POZ Community Forums
Off Topic Forums => Off Topic Forum => Topic started by: tigger2376 on June 28, 2007, 09:54:12 pm
-
I watched this film on bootleg tonight with horror. Is this really what its like in US?
-
YES
-
I'll have to wait until I can see the film to actually be able to comment more, but the health care situation in the US is pretty bad. Michael Moore isn't always balanced in what he does, but there is enough evidence that it is bad taht I don't see how he can spin things any worse. But I will know more when I see it and I hope to.
-
If anything, what passes for health care in the US is much worse than what Moore could put in a two-hour movie.
I don't think he even scratched the surface of some the problems like 50 percent of people filing bankruptcy are doing so because of medical expenses and most of those are people who actually have health insurance.
The drain on businesses trying to provide affordable health care to their employees wasn't touched that I can recall.
Or the people who lost their job because of a bad illness compounding an already horrible situation.
Or the people that have to work full time while undergoing chemo because they know that without health insurance, they will die and with no job, they have no health insurance.
Or the jokes that are COBRA and HSA's.
Or the waiting lists for HIV medications.
Or having to get a prior authorization for medications that aren't really all that expensive, like generic Allegra which costs about 30 bucks per month or Amitriptyline which runs for about 20 dollars.
Or people having to live with pain because the DEA has the doctors terrified that they will get raided for prescribing narcotics.
Or the insurance companies that tell doctors how long to spend with a patient.
Or the overstretched and overworked nursing staff getting shitty wages, working crappy hours, and having to attend to more people than each nurse should in order to provide good care.
Or the real lack of choice we have in the US. An example would be how I pay for really good insurance, but the clinic I'd like to go to for HIV treatment, which is a community non-profit clinic dedicated to treating HIV with a doctor, nurse, pharmacist, dentist, medical assistants and a dietician, isn't covered, despite being much cheaper than a for-profit specialist.
I could go on all day, but the real problem is that the US market sees health care like they do hair care....a commodity to squeeze the most profit out of and give as little service as possible.
-
I just downloaded it (took 1h30 minutes for a 2h movie.. torrents are amazing).. i'll let you know what I think tomorrow!
Milker.
-
I downloaded it 2.5 weeks ago and forgot to watch it.
-
I just watched the first hour of it but i'm getting tired.. so far what is depicted for the US is accurate. However when I lived in the UK I didn't find the NHS particularly good when it came to finding a good doctor, and getting care in a timely manner. That may have changed, but it shows the NHS as bit brighter than what I experienced.
Well tigger, here in the US the FIRST thing you are asked for when you go for a doctor visit or to the emergency room is not what is your problem, it's your insurance card.
Milker.
-
libvet, you make it out that it is that way all over the US. Then I suggest you move to another state. I've never found any of my medical needs, tests etc to be denied. I have had a new medication denied, but I still receive the medication from the mfg. Go to Canada, and see their waiting list to visit doctors, specialists and get meds or surgeries. We have four states that have a waiting list to get on ADAP for HIV meds, but there is ways to work around that, if one has a good case manager, you can still receive your meds at reduced or no cost. Yes I won't argue the over inflated amount it costs for medical care or insurance, but as for services, I can't complain.
-
Roddles,
You know I love you but this stuff you spout about socialised health care isn't true. The reality is that these waiting lists you and others often refer to just don't exist. In countries like Canada, Australia, the UK and other places with similar health systems get timely and ready access to health services. Some elective procedures which are covered by the public purse may have a waiting list, but if you're willing to pay you can get that done immediately.
In fact I never hear Canadians talking about these so called waiting lists. Only Americans who argue against socialised health care.
MtD
-
Matty, I beg to differ with you on waiting. Here in the US you don't have a waiting period on any elective surgery and in Canada they have a waiting period for elective surgeries. Canada does not finance the medical system as a whole, each Providence is responsible for their medical service and that is based on tax dollars that has been allocated by each Providence and the service available can very from one Providence to another, just like the Medicaid system, each state has in the US, some states are better than others. The only thing Canada guarantees, is that any emergency will be taken care of, which is the same in the US, even if you don't have the money to pay.
-
Well Roddles, we'll just have to differ about how the Canadian system works. I'm fairly confident that the Canadians guarantee much more than you say they do. Perhaps one of our Canadian members can set the issue straight.
I do have to say one thing though babe. For someone who enjoys what is essentially defacto socialised health care in the US you're pretty keen to deny it to other Americans.
MtD
-
We need a national back up system to give (very) basic coverage to all, and some way of controlling costs in the private insurance system. I am one of the fortunate ones. I get what I want when I want it. From HIV to orthopedic care to physicals and my fabulously expensive drugs - it's all covered by my employer and as of yet I don't have to contribute to the premium (that'll change next contract). Empire Blue Cross makes no money on me. With 10 - 13% increases a year in premiums, something's got to give. I have to say health insurance is one major motivating factor of doing my job well and of staying put. A bit of a trap, but unavoidable.
Anecdote time: The system is wacked though. I was in the emergency room this past Saturday because of a large swelling on the back of my good knee. It didn't hurt but it was impeding movement. So I'm going away and need to deal with it pronto. So I go. I did get an ultrasound and a diagnosis - a baker's cyst (a simple fluid filled sac that grows out of the joint). What I didn't get is to have it drained. See I have private insurance and worse yet an orthopedist - they said go on Monday and have it taken care of - they refused to draw the fluid down. The guy next to me however, a street person (one of several in the ER) got his cyst drained no problem, he had no coverage I assume. I get the door to more expensive and drawn out procedures and the guy on my dime gets treated. Oh well - I treated it myself. I hyper extended my leg, isolated the cyst between my thumbs and crushed it. Boy did that feel good (sort of). Ha! and the treatment was free.
-
I do have to say one thing though babe. For someone who enjoys what is essentially defacto socialised health care in the US you're pretty keen to deny it to other Americans.
Matty, I've never said that at all, I don't know why you made that statement.
-
Hi there,
I am looking forward to seeing the movie. It's currently playing in Tampa,(FL) but I don't see any theaters, here in Pinellas county showing it yet. Will have to keep an eye on it, been watching it advertised all week.
Ray 8)
-
I just saw the second hour of the movie. It's very sad.. but it's the most accurate movie I've seen from Michael Moore, however the part about Cuba is very suspicious and the movie didn't need it. I didn't see anything not accurate in his description of the health care system in the US nor in the description of the French system.
I think this may be a movie that will hit Americans deeply, as opposed to the other ones that he made before, this one will hit millions of people that are experiencing health care in America.
Milker.
-
The only thing Canada guarantees, is that any emergency will be taken care of, which is the same in the US, even if you don't have the money to pay.
Of course, we won't mention the fact that if you do have an emergency in the United States and no health insurance (or even sometimes when you do), the hospital that provided that service will harass you mercilessly for payment, take you to court, garnish your wages. ruin your credit rating, force you into bankruptcy, etc....
And for those of us who have seen the movie, dumping indigent patients on skid row.
As far as moving. That seems to be a common theme in right-wing talking points. Factory closes up and moves to India? Move to another town. Long waits to see a specialist? Move to another town. Schools not state of the art? Move to another town.
Sometimes, moving is a perfectly good thing, but it is usually not as simple as that. So the waiting lists for heart specialists in Seattle is really long compared to say....Tulsa. But the waiting lists to see an HIV doc in Tulsa is longer than it is in Seattle. If someone has both, should the person split the difference and move to Denver?
And let's say you have a heart condition.....what good does it do you to move to Tulsa if when you get there, you don't have health insurance and no assurance you will find a job that has health insurance? What about that your house and bills? What if the field you spent a few years going to college for is booming in Seattle, but a total bust in Tulsa?
In reverse, if you live in Tulsa and are gainfully employed, have insurance, a modest home, and have HIV, but little in the way of skills that are marketable in Seattle, not to mention the sheer expense of packing up all your belonging and moving. And is one expected to just quit their job when they have 5 more years until retirement?
It sounds to me like what you are suggesting is reminiscent of the adage: For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat and wrong.
The problems that permeate the US health care system are not going to be solved with solutions like "moving".
Some of the problems that must be addressed:
1) The inability for most people to actually be able to afford to pay for health care out of pocket.
2) The fact that the vast majority of Americans get their health insurance as a benefit of employment.
3) The insurance premiums that are rising much faster than wages.
4) The 45 million Americans who don't have access to basic health coverage at all.
5) The laws that skewed toward toward insurance companies that allow them to deny you individual coverage if they deem you to be "high risk".
6) The insurance companies that are more interested in seeing how much money they skim off your health care dollar than how to provide the best health care for your dollar.
7) The incredibly inefficient system of a patchwork of insurance companies, each with it's own payment schedule, rules, coverages, paperwork, prior authorizations, in and out of network labs, hospitals, and specialists that require doctors to need a staff of medical transcribers and billers and accountants to run the gamut of the system.
8) The people who work in a state that has "at will" employment that decides your chemo sessions are just too much trouble to make allowances for and fires you and leaving you with a life-threatening illness AND no job AND no health care.
And that's just off the top of my head.
Medical migration isn't going to solve ANY of those problems.
-
Regarding Canada.
Yes care will vary from Province to Province, since each Province administers it's own plan. So there are differences. For HIV for instance, BC pays for all medical expenses, from any blood work needed to medication (I don't know anyone that has waited for these services in particular). Other Provices might chose to pay 95% of the cost of medication...
To see a specialist you normally would need a referral from your doctor, you can't go see an oncologist because you think you might have cancer. A friend of mine recently had to do some scans, biopsy and see an oncologist for the results... it did take him 6 weeks until he got the scan done, biopsy and finally an appointment to see the oncologist, but he never paid a dime.
In BC any legal resident can apply for BC Medical, it's $54 per person, $96 for a couple and $108 for a family of 3 or more. (per month). Depending on your income you can get assistance... so your monthly payment can go from Zero dollars to the default premium or somewhere in between.
In my case my employer pays the $54 for me (as taxable benefit).
Of course there are taxes we pay that go into our medical services... One of my favorites in BC is the "Property Transfer Tax", with the average price of a /home/ in Vancouver being around 600 thousand... Meaning you buy an "average home" you pay the average 10 thousand to get the property in your name. If in your life time you bought/sold a home 3 times... 30 thousand in taxes (always the purchaser).
Have I ever waited long periods of time to see my doctor? No... Can't say I can get an appointment the day I call but if I'm flexible with my time I can usually see him on the same week I call, if it's a non emergency issue... I also have nurses that I can see if I just want someone to take a look at something right away, want to follow up on something, get my vaccinations etc.
Moore is usually one sided making things look a bit too rosy.... I'm quite sure he could even find certain things that work better in North Korea...
Canada could be doing a better job at many levels (including having more minimum standards across the country) but I personally have no complaints and rather pay the taxes even if they are "Property Transfer Taxes" or 7% Provincial tax on any goods and/or services I purchase to name a few, then not have a universal health care system and I thought that way even before I was HIV.
-
WAITING LIST FOR HIV DRUGS?!!! what are you supposed to do? I know I've had some problems with the NHS, and yes its by no means perfect, but makes me realise how lucky we are...and thats not being smug I promise, this horrifies me.
Is there anything that can be done?
-
WAITING LIST FOR HIV DRUGS?!!! what are you supposed to do? I know I've had some problems with the NHS, and yes its by no means perfect, but makes me realise how lucky we are...and thats not being smug I promise, this horrifies me.
Is there anything that can be done?
Not until a significant portion of the United States stands up and realizes that "We the People" are the government and if we have single payer health care with the government acting as our "insurance company" we are actually engaging in self-help, not a mommy state.
The other thing we need to get over is the idea that switching to universal health care isn't a slippery slope that is going to turn America into Stalinist Russia anymore than universal public education or the public library system is going to turn us into a communist state.
-
Not that Kurt Loder comes to my mind as a serious journalist, however I did find his review interesting
Sicko': Heavily Doctored, By Kurt Loder
Is Michael Moore's prescription worse than the disease?
By Kurt Loder
http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1563758/story.jhtml (http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1563758/story.jhtml)
-
The "People" are those that are our elected senators and congressmen. We elected them to serve and represent us. At any non presidential years there are apx 40% of the registered voters that vote, and 60% don't even bother. When those that can vote, won't vote and the others won't register to vote and take time to vote, who do you blame? So who do you blame for the lack of interest in speaking up? Do you really think in our system that our congressman/women and senators are going to push for a national health system? It will be dead on the floor, like the immigration bill, before it ever gets started.
-
Not until a significant portion of the United States stands up and realizes that "We the People" are the government and if we have single payer health care with the government acting as our "insurance company" we are actually engaging in self-help, not a mommy state.
Yes, it is up to the everyday people of this country to insist that health care reform is an important election issue. Until we make it important the politicians will not give much attention to it.
I glanced through the websites of the Republican and Democratic candidates. Most of the Republicans didn't list health as an issue, and if they did it was an affirmation of the free market. The exception being Tommy Thompson, who isn't backing a single payer system but sees the need for reform and spells it out in some detail. The Democratic candidates all list health care as an issue, although usually it was bland and lacking in details. The notable exception being Hillary Clinton, who has had a long term interest in the topic.
Incidentally, Clinton is the only candidate to mention HIV in a domestic context. Her website stated: "Hillary led the fight for the Early Treatment for HIV Act, which expands access to vital treatment options for low-income individuals living with HIV. She also fought to fully fund the Ryan White CARE Act to improve access to treatment and support for those living with HIV and AIDS."
-
The "People" are those that are our elected senators and congressmen. We elected them to serve and represent us. At any non presidential years there are apx 40% of the registered voters that vote, and 60% don't even bother. When those that can vote, won't vote and the others won't register to vote and take time to vote, who do you blame? So who do you blame for the lack of interest in speaking up? Do you really think in our system that our congressman/women and senators are going to push for a national health system? It will be dead on the floor, like the immigration bill, before it ever gets started.
So the answer is to not try? To do nothing?
I'll be the first to admit that there is a huge problem with the "pay for play" culture in Washington that has resulted in special corporate interests getting the lion's share of the average representative's time. That's something that must be addressed as well. But health care has become such an issue lately that even some big corporate interests are starting to look at alternatives to our current system. It's shocking to think of it, but even Wal-Mart has joined forces with labor in calling for universal health care....of some sort. I guess politics really does make for strange bedfellows.
The baby-boomers are heading into retirement now and many of them are going to watch their savings for retirement being chewed up by larger and larger health care costs and those who actually thought it wouldn't be a problem because they were supposed to be covered under their former employer's group plan as part of their retirement plan are watching corporations renege on their bargain. As that happens....more and more people are going to start wondering if we can't do something better than what we currently have.
-
sloth, when the Clintons were in office, Hillary was given health care to work on, what became of that?
-
Not that Kurt Loder comes to my mind as a serious journalist, however I did find his review interesting
Sicko': Heavily Doctored, By Kurt Loder
Is Michael Moore's prescription worse than the disease?
Kurt lost me when he started praising a film funded entirely by a right-wing think tank that is dedicated to preserving "free market solutions" at any cost.
The bottom line for me is when you actually poll the people.
78% of Americans are dissatisfied very dissatisfied with our health care system.
85% of Canadians are satisfied or very satisfied with their health care system.
69% of Brits are satisfied with their health care system.
65% of French are satisfied with their health care system.
Most of the Canadians I have talked to (and living not far from the border, we see a lot of visitors from Canada and I visit Canada myself on occasion) don't want our health care system.
That is not to say there are no good things about our system....there are, but the notion of being beholden to an employer for health coverage or having to give up most of your assets to get health care coverage if you are out of work seems to appall them as much as it does me.
-
sloth, when the Clintons were in office, Hillary was given health care to work on, what became of that?
As I recall, the republicans in congress threw a hissy fit and the insurance lobby and right-wing noise machine went into propaganda overdrive to stop any plan that would have threatened their place at the teat of health care profits.
-
Yes, it is up to the everyday people of this country to insist that health care reform is an important election issue. Until we make it important the politicians will not give much attention to it.
I glanced through the websites of the Republican and Democratic candidates. Most of the Republicans didn't list health as an issue, and if they did it was an affirmation of the free market.
Not entirely surprising. It's pretty hard to get worked up about health care when you are heavily invested in the health care industry, you have really good health care coverage, and you aren't a middle-class worker who could be financially wiped out in an instant by a single illness.
-
She said her plan was flawed. (New York Times)
-
Matty, I beg to differ with you on waiting. Here in the US you don't have a waiting period on any elective surgery and in Canada they have a waiting period for elective surgeries. Canada does not finance the medical system as a whole, each Providence is responsible for their medical service and that is based on tax dollars that has been allocated by each Providence and the service available can very from one Providence to another, just like the Medicaid system, each state has in the US, some states are better than others. The only thing Canada guarantees, is that any emergency will be taken care of, which is the same in the US, even if you don't have the money to pay.
Each Province guarantees that they will fulfill the Canada Health Act, which exists to ensure that every Canadian has access to medical care, not just emergencies. Thus far no province has risked their Federal funding by allowing for-profit healthcare for medically necessary procedures. This makes the Canadian system far stricter than the UK or Australia which allow private healthcare.
As to wait times, as Moore points out when you have a life threatening illness you go to the head of the line. A friend was recently diagnosed with Hodgkins and he went in for his first chemo treatment within two weeks.
As to waitlists: I can usually see my GP (who's also my HIV doc) the next day. I waited 3 months to see a GI doc, and another 4 weeks after the appt to get a sigmoidoscopy. I waited 6 weeks to see a dermatologist, but 2 weeks for a follow-up appt. I get my labs done at large downtown hospital and the results are available in about 10 days. When I have to start meds that will be covered. The formulary is reasonably up-to-date, they do not yet prescribe Atripla, though that should be within the year.
Cost to me for all the above mentioned medical care: nothing. And I didn't have to beg for my life to some caseworker to get it.
-
northernguy, isn't your health care funded by tax base per providence? So to actually say that you don't pay anything isn't quite so. You do pay into it. Correct?
-
If you mean that I pay taxes, therefore paying for healthcare, then yes. However: I will never be bankrupted by medical bills; as an HIV-infected middle-class citizen I will be treated by the system the same way a healthy millionaire. As Moore points out, when you add up what the average US citizen pays in taxes + healthcare to what the average Canadian pays for the same Canada comes out ahead.
-
That's what I thought. No doubt it has it's benefits that we don't have. If you are rich here, no problem, if you are poor here, no problem, if your in the middle your sunk until your poor and then you don't have a problem. That how it works.
-
As I alluded to, IMHO the greatest benefit of universal healthcare is that it allows people to retain their dignity, as well as their health. I'm happy to pay taxes for that.
When I hear people on this forum in a panic, having to beg for proper care, it breaks my heart.
-
sloth, when the Clintons were in office, Hillary was given health care to work on, what became of that?
Oh, I am afraid that memory doesn't serve me very well. I do recall that it went down in flames.
I suppose it could happen again. <sigh> In talking with people, when I mention that the health care system is a mess, I am often met with disbelief. But those people have always had access to affordable care and that largely determines their attitudes. I dunno... maybe Micheal Moore's film will shake people out of their complacency. But this may just be wishful thinking on my part.
-
So I should take William out for a fancy Dinner, a bottle of wine and then desert. Then skip on over to the moovie theater and enjoy a nice evening with Michael??
Is that what your saying!?!?!?!?!
Fragil minds want to know....
Eric
-
I just came back from the theater where I watched "Sicko"
Very one sided but it does raise interesting questions. Very much a documtainment in the typical Moore style.
Some of it is a bit sad... The entire thing about trying to get coverage or the people that worked their entire lives only to have their savings wiped away because they got sick (cancer... heart attack...)
Some was a bit shocking and I wonder if it actually does happen... where a hospital would drop off people at a shelter (actually the side walk in front of the shelter) with an IV stuck in their arm, because they can't pay for their hospital stay OR the fact that the inhaler that cost $120 a pop in the States and costs 0.5 cents in Cuba is actually available at all times in Cuba... I do find that if some of the cases shown were /typical/ that American voters would be outraged...
Some of it was quite disturbing with the 9/11 volunteer workers :(
In Canada even with the system we have before elections health care is usually the #1 concern for voters... don't remember an election here where health care wasn't one of the top 3 priorities, be it to protect the current system, improve it or provide more funding (so it's not like things work like a Swiss watch). But jeez $60 thousand to reattach a finger tip!?!
-
Some was a bit shocking and I wonder if it actually does happen... where a hospital would drop off people at a shelter (actually the side walk in front of the shelter) with an IV stuck in their arm, because they can't pay for their hospital stay OR the fact that the inhaler that cost $120 a pop in the States and costs 0.5 cents in Cuba is actually available at all times in Cuba... I do find that if some of the cases shown were /typical/ that American voters would be outraged...
Actually it does happen.( i am not sure about IV's in the Arms) It made the news here not that long ago. Seems to happen quite frequently in LA.
Heres a couple articles :
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-10-26-homeless_x.htm
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5298034 This is video
Ray
-
The problem is because of his less than factual work in the past,when he does produce something that actually might be true it is immediately trashed by most reasonable people because of his past work. It is laughable to think anyone can get better healthcare in Cuba than in US,but everyone knows his attack on insurance industry is right on. His claim the government could more efficiently administer health care than private industry is pure madness, but his claims that insurance industry is a great roadblock to good and efficient health care is true.
In short much of stuff might be true but his solutions could be worse. Remember any government program you start will only grow and grow and become more expensive. It will never end,because government spending programs never end.
-
What does it cost for HIV meds in the UK? Are they easy to access? How does this compare to the states.
The notion of being denied access to medication for financial reasons is abhorrent to me. I don't mean to criticise or offend - but to me it makes no sense.
I am fairly proud and passionate about the Australian healthcare system - but am concerned that our current right wing government policies are allowing it to crumble. I know that in recent trade negotiations some officials in the US were critical of the Australian pharmaceutical benefits scheme - but were advised it is here to stay.
Tempeboy
Who works full time, has no insurance and pays nothing for any of his HIV care, medication or treatment (psychological - accupuncture - massage - yoga - meditation - and much more)- and is proud to say so.
-
Quote from: Iggy on June 30, 2007, 09:45:14 PM
Not that Kurt Loder comes to my mind as a serious journalist, however I did find his review interesting
Sicko': Heavily Doctored, By Kurt Loder
Is Michael Moore's prescription worse than the disease?
Kurt lost me when he started praising a film funded entirely by a right-wing think tank that is dedicated to preserving "free market solutions" at any cost.
Well....just to quibble but how is that point valid vs. Michael Moore's film which is produced and funded by a far-left think tank that is dedicated to socialization of medical care at any cost? :-\ It seems that both have agendas and both will use selective images to promote that agenda.
For the record, I agree that we need to change the U.S.' current system and I am in favor of a universal health care plan, but the thread was about the topic of how does one view Moore's film and I think Loder gave an interesting review. Whether it was the GM, 9/11, Guns in School or current health care movie - Moore has never been a strict documentary producer - he purposefully mixes dramatic elements - not something I have an issue with either - just something that prevents me from saying that his film tells the whole or even correct story.
-
Just FYI. If I try and send my excess drugs to the US I run the risk of being prosecuted...even inhalers. If I take it back to my Gp etc, its destroyed. The NHS needs a SERIOUS shakeup, not the 'tweaks' that moore seems to think. If you've got access to BBC NEWS 24 hes on there at 11.50 BST.
Modified to give correct channel name
x
-
Had more to say but wanted to get that up quickly JIC anyone could see it in time. I really DON'T understand US politics, but aren't there lobbyists/charities who can put accross that in the long run, a well thought out and applied social healthcare system can SAVE money? I also feel a bit embarassed that I am so relatively lucky, but EVERYONE should have the same rights and access to healthcare. I know I'm an idealist, and things dont change that fast but by hell, if hillary Clinton really does support this ethic, then yes, more people need to get out there and vote
(and this is from a country where only 36% of people vote, maybe we've become too damned stuck in a rut)
-
In short much of stuff might be true but his solutions could be worse. Remember any government program you start will only grow and grow and become more expensive. It will never end,because government spending programs never end.
Well, let's look at it from a different perspective.
There are very very few things thats grow cheaper and cheaper over time. This is true even in the free market. How much was a loaf of bread circa 1950? How much was a new car? How much was a visit to the doctor for that matter?
As far as ending, certain programs are never going to end because the job is never done. We aren't going to reach a point anytime soon where we say, "Well, the roads are all built and the bridges completed, so let's stop spending money on them." Likewise, we are never going to say, "Well, we got everyone through first grade, lets close up all the first grade classrooms." We are never going to say, "Well, there aren't any wars currently going on, so let's disband the military and call it good."
So short of a cheap panacea potion that cures all illness, pain, and disease....I'm not sure why would expect a fully-funded health care program to end. And yes, I would expect that over time, like everything else, it would be more expensive, just like pretty much everything else, free market or not. As it is, health care costs have consistently risen at rate much higher than most things.
From my perspective, national defense, health care/public health, education and infrastructure and public safety are entirely appropriate roles for the government as they are all things that really too big and too important to handle at an individual level.
-
I really DON'T understand US politics, but aren't there lobbyists/charities who can put accross that in the long run
Dear,
Lobbyists are not there to save money, but rather to make money... Associations like the ACLU do not have a seat at the White House and Congress' private dinners..
Milker.
-
Lobbyists are not there to save money, but rather to make money... Associations like the ACLU do not have a seat at the White House and Congress' private dinners..
Probably because the ACLU doesn't pay for re-election. Honestly, about the time that it was decided that corporations are people coupled with the fact that it takes enormous sums of cash to get into office, the voice of the people is pretty much drowned out by fund raising. The congresscritter who wants to have any shot at being re-elected and honestly, a freshman is rarely given the opportunity to shape policy, has not much choice but to hear out the organization or business that is putting money into his campaign.
That's something we should really think about changing, also. The best way I can think of to stop the pay for play culture in Washington is to stop making our elected officials into beggars for funds. Almost all of them are deathly afraid they might bite the hand that feeds them....and that hand is not attached to common people.
-
Probably because the ACLU doesn't pay for re-election. Honestly, about the time that it was decided that corporations are people coupled with the fact that it takes enormous sums of cash to get into office, the voice of the people is pretty much drowned out by fund raising. The congresscritter who wants to have any shot at being re-elected and honestly, a freshman is rarely given the opportunity to shape policy, has not much choice but to hear out the organization or business that is putting money into his campaign...quote]
Just another reminder that there is another way: in 2004 Canada capped all corporate and organizational (ie. union) political donations at $1,000 per year. Individuals are allowed to give up to $5,000 per year, thus trying to ensure that the rich and corporation can't buy elections.