Shining_brow:

You're probably trying to make a point here with this long rant, but you haven't actually stated anything...! You ask a lot of rhetorical questions, throw in a few hypothetical (possible future) scenarios - without actually saying much! No data to back up any claims, some ridiculous analogies... And a complete lack of reference to the rest of the world and their healthcare policies...

As for your comment regarding the first black person as head of state... ummm, in most countries, around 50% of the population is female. AND women have had the vote longer than African-Americans (in the US), and  longer than non-white citizens in other countries. So, the US has made a president from 13% of your population, but not someone from 50% of your population...!

"I don't know how you make people feel safe and have government in the doctors office with you and the doctor."

Are you being deliberately ignorant and moronic? Or what? Australia has universal healthcare, and I've been to the doctors many times. Only on extremely rare occasions, I've had someone else in the doctor's room with us, and that's only ever been a nurse for taking blood. I've never seen a government official at any time I've gone to the GP or any other medical facility. Maybe it's cos it's not America (or China).

If you're going to use hyperbole, it's a good idea to actually connect what you're staying so it makes sense!!!

"The other question is how much should a citizen pay for healthcare. 15 percent of everything you make for your whole life for free care. Is that enough? Who decides how much? Why do they get to make the decision? Do they have a medical and economic background?"

In order for this argument to be coherent, it would assume that whoever decides how much taxes should be paid towards anything should be decided by qualified people - for ALL expenditure. So, economists or civil engineers for infrastrucutre, economists or military personnel for the defence spending,  economists and an unemployed injured person for welfare...

Given that most western developed countries do have universal healthcare, it would appear that only America is unable to find qualified people to make this work...

US bases in other countries... I'm not sure how much opposition would actually come about if they closed down, and the troops went back home. I suspect far less than you may imagine! In fact, in many places, there have been a lot of protests to send them home! It's been a very very rare thing for a country to say "Oh, please America, build a base on our land... pretty pretty please!!!. No. In most cases, those bases have been forced through negotations to be built.

Pre-existing conditions... precisely why universal healthcare is so damn important! When health insurance companies refuse to accept your application (or charge exorbitant fees if they do). In a user-pays system, those people are well and truly screwed!

ambivalentmace:

like I said good intentions with no answers.

so, HOW MUCH should someone pay from their labor for the benefit of universal healthcare, it's not free, what is a fair amount.

The idea that no matter what the cost, we should have it, just will not fly in America. We simply don't trust government.

what is the cost in England, Canada, other countries?

how much is subsidized?

as for no figures to back up anything, i thought everybody knows the costs in their country, we have web users from new zealand, how much do you pay?

retired in china said germany is 15 percent of your income for you whole life, is that a good price, i dont know. I'm not German.

the worse number you get is health costs as a percentage of gdp to make america look bad, but this includes cosmetic surgeries, boob jobs, sex changes, and other non essential medical procedures, hardly a good number for comparison but we get branded with it when comparing our costs and results against other countries.

I would not feed hungry people with food that i would need to survive and I dont want to obligate myself to an unknown number for healthcare that might be worse or force me to eat a different diet or change my lifestyle. No more cigarettes, alcohol, sugar drinks, beer, junk food, where would it end.

Englteachted:

America has a law requiring hospitals to treat people regardless of ability to pay. That inflates the costs of healthcare because emergency room visits are more expensive and will require more treatment. So you don't want universal healthcare then that law has gotta go, then don't pass out by yourself in public. Because they'll be legally in the right to refuse treatment until you can prove that you can pay. 

The reality is this from recent history in USA, millions died in the last about 10 to 15 years because they did not have adequate health insurance. Are you ok with that?

ambivalentmace:

the problem is doctors, news reports in Canada say some doctors don't make 70 thousand dollars a year, hell a truck driver in canada makes more money and a doctor has all those years of education.

i have seen news reports from england that they set up a two tier system with junior doctors that barely make 30 thousand euros until they get so many years experience and then they get more money.

you cut the doctors salaries and wonder why you have a shortage and nobody wants the jobs, some day if this continues, we will have to offer free medical school tuition just to get someone to do the job.

I was not talking about the government being in the office with the doctor literally, the regulations and questionaires from the bureaucratic government interfere with the doctors work. I had a medical doctor ask my wife if anyone in the home owned a gun because it was directive from the government. she told him it was none of his or the damn governments business.

Englteachted:

How is it you're ok with the govt taking tax dollars to pay 1 trillion for defence ? And not protecting people from something that really might kill them?

ambivalentmace:

englishteach,

my mother died because she could not get a doctors appointment for 9 months and refused to go to the emergency room because she did not want the bill hanging over her head even though she had insurance. we simply dont have enough doctors, does not matter who pays. Seniors have free government medical care but since they pay in 90 days, my mom would get collection calls and bills in the mail and scare her and she hated doctors and the prices they charge and death was a better option. she had 30 thousand dollars in the bank when she died and 500 dollars cash i gave her for taxi and emergency room to use that she kept in her wallet for 5 years untouched.

ambivalentmace:

i am not happy with defense spending because we don't win the wars. if we won fine but if your not going to win don't spend the money. Healthcare is like education, when you get the government to guarantee the money, the cost of college has gone twice sometimes 3 times the rate of inflation for the last 30 years, and the same thing could happen in healthcare if it's not run correctily. Hell, we spent 1 billion for a software program for obumma care that did not work after 3 years putting it together. True universal Healthcare with good oversight and a responsible government plan monitored closely at a fair price would be great, i just dont believe it could ever happen with the leaders we have in America.

Shining_brow:

I'm still not seeing any actual argument one way or the other in what you write!

I presume you're against universal health care, but haven't actually defined any particular reasons - other than 'government in the doctor's room'... which appears to be a uniquely American thing. I've never had any questionnaire for the doctor's that hasn't asked anything related to medicine (other than obvious demographics etc)

Saying 'nay' to universal health care because you don't trust the government seems pretty foolish to me! The solution there would be change the government, not let people die!

Shining_brow:

Oh, as for the costs involved, they're pretty easy to find online... I just can't be arsed doing so!

How much tax to people pay? How much does Medicare cost... simple!

ambivalentmace:

let's see medicare and social security is 7.65 percent from the victim and your company for a total of 15.3 percent, medicare for old people takes 1.45 percent from both sides, so thats 2.90 percent of taxable wages to a ceiling amount of about 105000 dollars  a year,

although the poor dont pay income tax to a certain level, everybody pays the 2.9 for all wages to the limit every year to age 65.

medicare is always broke and never lives within the budget with 2.9 and this just covers seniors. social security gets 12.4 percent and its broke also.

ambivalentmace:

shining, how can you be for something without knowing what it cost, i just don't understand, I work hard for my money and I want to know what you are going to take from me and where is it going?

Englteachted:

Ambi, you do understand that the reason why the cost goes up, we don't win the wars, education expensive as shit is because private industry is involved. So you agree with me. Socialize it from the ground up and when you can't restrict how much private contractors can charge. You know why there aren't enough doctors? The medical association restricts how many get licensed in order to make sure supply stays far behind the demand. Look deeper into things man

ambivalentmace:

get rid of the medical association, competition is great, oligopolies are not and i dont think government should fund any private education, grants, loans, anything, if your private and think your better than the government and you may well be since i dont have any faith in government then you should be private, talk the talk and then walk the walk, if harvard thinks there special, why should the government fund a grant for a student to go there, let harvard pay for it. government should provide some protection for religions and some basic minimum requirements for education and that does not mean funding private education enterprises of any kind. if private schools compete, let them compete fairly without a government handout. I think the guaranteed loans for college by the government made colleges think "dont worry the government will just loand them more money so we can raise the tuition" when trump gets rid of the department of education that was set up by jimmy carter and we were fine without a department of education before 1979, i hope some of this private and government education scams will stop.

Shining_brow:

Ambi - youi're clearly seeing things from a single perspective - that of America and its sucky systems. Granted, I'm (mostly) viewing things through Australia, and its apparently not so sucky systems - but I also notice other countries in the world (which you don't seem to have done).

"shining, how can you be for something without knowing what it cost, i just don't understand, I work hard for my money and I want to know what you are going to take from me and where is it going?"

Easy - I see my taxes getting taken out of my salary, and I know I have about zero influence in where it goes, other than voting. I also see that I can walk into a doctor's clinic, show my Medicare card, have my appointment, and walk out, without a single cent being handed over the counter. I then walk to the pharmacy with my script, and I see that I am paying X amount for my painkillers, and other medicines - at a price that is drastically cheaper (except in Thailand... :p) I also see other people in exactly the same situation!

If per chance I need an ambulance to go to the emergency room after a car accident that wasn't my fault. I know that a) I won't be in debt to the ambulance, b) I'll be seen relatively quickly (depending on the extent of my injuries) and c) I'll be covered by the compulsory Third Party Insurance that Australia has on vehicle registration...

I also see other things the government has chosen to do with my tax money... and I deem it mostly acceptable. But I also know there are groups out there (which I (occasionally support) which will influence that government into directions I would prefer. But, unfortunately, if the US gets involved in another war, there's sod all that I'll be able to do to stop use getting dragged into it.

I also see that the vast majority of Australians are doing fairly well - though I acknowledge that there are changes that ought to be implemented.

When I do feel strongly about an issue, I have access to an email so I can shoot them off to relevant ministers and shadow ministers.

One thing I do want to know is... where the fk is the 30-40 billion dollars per year the tax on mining companies has gone.....??????

Shining_brow:

oops - my bad... the stupid Liberal government repealed that mining tax... Goodbye $22 billion dollars that would have wiped our debt (or given the people of Australia a better lifestyle... instead of the private multi-national companies taking our money off-shore).

Shining_brow:

As for smoking, that's why Australia has some of the most expensive cigarettes in the world - increased tax to pay for the increased health-related problems smokers get.

Shining_brow:

I'd also suggest tax rebates for gym memberships and other sporting (playing) fees and expenses. Granted, not everyone will actually go and use the gym, or play football etc... but it'd be an incentive!

Englteachted:

You guys are looking at it the wrong way. When you fund a hospital, it is there already. When you stock the shelves with medicine, it's there. And why  are you upset that someone else needs it more than you, you jealous? Yeah Liberals are selfish too

nzteacher80:

I'm not a Liberal. Belonging to a movement or labelling yourself is foolish and you forego you're right to be logical and reasonable. You don't think treating someone for lung cancer or heart disease costs money? If health care is publicly funded then there is never enough money to go around. Someone always misses out. If you are wasting money on people who have made poor lifestyle choices then others will miss out. It's that simple.

Englteachted:

If some Joe catches the next big bug, wouldn't you want them seeing a doctor instead of sitting next to you on a train or sitting in a doctor's office instead of forcing themselves into work? Society is better served with free  healthcare (including annual checkups, catching problems early saves more money) and sick days. 

Englteachted:

It doesn't have to go that far. The US is one big fat piece of pork, there are over 19k police depts!! when there should just be 1 nationwide dept , that would seriously lower the cost of policing. The legal system is designed to inflate costs. spending on silly military projects like the f-35 that is so fucking expensive it is very unlikely to see any real combat because they're so fucking expensive to replace. And they don't work. tax loopholes for the extremely wealthy , Romney bad a lesser percentage than me. Earned income credit!!! why pay someone extra money for having a kid they can't afford. Corporate welfare, stadium funding, immigrant detention centers, private prisons, the list goes on and on

ambivalentmace:

if you have stock in private prison companies, you should be selling or shorting them, when trump kicks out 3 million people, these private prisons will disappear, 25 percent of the prison population of california are illegal immigrants. correction corporation of america cxw and the geo group geo are in for some rough times.

ScotsAlan:

In the UK, from memory, it is about 7.5% flat rate. The employer needs to pay another flat rate on top. A simple flat rate tax that conservatives love.

Englteachted:

employers should pay anything except salary 

You really think he's gonna go against those big Republican donors? Look at his team it is the Republican establishment and lobbyists he railed against.

RiriRiri:

Yeaaaah but you know, all those people with wonderful fantasies that consistently end up in disaster, they meant well and that's all that counts. Mao didn't deliver on healthcare? Oh too bad. He did, however, deliver on his private trains and stations.

ambivalentmace:

sadly all very true, but progressives think with emotion, the right thing to do, and never use logic or look at results.

if progressives ran the world, there would be no accountants or auditors because it does not matter what anything cost, it's the decent thing to do.

Englteachted:

Seeing things like a Child,just because the govt has screwed up many things we shouldn't ask the govt to do anything ever again?

What you also ignore is Social Security worked well for now closing on  80 years! Medicare works well the only problem being seems the private contractors. The Education System better than the alternative, (only problems Teacher's Unions, dumb parents, private contractors). Ambulance system, fire dept, anti trust laws worked well until they were dismantled. 

Nice to ignore facts

RiriRiri:

That's the problem with children mindset: no capacity to project forward and foresee problems, it's all the here and now.

Not because a system is designed to work in the here and now does it mean it is sustainable enough to work 2 or 3 generations from now. Me too, I can implement my own delusional policies like say painting all the white roses in red in the kingdom, and since I'm the government and I have the monies I can get your children and grand children to pay for it. No one will say shit because, heh, I'm the government and I provide education for free too with my Education System capital E capital S, so you've already been brainwashed into that children mindset with the conviction that I, the state, am responsible for you because you're just not mature enough. Giggles.

You put healthcare into the hands of largely unaccountable people, the first generation of whom probably mean well and are honest and decent people working for the common good. Then generations passes and the benevolent policy starts to look like a liability, then an opportunity for cronies to establish fake public-private partnerships which are in fact state sponsored monopolies that couldn't exist if alternatives were legally allowed to grow (but somehow it's nothing to do with the government, blame the private sector).

ambivalentmace:

the only thing the US government has ever done efficiently and within budget is the TVA, Tennessee Valley Authority, and NASA. The Christian democrat who ran the TVA would never get the job in the political environment we have now, but if you want the engineers and professionals that work at NASA, to run our healthcare, sign me up, they would do the job right and within budget. there are not any other government programs or agencies that even come close in budgeting and running a professional operation.

Shining_brow:

If you're going to see everything from the mindset of the permanently paranoid, then we can never have a rational discussion about anything!

From what I'm seeing here, you a) don't think governments (anywhere in the world - not just American) have any reason to exist, and therefore b) we should never vote - after what's the point of voting if you don't think the government has any worth???

You talk about me giving up responsibility... while voter turnout for your elections is at an all-time low!!! Your country has a failed political system, and so you blame the government for it, rather than the people who put it there.

What's the difference between idealism and pragmatism? Pulling one's finger out and actually doing something! About 25 million Americans have voted and made a  difference for the other 300 million people in the country...

Adding to what I wrote at the beginning, if you don't trust your government to be 'responsible' then why the hell would you trust a private company only after your money to be any more responsible???

You have done what so many others have done... ignore the facts as shown in the rest of the world. You look at your own backyard, and see a mess... then when you look at the neighbours, you complain that their beautifully maintained gardens are only waiting for disaster to strike Adding to the irony is that what you predict for everyone else is what's actually happening in your own backyard - that is, it's getting much worse at a much faster rate.

In this case, you are suggesting that the approx 60 countries that have universal health care, ALL of them are about to come crashing down - their economies are running so badly in a never-ending sliding level of debt, that in another 20 or 30 years (you said a generation or 2), we can expect total anarchy - all due solely to funding of healthcare for their citizens (and visitors).

Here I'm reminded of Christians who keep saying their lord is coming... and coming... and coming........ (or Icnif and 0H and how the US will collapse :p).  Some countries have had universal healthcare for 100 years or more... and still going strong. Others only 50 years... and their economies are growing.

When I take a look at the % of debt to GDP, I find that there are only a handful of countries looking worse than the US.. and only a couple of those are developed nations with universal healthcare... So, the vast majority of the nations with universal healthcare are better off economically than the US that doesn't look after it's people!

RiriRiri:

I'm sorry, would you ever feel safe if you ever had to agree to a contract where the other party has written every single article, also has all power to judge and enforce its contents, and that has no termination article? That wouldn't even be called a contract, just a fraud and enslavement. Buuuut somehow it's okay when Party A is government and Party B is citizen.

And that is exactly why a private company is always a better deal. Because of the freedom to enter and terminate an agreement on your own terms.

Now I'm sure you'll only allow me an opinion once I have carefully reviewed and assessed all 60 or so healthcare systems you have duly esteemed as valid proof of concepts, which, you guessed it, I'm not going to do because I really can't be bothered. Sorry. My experience has consistently shown me that government administered anything beyond a narrow scope of things called regalian always ends up in an ineffective mess usually solved by war.

So yeah, I'm ignoring the facts, deal with it.

Hotwater:

This is because the current U.K. government don't want universal health care run by a government organization. They want to parcel it up and sell it off to their banker mates. Also underfunding the NHS in the name of "austerity". The U.K. has enough money to fully fund the health service from taxes but claim they're penniless after agreeing to spend billions on the Trident nuclear submarine replacement vanity project. 

retiredinchina:

unless government healthcare is a separate run agency with its own revenue source and budget, this could happen in any government when government controls the healthcare.

as for transparency, what did the NHS receive for funding in 2016, how much is collected per citizen for the cost, how much was spent per citizen, how many citizen percentage wise against population were treated in 2016.

separate self sufficient agency, self control of revenue, full disclosure of everything except a patients name, but it does not matter, my healthcare is free, who paid for it, i dont care, did the money to pay come from a government loan against my grandchildren's future earnings. don't care, it my right and the governments responsibility, who cares, OBVIOUSLY, nobody cares, that's the problem, good intentions with out measuring and reporting the results. I can't imagine the MAFIA running a casino and never counting the money or costs, but the MAFIA can't print money like the government does.

Englteachted:

People have to do a better job of electing non-corrupt officials and bouncing those that prove corrupt/ incompetent (regardless or political affiliation).

expatlife26:

yeah, the problem is that you need people with enough of a backbone to say "no" involved in the system to people who are abusing it

For UHC to work you need to have the system be good enough for the people who actually pay for it or eventually they'll revolt.

It's why I actually kinda like the idea of Obamacare...just force everybody to get insurance, better than single payer. It has been implemented pretty terribly, but I think the idea of trying to find a balance between fully free-market and fully socialized is a good idea. That's probably where the most reasonable solution would be.

ambivalentmace:

yes, we have a Canadian teacher here drawing disability and working in China because he is not allowed to work in Canada. Bike riding, kites, flag football, looks pretty healthy to me.

expatlife26:

I'm basically a liberal by nature but I think you are absolutely right that as you get older you start to see that the pie is finite. 

Englteachted:

I think what everyone can agree to is Universal Healthcare for cancer, birth defects and some other diseases, I'll put colds/ flu on that list also (to prevent outbreaks). You're right, diabetes and heart disease and even things like AIDs/ other STDs are usually examples of life style choices. 

Shining_brow:

I presume with the cancer there, you're not thinking of lung cancer brought about by decades of smoking... or liver cancer from decades of drinking...

I've mentioned this elsewhere - Australia has amongst the most expensive prices for cigarettes, in theory to help pay for the excessive medical costs smokers are likely to incur later in their lives. Same with alcohol....

Englteachted:

I support vice taxes in conjunction with free healthcare

Shining_brow:

I have no idea what other things mentioned cost in Au. but....

". Setting and casting a basic broken leg: $1,925...."

OMFG!!!!!

In Australia, it costs NOTHING!!! Ok, sure, we pay through the tax system (like in MANY countries around the world... well, at least in Europe!), but it's clearly worth it! We also have an insurance system...so, if you want elective surgery you can get that as well.

Medicines... again, cheap as chips (mostly). Certainly in contrast to costs I hear about in the US.

(actually, I had this issue just the other day... I was given a script for an 'imported' medicine - cost me about 150RMB for only 10 tablets... after looking online, I found a locally made drug (considered to actually be better) manufactured in the next province over - 23RMB for 100 pills! Bastards!!!)

retiredinchina:

this is actually high, but much worse under health plans, private and government because there is no listed price for anything, if they actually told us what things cost, competition would bring down prices substantially.

i did an experiment in america when trying to get an appointment for my mother and out of a 100 doctors only 12 told me the real cost of a doctor visit just to consult if no medicine was needed. the other 88 would not give a price. the 12 doctors were all foreign born. Nobody will give a price for anything. A friend in california with no insurance had to go to six hospitals to find one that would handle the birth of his child for a flat 8000 dollars cash, although the price was fair, nobody wanted to put in writing. This made him so mad, he divorced the lady, let her claim low income welfare single mom and got the government to pay for the birth and remarried her 2 years later.

Englteachted:

Retired: You are missing an important fact, both Dems and Reps are in the pockets of Insurance companies, Drug companies, Hospitals and the Medical Association and they use the corrupt politicians to inflate the costs.

retiredinchina:

i know the costs are government and corrupt, but it's nice to see the free market find a way around the healthcare mafia and find a solution. It's not great, but it's a start. If Trump gets access for people to buy medicines in Canada and Mexico, we can begin to tear the system down.

Hotwater:

You claim this mess is from Obamacare? Rubbish! The US has had an awfully expensive private healthcare system for decades! Private healthcare systems only benefit the insurance companies, private hospitals and the doctors.

A national healthcare system where everyone pays a set percentage of their salary is far more equitable AND cheaper and as there is no vast profits to be made by hospitals the costs are far cheaper.

I'm always amazed when you Yanks moan about healthcare that you don't seriously consider a fairer system...

Shining_brow:

I sort of skimmed the article, and gave up... $30,000 per year for healthcare for a family of 4?? WTF??? That's just INSANE!

Try comparing the US version of universal healthcare with any other developed nation's version, and you'll instantly see what the problem is! You've all been fed a crock of crap, and you've all lovingly slurped it down...

However - the US is the greatest nation on earth, and there's NO way that you could ever actually look at the way other countries do things... cos that might mean you're not the best at everything, and you'd lose so much face!

retiredinchina:

before obama health care, In 2007 I paid 110 dollars a week for family coverage with a 5000 deductible and that was crazy, he just made it much worse. what i had was fine, but they had to try and make it better, a bunch of intellectual elitists who know nothing about medicine or insurance.

Englteachted:

Retired: What about this idea, if you have a job (FT) you qualify for Medicaid (Govt pays docs/ hospitals, no insurance company) ?  You know who are the biggest opponents to the Aussie system/ Canadian system?

Englteachted:

I'm willing to bet that article is bogus 30k, BS

Englteachted:

Universal care will decrease per capita costs while ensuring coverage for all.

That's what dumb republicans don't understand. We pay for it regardless!!!!!!!

If it's 100% private, workers will demand enough salary to afford it, consumer prices will go up or the economy will tank. The only ones who hate Medicaid are corporations because they can't screw the customers. If every FT worker qualified Medicaid that would push wages down without sacrificing the quality of life. Conservatism means being fiscally conservative not inflating the costs.

ambivalentmace:

if the doctors were paid on time, it might work, but getting paid in 90 days from the government just causes them to take cash or insurance plans only. i have no faith in a system run so badly that they can't even pay the bills on time. doctors would take less money and lower costs, but not while you starve them of operating cash to take care of payroll and keep the doors open and malpractice insurance can't be paid late in 90 days either, it's just a damn mess. my first check in the US army reserves 35 years ago was 6 months late getting started, got all the back pay but they took 6 months to get the shit right. same thing happens when you get social security, friend here in china got a check for 8 months for his first check. 8 months to get payment system working for his benefit.

Shining_brow:

Wow! You are absolutely amazing, RiC, and you've completely convinced me that Universal Health care is complete bollocks!!!

ONE person died... totally proves you are right!

I'll try to turn my brain off too, and ignore the HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of people around the world who have benefited from socialised healthcare in the decades (centuries??) that it's been around.

Your one death is a MUCH better argument for making people unable to get, and then unable to afford, a fully capitalistic "user pays' system than all the other statistics in the world...

Englteachted:

Assuming your article is true, I believe you don't have the rational thinking to understand what you're presenting. Everyone essentially has to wait (I didn't where they said how long she had to wait) but you're comparing a poor person being treated with poor people not having access treatment at all and saying poor people having access sucks? 

retiredinchina:

It's a fundamental argument, citizens trust the government to take care of crime and punishment in a given society, but do you trust the government to make decisions on your healthcare and overrule the legal parents of the child.

Maybe a team of genetic doctors should patrol hospitals and get rid of the undesirables to create superior humans and lower government healthcare costs.

Bring back the DNA equivalent of Joseph Mengelev, what could possibley go wrong?

This little incident is just a stepping stone to something you don't want to see.

retiredinchina:

Healthcare for the poor is fine, but let the church, Bill Gates, the red cross, anybody but the GOVERNMENT  run the damn system.

retiredinchina:

dont let any government run the healthcare system, left, right, any government.https://www.yahoo.com/style/19-old-rape-victim-el-224515750.html

This is the right conservative screwed up government interference.

Shining_brow:

"It's a fundamental argument, "

I don't recall seeing that argument anywhere..

And, I doubt it will go anyway like you'd think.

You obviously have an agenda, and it's ALL about about being anti-government. I'm surprised you allow roads to be built! (which, btw, has something in common with universal healthcare... that is, the gov says where the money goes, but it's qualified surveyors and engineers that actually dictate the expenditures! I don't see you bitching about that!)

retiredinchina:

Actually, roads are a good point, In Germany you build a road and guarantee the road for 10 years after it's built. Most road builders are useless government workers or private contractors because you get the cheapest, lousiest, contractor to build the road.

A good example in the United States is the state of Georgia builds and maintains their own interstates and are in the top 5 for the best roads of 50 states and have the fourth lowest road taxes in America, while on the other hand, California highways absolutely sucks with the 2nd highest road taxes in the country.

Governments do a lousy job in general and a very expensive job with roads, healthcare would be the same result, ask any American veteran is he is happy with his government healthcare.

Hotwater:

Do you know the details of this case? The poor child is basivally brain dead and wouldn't survive without the free health care it's been receiving. 

The radical treatment being proposed in America MIGHT enable Charlie to get some slight brain function back, enough to be "alive" but highly disabled. 

And before you mention it's related to socialised health care (like the article) originally the parents were going to have to pay US$1.3 million for this experimental treatment. It's only since it has become an international story that the American hospital offered it for free. 

If the Gard's had been in America they of course could have had this treatment immediately IF THEY HAD THE MONEY. 

retiredinchina:

the care would have been given whether they had the money or not, it's a chance to work on a rare disease for the doctor it's about prestige and reputation and some medical research to handle the next case better.

this little incident is just example of government making decisions for and telling doctors what to do and giving them more power than family guardians.

The long term consequences of these little incidents is what we should be worried about. the cold hard ass says the death is insignificant, but the precedent that has been set is a ticking time bomb. the more you let government in your home and life, the more they will look for something else to screw with you about.

Hotwater:

I think you might be confused about who makes decisions in cases like this. Yes the health service is government/taxpayer funded but the decision on withdrawing care is a medical one, made by the doctors. In this case they decided based on their knowledge that there was nothing else they could do that would help this child. The family chose to dispute this and went to court. In the U.K. the courts are independent of government. Up to the highest court in the U.K. the independent judges agreed with the doctors professional opinions. 

So im confused why you claim this has anything to do with the government. Actually I'm not...you choose to think this way based on your viewpoint. The facts here disagree with you 

retiredinchina:

So the educated judge sided with the educated doctors against the poor underling serf dead beat parents who have know say in their own child's health options. I love educated compassionate educated elitists bureaucrats telling me what is best for me. Let's take a guess the judge is appointed and not elected, so he is not worried about his judgement he just passed down.

ambivalentmace:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-the-netherlands-the-doctor-will-kill-you-now-1500591571

Hotwater:

Do you realize you've linked to a paywalled site?

more importantly do you understand "voluntary euthanasia "?

from how you've posted this I doubt it! 

Before i comment any any further would you care to explain two things!",

1) what this has to do with healthcare systems?

2) your views on someone choosing to end their life to reduce their personal suffering. 

ambivalentmace:

this is not a liberal conservative argument, this is about costs, government does not care about the individual, i am looking at the cost results of doing this, it reduces cost, despite the views of the individual. I just wish they did this for everything and left emotions and politics out of these decisions.

ScotsAlan:

Very sad story. RIP wee fella. If you want the real story Ambi, the court rulings are available online. You dont even need a VPN. I cant post a link from my phone but I will try pm you from my laptop if you like. Or, if you have wechat now, add me and I can sent you the pdfs of the original judgement, the three appeals, and even the EU court of human rights judgement not to hear the case.

ambivalentmace:

yes, the elites play God because doctors and politician are atheist and know what is best for us, I just don't see the harm of letting the kid die at home or let the Catholic church try to save him if there is no cost to Britain's healthcare system. From a PR standpoint, Britain did not get any points for compassion and came out looking like death squads.

ambivalentmace:

The lesson learned is if your kid is screwed with bad genetics, get out of England before the courts tell you what to do with your own child or cut the kid's throat to save the government money and then screw them with the cost of housing and feeding you in prison and live to be a 100 years old.