddenly on everyone's lips and in all the headlines, and that person just happens to be spewing lies about the massacre of civilians in Gaza, some of us can't help remembering the meteoric rise to power of an unknown house painter in Germany who wrote mein kampf.
Ilhan Omar, another new Democrat with no experience in foreign affairs and some nasty anti-Israel remarks in her resume has been assigned by our dear Nancy Pelosi to the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
Don't even get me started on Rashida Tlaib all wrapped up in the Palestinian flag.
The Democratic party in the US is quickly joining the ranks of the people who we sing about at the seder, "Ella sheb'chal dor va'dor omdim aleinu..."
May Hashem save us from all of them.
Back to top

Fox




 
 
 


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 3:55 pm
leah233 wrote:
I'm not so against socialized medicine but there is no way the US can be compared to Europe or any other place that has it.

Agreed.

Health care is like immigration. It doesn't really lend itself to strident positions on either side, though people on all sides like to shoehorn their political opponents into those positions.

Government intrusion into health care is beneficial in some ways and harmful in others, just as entirely private health care is both good and bad.

The problem with paying for health care is very basic: we all want top-notch health care and we all want to pay as little as humanly possible.

Given that there's no such thing as a free lunch, we will all generously permit someone else to pay for our top-notch health care.

There are a couple of problems that are difficult to surmount if we offer single-payer health care in America:

Cutting Off the Invisible Hand of the Free Market
When I was caring for a trached child at home, I discovered that the LPNs who cared for her while I was at work were simply throwing away high-quality steel bandage scissors if they got sticky from adhesive. Why not just wipe them with a little alcohol? Because they only cost $1. Why only $1 when it obviously cost more than that to manufacture, distribute, and sell them? Because that was what Medicaid and Medicare would reimburse for them, so that became the price, even for private insurance companies.

When government sets the prices, the world goes wacky. The price is no longer set by the invisible hand of the market as buyers and sellers find a common point for that particular item. Rather, whoever makes scissors and must sell them for $1 finds a way to make a profit elsewhere. The cycle spirals until prices don't bear any relationship to the actual value. This ultimately leads to higher prices for virtually everything.

Geography
When people bring up the UK or Israel, they are essentially talking about providing health care for only my city or my state. The U.S. is literally too big to create the kinds of economies of scale that can be done with smaller populations and/or smaller geographical areas.

Even before health care costs became a pressing problem, there was a major crisis in providing health care to rural areas. Herding people to major urban centers for their health care will ultimately be a huge drain on productivity and lost wages, and it will likely result in poorer health care for those outside those urban areas.

The Immigration Conundrum
Depending on who's asking and who's answering, health care in Canada works great. Why can't we do what they do?

All of the celebrities who always threaten to move to Canada when their preferred candidates lose elections are unaware of the fact that Canada doesn't just take anybody. An acquaintance of mine moved to Canada to live with his spouse, who was a Canadian citizen. It took him years to become eligible for health care; until then, he had to cobble together several private plans. Do you have a child with a disability? Don't even bother trying. You will not be permitted to emigrate to Canada because your child might become a burden to the State.

Despite the hullaballoo about illegal immigration, the U.S. has some of the most lenient immigration rules in the world. If we choose to imitate Canada's model, we'll be forced to aggressively turn people away either at hospitals or at points of entry.
_________________________

I think reasonable people agree that the employer-based system is not a good one; it's a holdover from right after WWII, when businesses offered health insurance as a perk because wage freezes were in place. There must be a role for government in making sure that people can access reasonable health care.

At the same time, it's foolish to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs, and private health care has produced a level of innovation and research that is unparalleled.

How do we find the formula of public and private that would provide reasonable health care for all citizens without killing off innovation and the free market? If I had the answer, I probably wouldn't be rabbiting on about the problem on Imamother right now.
Back to top

amother




Fuchsia


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 4:03 pm
Fox wrote:
Agreed.



An acquaintance of mine moved to Canada to live with his spouse, who was a Canadian citizen. It took him years to become eligible for health care; until then, he had to cobble together several private plans.


I agree with a lot of your post. I just wanted to clarify the above. Every permanent resident is eligible for free health care. Upon marriage to a Canadian citizen, the process of acquiring permanent residency is relatively simple and takes less than a year.
Back to top

Raisin




 
 
 


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 4:14 pm
leah233 wrote:
I'm not so against socialized medicine but there is no way the US can be compared to Europe or any other place that has it. Those places aren't nearly as litigious as the US is. In the US doctors can pay one third of their gross income for malpractice insurance. In the US doctors have all sorts of expensive unnecessary tests done to avoid getting sued. Therefore the cost of socialized medicine in the US would be way beyond the cost of implementing it any other county.

Who is going to pay for it? How?


People can and do sue the NHS in the UK afaik.
Back to top

Fox




 
 
 


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 4:15 pm
amother wrote:
I just wanted to clarify the above. Every permanent resident is eligible for free health care. Upon marriage to a Canadian citizen, the process of acquiring permanent residency is relatively simple and takes less than a year.

That's what he was told, and apparently it does work out that way for many people. I don't know if there were additional circumstances he didn't share with me that made things more complicated -- that's definitely a possibility.
Back to top

Fox




 
 
 


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 4:26 pm
Raisin wrote:
People can and do sue the NHS in the UK afaik.

That's not really what we're talking about.

The costs imposed by litigation don't come from patients suing health care providers. They come from major class-action lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies and similar "whales."

It's hard to find people lining up to defend Big Pharma (for what are good and obvious reasons), but when a company has to pay out hundreds of millions or even billions (of which the attorneys get a third), that has an effect on prices.

No one wants a system in which Pharma companies are allowed to get away with forged data or inadequate testing. No one wants to deprive victims of bad outcomes of whatever they need. But class action lawsuits are an entire industry, and people are often added to such a lawsuit even if they've suffered few if any adverse effects.

Every decade or so, various states attempt to reign in costs by placing some reasonable limits or alternatives to these mega-lawsuits. And every time, personal injury lawyers pull out all the stops to kill it.

We could make health care costs more manageable by simply doing a few simple things, including creating state pools for certain medical outcomes and by limiting the huge settlements the personal injury industry tries to generate.
Back to top

Raisin




 
 
 


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 4:26 pm
Fox, I am unimpressed with your startling lack of knowledge re population of the UK. There are 66 million people in the UK, vs 325 million people in the USA. That is a 4 times smaller population then the US. (in a much much smaller space - the US is 38 times bigger then the UK).

The UK also has an extremely diverse population with large numbers of black, asian and other minorities. Growing up in North East London I think I recall ONE white, non Jewish neighbour - one half of a mixed race couple. Everyone else on our street was black, asian, turkish, or Jewish.

You will probably come back and me and say, ah, thats why the NHS performs so poorly compared to Finland or wherever. Well, the NHS is not perfect but it sure beats the USA medical system. And even the most right wing of right wing conservatives in the UK would not dream of getting rid of it.
Back to top

Raisin




 
 
 


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 4:32 pm
Fox wrote:
That's not really what we're talking about.

The costs imposed by litigation don't come from patients suing health care providers. They come from major class-action lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies and similar "whales."

It's hard to find people lining up to defend Big Pharma (for what are good and obvious reasons), but when a company has to pay out hundreds of millions or even billions (of which the attorneys get a third), that has an effect on prices.

No one wants a system in which Pharma companies are allowed to get away with forged data or inadequate testing. No one wants to deprive victims of bad outcomes of whatever they need. But class action lawsuits are an entire industry, and people are often added to such a lawsuit even if they've suffered few if any adverse effects.

Every decade or so, various states attempt to reign in costs by placing some reasonable limits or alternatives to these mega-lawsuits. And every time, personal injury lawyers pull out all the stops to kill it.

We could make health care costs more manageable by simply doing a few simple things, including creating state pools for certain medical outcomes and by limiting the huge settlements the personal injury industry tries to generate.


I'm sorry, the person I was quoted was talking about malpractice insurance for Doctors, not pharm companies. Most pharmaceutical companies nowadays are multinational - so the price I am paying here in Europe for a drug is probably going to be affected by class action law suits bought in the USA. Drug prices in the USA might be higher, but that has to with other factors. (see article below)

https://www.scientificamerican.....for-drugs/
Back to top

amother




Brunette


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 4:38 pm
According to the Institute of Medicine and others, the United States is the only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not provide universal health care.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialized_medicine
Back to top

amother




Fuchsia


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 4:42 pm
Raisin wrote:
Fox, I am unimpressed with your startling lack of knowledge re population of the UK. There are 66 million people in the UK, vs 325 million people in the USA. That is a 4 times smaller population then the US. (in a much much smaller space - the US is 38 times bigger then the UK).

The UK also has an extremely diverse population with large numbers of black, asian and other minorities. Growing up in North East London I think I recall ONE white, non Jewish neighbour - one half of a mixed race couple. Everyone else on our street was black, asian, turkish, or Jewish.

You will probably come back and me and say, ah, thats why the NHS performs so poorly compared to Finland or wherever. Well, the NHS is not perfect but it sure beats the USA medical system. And even the most right wing of right wing conservatives in the UK would not dream of getting rid of it.


I agree.
The homogeneity argument falls apart when you consider the diverse populations of the UK, Canada and Australia. In Canada specifically, there is a serious challenge in meeting the needs of the indigenous communities of the Arctic and sub-Arctic regions. Similar to London, anyone who has strolled through downtown Montreal, Toronto or Vancouver would be astonished at the tremendous diversity.
Back to top

leah233




 
 
 


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 4:57 pm
Raisin wrote:
People can and do sue the NHS in the UK afaik.


True but (1)the U.K. caps the amount of pain and suffering damages that can be awarded in a medical malpractice (2)the U.K. policy of loser paying for all legal fees from both sides is a major deterrent from "try your luck lawsuits" where you pay on a contingency basis (3)medical malpractice cases are decided by judges knowledge about medical practice. Not a jury which is a lot easier for a lawyer to falsely convince

Therefore there is a lot less of a malpractice industry adding to medical costs in the UK than in the US
Back to top

PinkFridge




 
 
 


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 5:05 pm
itsmeima wrote:
Bernie Sanders might actually run again in 2020 - why aren't Republicans obsessing over that?

Compared to Bernie Sanders her base is pretty small.


They're more worried about another old Caucasian named Joe Biden.
Back to top

Fox




 
 
 


Post  Sun, Jan 20 2019, 5:11 pm
Raisin wrote:
Fox, I am unimpressed with your startling lack of knowledge re population of the UK. There are 66 million people in the UK, vs 325 million people in the USA. That is a 4 times smaller population then the US. (in a much much smaller space - the US is 38 times bigger then the UK).

The UK also has an extremely diverse population with large numbers of black, asian and other minorities. Growing up in North East London I think I recall ONE white, non Jewish neighbour - one half of a mixed race couple. Everyone else on our street was black, asian, turkish, or Jewish.

You're mixing up a few of my posts to come up with a cholent.

The comparison I was making was about the UK's size in comparison to the U.S. -- not its population. Moreover, given the comparatively small geographical size of Britain, economies of scale are possible because the NHS doesn't have to cover such a large physical area.

I think you misunderstood my point about homogeneity.

First, that post was about the general principles of applying Socialism, not the specific issue of health care.

Second, I am not talking about racial, religious, or ethnic homogeneity, and I made that very, very clear. I am talking about homogeneity in values and priorities, and the UK has been until recently an excellent example of that.

Prior to the past decade or two, the vast majority of Britain's immigrants came from former British colonies. In fact, residents of former colonies were given preferential treatment when it came to immigration. So while people looked different, spoke different languages, and had different customs -- they had nevertheless been socialized to one degree or another (and their communities had been socialized) with British ideas of what was important and what was not.

Now, that doesn't mean that everyone fits together seamlessly -- something that the UK is increasingly grappling with -- but it's a far cry from the American experience.
Back to top
  Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next  Last >> Recent Topics

Page 5 of 7 View latest: 24h 48h 72h


Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> In the News -> Politics

Related Topics Replies Last Post
6 am tomw Car Service from Washington DC to Alexandria, Va
by amother
1 Mon, Mar 06 2017, 6:27 pm View last post
jewish girls name -Alexandria. ????
by amother
21 Wed, Apr 26 2006, 1:02 pm View last post
by chen

Jump to: