Well, let's see how this goes. Personally, I'm not entirely sure that this plan does enough, but to quote my local congressman, doing nothing is not an option.

And before you say that the government can't run anything correctly, let's not forget America's entirely tax-funded government-run system that is the best in the world.

Thoughts?

Originally Posted by The Other Guy

Well, let's see how this goes. Personally, I'm not entirely sure that this plan does enough, but to quote my local congressman, doing nothing is not an option.

And before you say that the government can't run anything correctly, let's not forget America's entirely tax-funded government-run system that is the best in the world.

Thoughts?

Hey governments can run anything they just do it inefficiently.

absolutely no part of the government runs efficently, also do we wont the same government that made the us tax code doing something like health care.

Basically it comes down to: Americans are too incompetent to make it work.
It's not what I'm saying, it seems to be what Americans are saying.
Why is it that governments the world over seem to be able to do it, but a government staffed by Americans (according to the critics) can't?

Originally Posted by Bacara

absolutely no part of the government runs efficently, also do we wont the same government that made the us tax code doing something like health care.

Well I hardly expect that the same guys that did the tax code will be doing operations so I don't think that will be an issue.

The problem is that you have vast numbers of people without health coverage and so far I have not met anyone who has actually required on going long term treatment who is happy with the current system (in fact I personally know half a dozen who have effectively been bankrupted by medical care due to being dropped by health insurance once the bills became too much), it is because of this that I believe inefficient but guaranteed medical insurance run via a government mandate is still better than the current system.

There isn't a single government agency or division that runs efficiently; do we really want an organization that developed the U.S. Tax Code handling something as complex as health care? Quick, try to think of one government office that runs efficiently. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? The Department of Transportation? Social Security Administration? Department of Education? There isn't a single government office that squeezes efficiency out of every dollar the way the private sector can. We've all heard stories of government waste such as million-dollar cow flatulence studies or the Pentagon's 14 billion dollar Bradley design project that resulted in a transport vehicle which when struck by a mortar produced a gas that killed every man inside. How about the U.S. income tax system? When originally implemented, it collected 1 percent from the highest income citizens. Look at it today. A few years back to government published a "Tax Simplification Guide", and the guide itself was over 1,000 pages long! This is what happens when politicians mess with something that should be simple. Think about the Department of Motor Vehicles. This isn't rocket science--they have to keep track of licenses and basic database information for state residents. However, the costs to support the department are enormous, and when was the last time you went to the DMV and didn't have to stand in line? If it can't handle things this simple, how can we expect the government to handle all the complex nuances of the medical system? If any private business failed year after year to achieve its objectives and satisfy its customers, it would go out of business or be passed up by competitors

These government run programs aren't expected to run efficiently but they are supposed to provide an essential service to the public at affordable prices.
Why can't you get that in your head?
We KNOW government run programs are inefficient. That's why the government doesn't run everything. However, there are services that are very important and must be run at an affordable cost nation wide regardless of whether it makes a loss or not.
The insurance companies are too similar and they generally face the same problems. If you've been following the other threads I've been getting a lotof crap on, you'd know that I am definitely pro-capitalism but sometimes there are exceptions to these rules.
According to this argument we should disband the military for being inefficient and unable to create any profit.

its not only that, when i tare my acl sacking some helpless quarterback, i wont to go to the hospital, and get an mri NOW, i dont wont to wait, while i am waiting could be in surgery and physical threapy getting ready for next season. In nationalized health, would have to wait up to six months for a MRI, and while i was waiting, i could do more determental damage to my ligaments, i wont to see my doctor, and i wont to see her now

Not sure who is feeding you your "facts" but I live with both "nationalised" health care and private health care and if I need any medical treatment I usually get it immediately on private health but should the guy down the road who doesn't have private insurance have the same injury he will still get exactly the same care.

The only difference in treatment is the quality of the optional aspects of the case, for example I get private rooms, menu dining and all the bells and whistles and he doesn't.

Trust me having seen both your system and ours I would take ours any day not because our doctors or facilities are better because they arent but because our system gives everyone at least the basics in health care and those that can afford it have the luxuries of the private system.

yes but will they allows us to keep our insurance, and if they do, will i still pay for the guy who weighs 500 pounds and smokes 3 packs a day, while i dont use it?