End of life discussions

[grassfarmer]

I love hearing these liberals talk about the necessity of having an "end of life treatment" discussion. Senator Kennedy would be toast by now if that criteria was in place. Isn't he a big proponent of universal health care? My bet is he is sparing no dime in prolonging his chances of living another day. But he would vote to pass legislation to keep you from having the same opportunity.
It is no business of the bureaucracy to tell or suggest to anyone how they should select the treatments necessary for the last days of ones' life.
One other thing. It seems that the big catch word is now obesity or smoking. How about the use of alcohol. Isn't it time for another round of prohibition?

[checkthisout]

Originally Posted by grassfarmer

I love hearing these liberals talk about the necessity of having an "end of life treatment" discussion. Senator Kennedy would be toast by now if that criteria was in place. Isn't he a big proponent of universal health care? My bet is he is sparing no dime in prolonging his chances of living another day. But he would vote to pass legislation to keep you from having the same opportunity.
It is no business of the bureaucracy to tell or suggest to anyone how they should select the treatments necessary for the last days of ones' life.
One other thing. It seems that the big catch word is now obesity or smoking. How about the use of alcohol. Isn't it time for another round of prohibition?

You have to admit, the 1920's were a time of fierce economic growth.

And, cutting costs is a Republican, not a Democratic slogan.

These Democrats in power may as well be Republicans. There is no difference anymore. Democrats do things like come up with Hill/Burton, they don't subsidized businesses to purchase private health insurance from a for-profit corporation.

The Universal Healthcare Debate has been distorted to mean Obama's way or Private Insurance ignoring the Single-Payer option.

Are you against Medicaid/Medicare?

[AK_Gandy]

Originally Posted by grassfarmer

I love hearing these liberals talk about the necessity of having an "end of life treatment" discussion.

This provision referred to having a discussion as to your choices and to encourage you in making out a 'Living Will.' Which, if not done, keeps you hooked up to life support............long after there's any chance you will recover.

And who do you think ultimately pays for that? Yup, you do. Either through higher premiums or through tax dollars if it is a federal program.

It is no business of the bureaucracy to tell or suggest to anyone how they should select the treatments necessary for the last days of ones' life.

But, it's OK for the health insurance companies to do the same? You do realize that they now "ration" care and make determinations on what is covered and what isn't....right? So tell me what the difference is?

One other thing. It seems that the big catch word is now obesity or smoking. How about the use of alcohol. Isn't it time for another round of prohibition?

So you are proposing that any of the above be taxed for their unhealthy lifestyles............. that others now have to subsidize?

Sounds reasonable to me. (BTW - I'm a smoker.)

[grassfarmer]

Not against Medicare or Medicaid because it is not designed to compete with the private market. It also serves the purpose to solving medical needs of certain portions of our population. I paid into Medicare for years....when I did not need it. Now I pay the premium for it plus carry a private co-insurance. This in not what the administration is proposing and you know it.

[AK_Gandy]

Originally Posted by grassfarmer

Not against Medicare or Medicaid because it is not designed to compete with the private market.

Excuse me? Of course it "competes." The reason they exist in the first place however is because it is almost impossible to get affordable health insurance at the age you are eligible for the other two. The whole problem is that insurance companies can pick and choose who they cover and actuarial tables show that they would lose big money if they were forced to cover the elderly..

And that is why, as long as 'for-profit' insurance companies exist, it really won't be 'reform.'

A single-payer system is really the only thing that makes sense...... in my opinion.

I paid into Medicare for years....when I did not need it.

That is, by definition, "insurance." Whether it is for your house/car/health/financial/etc.

Now I pay the premium for it plus carry a private co-insurance. This in not what the administration is proposing and you know it.

You (like myself) are the lucky ones then. What about the people who aren't old enough for Medicare/Medicaid and do not have access to an affordable health plan?

[LMJD]

What about the people who aren't old enough for Medicare/Medicaid and do not have access to an affordable health plan?

Can you name anywhere nationwide where the state/gov't agency doesn't already cover their medical bills if they have a major health problem and are unable to pay the cost? Someone fairly close to me works for a social services agency so unfortunately I know a little bit about how the system works.

Senator Kennedy would be toast by now if that criteria was in place. Isn't he a big proponent of universal health care? My bet is he is sparing no dime in prolonging his chances of living another day. But he would vote to pass legislation to keep you from having the same opportunity.

Right, he was a big proponent of busing too, but of course that didn't apply to his brats.

[AK_Gandy]

Originally Posted by LMJD

Can you name anywhere nationwide where the state/gov't agency doesn't already cover their medical bills if they have a major health problem and are unable to pay the cost?

I'm not even sure how to start answering this as it is so inaccurate.

If you're implying that everyone already has (some type) of medical coverage.............I don't want to be the one to tell you that you've been sold a bill of goods. Because.............................it is categorically false.

My mind could be changed however if you could prove that your statement is correct and then we can just drop this whole 'health reform' right now.

Someone fairly close to me works for a social services agency so unfortunately I know a little bit about how the system works.

Of course there are some people who receive social services provided health care. However, there are literally 10's of millions who have nothing.

[checkthisout]

The Debate has been framed to mean "State" VS "Non-State" rather than what is best for the super-majority of the population.

State/Federal health coverage is best.

Obamacare is not true government healthcare, but rather a system designed to protect Insurance company profits and to create a new income stream for the treasury to borrow from to pay for the Bailout.

[94_turbo]

[quote=checkthisout;1768490]You have to admit, the 1920's were a time of fierce economic growth.

And, cutting costs is a Republican, not a Democratic slogan.

These Democrats in power may as well be Republicans. There is no difference anymore. Democrats do things like come up with Hill/Burton, they don't subsidized businesses to purchase private health insurance from a for-profit corporation. (quote)


your right--cutting costs is repub--and spend like h is the democraps---my money and yours, starting with the great lbj!!!!

[checkthisout]

Originally Posted by 94_turbo

your right--cutting costs is repub--and spend like h is the democraps---my money and yours, starting with the great lbj!!!!

So much irony in your post......so very very much.

[grassfarmer]

"You (like myself) are the lucky ones then. What about the people who aren't old enough for Medicare/Medicaid and do not have access to an affordable health plan?"

That is a good point and I will admit that there are many folks who need health care, but that does not mean that they need health insurance. They need health assurance.
Age is not a factor in receiving Medicade or Medicare. Aid to Dependent Children is one of the social safeguards.
I am not trying to be mean about health care for the deprived, etc. but I have a neighbor who chooses to not insure himself or his family because he knows that the system will bail him out. Does he deserve health care? Yes. But he is a cheat and he knows it. And, guess what? We are paying for that and that is why costs are so high.

[hottub1]

[quote=grassfarmer;1768455]I love hearing these liberals talk about the necessity of having an "end of life treatment" discussion. Senator Kennedy would be toast by now if that criteria was in place. Isn't he a big proponent of universal health care?

Hey, leave Fat Teddy alone - he only has half a brain.

[clamgulch]

As far as I know, hospitals are REQUIRED to proved MINIMUM emergency care to save lives, even if the patient cannot afford it and has no insurance. May not be pretty when they are done, and they may go after you pension and all of your assets, but they will provide emergency services. What else does anyone NEED? Not want, but NEED?
Now put that into perspective of it being EVERYONE's lot in life to DIE at some point. Why should any of us pay to extend anyone's life at the expense of quality medicine? Socialized medicine is cr@p- lowest common denominator. And how do you deal with the MILLIONS of people who won't take care of themselves even when we the working class pay their damned insurance premiums for them?

Bah, HUMBUG. Let them all declare bankruptcy so we can carry them that way.

And what about faith healers, shaman, herbal medicine practitioners, witch doctors and their patients? How about podiatrists? How about chiropractors? How about surgeons? Who is going to regulate their fees? Should they all make the same because they all practice "medicine?" And what about dentistry? And eye doctors? Who is going to set the fees?

I don't understand how Obama and his wild imagination are going to even begin to pay for universal health care AND a war in Afghanistan for pipelines and control of opium profits.

[444-4D]

I don't think the motivation for Obama care has anything to do with health care. They couldn't care less about your health care. The largest pile of cash they can see is what is being spent on health care. They want the cash. Why are they so desperate to get that cash?

[Super_Dave]

Originally Posted by checkthisout

Are you against Medicaid/Medicare?

I am.

Why should your kids be enslaved to pay for my wife's parents health care?