Part of the controversial Obamacare proposal pending in Congress that discusses "end-of-life" counseling and medical procedures that could be rationed based on the age of the patient
and other factors was written by suicide advocates who argue openly for the "right" to death, according to reports.
The sources for the Obamacare provisions have been documented on a blog for Family Research Council Action and discussed by prominent pro-life columnist Jill Stanek.
"Come again that promotion of euthanasia isn't part of Section 1233?" Stanek wrote in her new explanation of the dangers of Obamacare. "Kudos to FRC's The Cloakroom â€¦for drawing attention to the fact that the two authors of Section 1233 are major proponents of euthanasia and assisted suicide."...
Good luck(not mean-spirited but you are going to need it). We are in deep trouble down here. All presidents over the past 50 or so years have succumbed to fear rhetoric and have stated positively towards or tried to initiate some kind of universal health care. Control! Only L.B.J. actually bulldozed it through(Obama is next with the Amer. Socialist in full control)and we have been a mess ever since. It is all about big gov. power and the Am. Soc. have extended their political base by lessening restrictions on mmigration(encouraging) and in former times the Amer. people were always totally against any gov. control. Now with all of the poor flooding Amer. soil for free handouts for the first time in our countrys history their is actually a strong voice in favor of national health care. We have been a semi-socialist state since then and as a consequence things are out of whack. Governments first priority-defense of its citizenry-cannot be maintained because of all of the other costs that gov. has no business being in according to our Constitution.
Yes, we do pay more taxes. The gov't just announced they are going to add the 7% PST to many more things next July. This will increase taxes over $2000/year for everybody in B.C. Opposition to this is mounting across B.C.
Chiropractic is strictly private. The gov't does not pay. Some people have an extended benefits private insurance plan which covers 80% or 50% of that. I have that. They cover prescription drugs. Gov't has a Pharmacare plan too which pays a certain amount when you exceed your annual minimum.
I am not sure if Orthodontic is covered by the public system. Dental is not covered so Ortho might not be covered. You might have to pay.
I have my own GP. He is in demand so I usually have to wait five days to get in to see him. But I could go to a walk-in clinic any weekday and see a doctor right away if I had to or go to emergency and wait a couple hours to see one.
I had a semi-private room (one other person) in a hospital. Some rooms have 2 people, some 4 under the public system. My private extended plan would pay for a private room, but they are not always available.
Most people don't care about choice when they need medical care. Yes, care may diminsh somewhat; but there is a lot of political pressure to keep good care.
I guess your main point(s) is(are) that it will not bankrupt you. Yes, taxes galore and there are going to be more.
Although, the Clintons have done some damage with their influence in years past(I believe because of Bill the medical tests now have to include cases such as AIDS in the pool, in figuring the avg. whereas before they were left out to figure the norm and were accurate. Now a test may reveal that their is nothing wrong with someone even though there is because of using extreme cases which were left out before.)we still receive great care. Most people today have some kind of copay, maybe $15 office and $25 specialist. Do you receive Chiropractic? I recently received same day treatment and the appt. was given for 10 min. after I called. My family Dr. also have given me an appt. at the spur of the moment. Do you receive Orthodontic? I could go into more but choose not to. Rooms, even private rooms at times are no problem. Care is always diminished with any public takeover. Eventually, you lose all real freedom of choice.
savedbygrace wrote: Wondering what your main points of choosing public over private health care?
I am answering from a hypothetical point of view because I cannot remember what a private health care system was like.
It is difficult to say whether I would be better off or not. If we had only private health care, I would have to pay monthly premiums which would probably be enormous. I have heard Americans pay hundreds of dollars a month for their health care premiums. Is that true? How much do they pay? What does the plan actually pay for if you need to see a GP, a specialist, and what if you needed to go into the hospital for Xrays, surgery, etc.? Do most health care plans in the U.S. pay 100% of costs related to medical care, treatments, hospital stays, etc.?
My taxes would probably be lower, but if the health insurance company dumped me because I was not a good risk for them, I would not be able to afford some of medical services I have received. It might put me in the poorhouse.
I like the public health system because it gives peace of mind that medical bills are not going to bankrupt me. This allows me to get on with life and not have to worry about such things as medical expenses.
I can foresee all kind of problems here. Question: (I will bring up the brain cancer issue again). Say, I am acting out of my normal behavior and it is obvious that something is terribly wrong. I go in for diagnostics and they discover that I have a brain tumor and that is the cause of the problem. However, because it is only a benign tumor I am told that I will not be put on the waiting list. I actually heard something like this today. Then what? Things up your way are only going to get worse. The government makes no money. The outlook is not very sunny. Of course here in the good ole U.S.A. the gov. acually owns or controls about 1/3 of the U.S. economy since the bailouts and will increase its domination after the Amer. Socialists political leadership majority puts this nationalistic health scare system into law, to approximately "40%"!!! No more quick, quality urgent care across the border. Wondering what your main points of choosing public over private health care?
savedbygrace wrote: Wayne M, So, YOU can't spend your own money in a private surgery centre on common heart surgery while other groups such as federal prisoners may.
In B.C. I don't think there is any private centre for heart surgery. Everyone who needs heart surgery must be referred by a GP to a heart specialist or big gen hospital in city where they do an angiogram and decide if they need heart surgery or stent, etc. It is done only in public health care hospitals.
Many people have their own GP who they see. There are also walk-in clinics where you take whatever GP is available. If you can't get in to see your GP, you can always go to emerg room at hospital for treatment.
If a person came in too often, the doc might tell them, but normally a person has a legitimate reason for going in. Normally only doctors can decide what the person needs.
There is talk about having nursing-practioners, who would not be doctors, but would be trained to screen people to decide if they need to see a doctor. I don't think this has been started yet in B.C., but it is possible in order to save money and free up more doctors for cases that really require a doctor.
Although it is not perfect, I prefer the publicly-run system.
That is one of the main problems with "free" giveaways of anything. People will line up for anything that they do not have to pay for. With the oppressive intrusion of ever increasing taxes by letting big gov. be the provider the accompanying mindset will always be: "I am going to use this because not only does it not cost me something but they are funding this by me through taxes anyway." This hurts research and development long term. Competition is dwindled away and privatization suffers. Healthcare does not maintain its optimum performance level and people suffer. Where will the people go for better care, available facilities, etc. when the U.S. goes socialistic? So, YOU can't spend your own money in a private surgery centre on common heart surgery while other groups such as federal prisoners may.
savedbygrace, That is a good question. I believe you can spend your own money in a private surgery centre in Vancouver, B.C. I believe they perform certain types of surgeries possible joint repair or replacements, and eye surgery. Heart and other surgery is only in publicly-run major hospitals. You would not want to spend your money when most services are free.
You are correct in saying there is pressure to cut back on growth or not increase funding as much as the demand; there is also continual pressure from the opposition party in the B.C. gov't to not cut back. It is a continual political battle. However, the gov't is spending 46% of the budget on health care. There is occasionally problems getting a patient a bed and they must occasionally search for a hospital with a bed. This is not common. Patients have occasionally been taken to U.S. because of a shortage of facilities.
I think you can spend your own money in that private facility in Vancouver. I think the Worker's Compensation, RCMPolice, military personnel, & Fed prisons sends people to that facility. Some (RCMP, military, WCB) may also get priority in the public system; I'm not sure. This has not been a controversy.
Doctors and others do not like queue jumping by patients. It is considered as unethical.
I believe the times that I read that urgent care(cancer and the like take up to 4 months). Even if the provincial gov. made some improvements that of course would mean more money to invest. Guess what that translates into........ INCREASED TAXES! As big gov. runs head on into a wall and the taxes reach disproportionate levels there will only be one solution - HEALTH CARE CUTS(pun intended.) This my friend is where the Canadian Socialistic system seems to be headed. As far as the federal arm of big gov. there are always restrictions or a catch somewhere. Question: If a regular person like myself happened to be living in B.C., would I be allowed to spend my own money on my own healhcare or are only some special interest groups, such as its federal prisoners, only allowed to use private surgery centres?
"Canada's healthcare budget increased by 65% since 2001"
Correction. That 65% increase for health care since 2001 refers to the British Columbia budget. Canada (the Federal gov't) does not run the health care system. Each province is responsible for providing it's own health care. So the figures I gave you only refer to B.C. But I agree with you that the escalating cost of the public health care system is of grave concern to many people. As a larger percentage reach old age, there will be an increased strain on the public health care system. I don't know what the answer is.
You don't believe the B.C. gov't stats on waiting times. I don't think you are correct about the waiting periods for emergency surgery. I know there are waits sometimes for non-emergency surgeries, but emergency surgery is dealt with quickly. I had an irregular heartbeat and received rapid care. I know of someone else in Ontario who had difficulty walking a block. He went in and was flown to Toronto within days where he immediately received a triple or quadruple bypass operation. That was about ten years ago. He is doing fine.
Canadians do not regard public health care as "evil socialism". That is pure propaganda. But I doubt your country will get a public health care system.
Mike, Agreed. With their constant attacks on the rich, these encouraged lawsuits, et. al., of course position the American socialists as the cause. In their eyes, their claims and lawmaking have the rich as inherently evil and the poor good(instead of a Biblical worldview they have a clash with class.)
The converse of having good health insurance is that doctors may order unnecessary tests with unintended consequences. I was given a full body scan nearly a decade ago having complained of overall skeletal pain. I later learned that a full body scan was the same amount of radiation as the survivors of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima received. Of course, there are lingering effects of that much radiation. The doctor said that my scan did not reveal anything. So, I received all that radiation and the potential "fallout" (pun intended) from the lingering effects. Now, I wish that that test had not been available for me. The insurance company was billed $20,000. Sounds like a good reason to order it for the doctor.
"But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him, and went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee."
The point was euthanasia. My father was not a candidate because of his age,regardless of the supply. An oppressive gov. will in effect set itself up as a type of temporal God. All human life is sacred and no man has the right to decide which life is of more value, as the social elitists would like to do. Organ donor transplants, ethically should be placed on a "first come/first served" basis. In Scripture, the elders of a society have as much to contribute as any other member. Actually, their experientially and God- given wisdom is priceless and should be much sought after. In fact the young are in desperate NEED of them. Wherever the elders are lacking you will find all kind of rebellion. There is no excuse to have any gov. control medical care. One of the reasons I stayed at my job, though physically demanding, is because I had started a family and the benefits were good. Incentives drive business production and are one of the many positive features of private enterprise. Everyone is not guaranteed everything. Christian church? Indeed, there are many here in the U.S.A. who run private clinics, sacrificing to help the poor. Personally, my dentist had given a large part of a couple of past summers to donate time to help those in need.
I think heart transplants have always been in short supply. Regardless what kind of medical system you have there will probably never be enough kidneys, hearts, etc. to meet the demand. That is a fact of life; it has nothing to do with whether there is a public system or private health care. The problem I can see with the private system is that the rich person would find it much easier to get a heart or kidney transplant because he might have the money to afford the high price to get one. Whereas, in the publicly-run health care system as in Canada, it doesn't matter how rich you are (at least that is supposed to be way it works), you still must take your turn and receive the same as a poor person would.
Waiting lists are a problem for some treatments. But in B.C. for urgent treatments such as heart or cancer, I don't think it normally takes too long. There have been complaints about some things taking too long and I don't have the figures at the moment. Will look into it on the internet.
It is true, if you have good insurance or lots of money, you can walk into a U.S. hospital and get superb, lavish treatment and the best the system has to offer. However, this is not available to everybody for various reasons.
SmallTownGuy (WayneM) wrote: 1. ... insurance companies often cut people off with pre-existing medical conditions. Insurance companies can pick and choose who to insure. Is that reasonable? 2. People who change jobs are sometimes cut off medical insurance. 3. 46 million people are without...Isn't this a national disgrace? 4. Escalating costs for insurance and medical care is leaving many people bankrupt, trying to care for their loves ones or themselves. It is also a real drain on the nation. 5. Is the present system benefiting a few at the expense of the majority? Why not support reforming the health care system in a way that will improve medical care and make if affordable for all citizens?
1. Different ins. companies have different requirements. It is reasonable to make them compete for your dollar. It's ok to find one that works.
2. Sometimes. Typically new insurance is found with a new employer. One size shouldn't have to fit all.
3. No. Many don't want it. MANY are illegal aliens. Should lawbreakers fare well off the backs of law abiders?
4. It's silly to suppose that anything done by government would be less expensive.
5. The majority of Americans like their healthcare. Why shouldn't they keep it?
Believe me, the propaganda that we receive here is an onslaught from the "big spending" left. Plain and simple, gov. seeks control. Advertise: no euthanasia, no rationing while the Amer. Socialists have gradually been implementing socialism so they deceptively say: "we already have rationing...". One personal "leading example" is my father who died a few years ago. He unexpectedly had a heart attack(our days are numbered...nevertheless)great shape, walked 3-5 miles military speed, daily, rain or shine. When they took his heart out and pumped blood by machine they said he was NOT A CANDIDATE for a transplant because of his AGE! You talk about costs, I wonder what your tax rates are and how about your major medical and the particulars? How about those famous waiting lines? Just wondering, how long you have been a Can. citizen? Our system is not perfect, was the best and is still the best(even though we now go to the Drs. instead of them coming to our homes). People from around the world(including Can.)come here for quality care not vice-versa.
savedbygrace wrote: Wayne M, You pay less. You get less. You have no choice. You have no voice.
That's misleading. I have not experienced that in Canada's public health care system. Don't believe all the propaganda and mudslinging. Have an open mind and consider all points of view.
1. Reportedly insurance companies often cut people off with pre-existing medical conditions. Insurance companies can pick and choose who to insure. Is that reasonable? 2. People who change jobs are sometimes cut off medical insurance. 3. 46 million people are without medical insurance. Isn't this a national disgrace? 4. Escalating costs for insurance and medical care is leaving many people bankrupt, trying to care for their loves ones or themselves. It is also a real drain on the nation. 5. Is the present system benefiting a few at the expense of the majority? Why not support reforming the health care system in a way that will improve medical care and make if affordable for all citizens?