You Can Have the Red States

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jayman\";p=\"105719)</div>

I also have no problem with classifying documents that pertain to real national security, and taking some things that never should have been on the internet off was a good start.

But I think from your final point above, you knew that this is what I meant.

 

Good discussions and interesting points., P4 though no matter what, you always bring back politics, and your great admiration of the Democrats.

Do you really think today's Democrats, the likes of J.Jackson, Reid and company and Hillary, will or would do ANY better really in this then what is being looked at now??

And more importantly WHAT exactly would they do....it seems they these democrats are just interested in destroying and putting down ANYTHING done by this administration, thinking they will get back in power if they bad mouth the other side often enough.

I only hear health care debate in the National News at election time., and I WILL add that it is from both sides. I just don't politisize everything....Yea we know you don't like the republicans P4., leave that all out of the equation, quit blaming everything on them. In case you have not noticed, in polls, when democrats just bad mouth, and offer no other suggestions, they usually go down in polls. Maybe the American people are trying to tell you, that negative politics won't get you their vote.

 

IALTMANN: I know you read what Prius04 says, but apparently not very carefully. He definitely does not like Republicans, but he does not tout Democrats.

 

Fredatgolf, is there any way you could perhaps be surgically attached to prius04?

 

I had no right to try to answer for Prius04 and I admit to the fact that I become too impatient with evidences that IALTMANN does not listen to what he reads, and that, further, this is what caused my inappropriate outburst. It is interesting to me that you watch the posts sufficiently to notice the similarities of belief between myself and Prius04. However, if you were really paying attention to what you read, you would note that there are sufficient differences to obviate the necessity for your sarcastic question.

 

As Fred pointed out, I don't greatly admire the Democrats. But when the Democrats were in charge this country was moving forward, and WE ALL ALL making gains. Now just certain sectors are.

And thank you Fred for noticing this and pointing this out.

No direction whatsoever is better than the wrong direction. So yes, I think we would be better off with Reid and Hillary in control. And accusing the Democrats of having no ideas is one of the talking points on the Republican party. It's propaganda and it's not entirely true.

The Republican party, with Rove leading the way, have perfected dirty tricks politics beyond belief. The fact that Democrats get blamed for it is because they still are not good at it.

And to EJ, your suggestion that Fred and I are joined at the hip is particularly ludicrous when one sees how disorganized the "liberal" and "Democrats" and "progressives" are. It's those on the right who tend to walk in lock step. Indeed when certain talking points enter the media language, all of a sudden you start hearing the same language from the RNC, Dick Cheney, Faux News and Rush Limebaugh pretty much on cue. And I've also noticed that you only seem to enter this discussion when you want to egg IA on, whereas Fred enters to add now ideas and points. And sometimes those conflict with mine.


As Will Rogers once said, "I don't belong to an organized political party, I'm a Democrat."

And IA, as for my politicizing everything, what I do is point out the interconectedness of things. If politics is already there, then I point that out. I don't insert politics where it does not exist. And in any case, the title of this thread, the forum that it is in has already done that. This is similar to the accusation that people on the left are constantly committing class warfare. This is another Republican talking point and it's patently absurd. Pointing out when the rich commit class warfare is not class warfare. We on the left are simply pointing out what they on the right are doing are doing. And they accuse us of class warfare.

 

I don't see your comment as "answering for me". You were simply pointing out a fact. Thank you and be my guest.

 

Oh... here we go again. This thread was doing so well, we were all talking about the same subject and everyone had different views but made some great points and we even had someone from the Canadian point of view share his 2 cents.

Now it's gone the way of so many other threads here and degenerated into political argument...

 

This thread has always been about political argument. What has changed is that the difference of opinion became less "personal".

Since when is expressing a different point of view a "degeneration"?

There is always going to be the "other side". There is always going to be a difference of opinion. Focusing on the difference of opinion is healthy. But when it focuses on the honesty or decency of those that hold that difference of opinion, that is a "degeneration".

I think IA and EJ are wrong, but I don't think they are dishonest, dishonorable or unpatriotic. IA and EJ think that I am wrong, but I certainly hope, at least for IA, that he will no longer suggest that I am dishonest, dishonorable, nor unpatriotic.

And in the last few posts, it has come through loud and clear that IA does not agree with me. So be it. But I no longer feel insulted. Hence, I take issue with your contention that this thread has now degenerated. I think it has risen above what it was when it started out, and it has remained so.

 

I was just pointing out that this was a good discussion of the state of our nations' health care system previously. Sure, there were politics involved, as they're necessary when talking about any nationally-directed program, but the focus was more on the topic of health care.

I actually agree that more progress was made while democrats were in charge. But I'm not getting into this again.

This seems to happen all the time though. A good discussion is going on, and it turns into republicans vs democrats vs independent... and how the country is doing under republican control vs the past democratic control and etc. Don't you think we've beaten enough dead horses? It's pretty clear here that everyone's set in their opinion and the same things keep popping up in all these threads. I, for one, am tired of every discussion turning to political parties.

That, to me, was the degeneration.

 

Understood and well said.

 

Well-said? Really?

 

Whatever you say, Emilyjohn. Since you're clearly the expert here...

:roll:

I'm bowing out of this one.

 

I always try to avoid these discussions but on the healthcare issue I have an opinion to share.

I grew up as a military dependent and my mother was a hospital administrator at Dyess AFB Hospital. I was treated more than a few times there and when I was 20, I was treated for severe burns at Brooke army medical center. The treatment at those facilities was not as good as I might have received at many civilian facilites but was adequate to keep me alive and made it possible for me to be treated before a condition became more serious when I was experiencing childhood illnesses.

I have always thought that the military healthcare model was the way to offer healthcare to those that couldn't afford health insurance. We know how to do it and the military system also is a funnel for medical students into the private system.

If you want to pay for better healthcare, then it is available. If you can't afford it, then you can at least take your kid to the hospital for a dose of antibiotics before thay get so sick that they have to be hospitalized.

This should help to ease the burden on our country's emergency room crisis. It is time to stop wasting money by pretending that we're not already paying for healthcare for everybody. We are already paying for it but right now we're doing it at emergency room rates.

 

I think Prius04 answered the question 'bout the politic's. The point about the VA is interesting. Yes health care management and general public information about health choices, should be useful tool to progress this debate and health care in this country.

I have been in and the "victim" of other country's medical systems. While the general ambulatory and simple health needs are clearly addressed, with traditional medical approaches, it is the cutting edge or specialized areas where health care systems fail.

The problem in this country seems in many cases to be the reverse. Good basic preventive care and common sense is avoided mainly by the citizen or user him or her self. The government may then coumpound the problem. Everyone wants or feels they need the most advanced and cutting edge treatments.

Sometimes simpler ways are more appropriate, but the patient cannot or will not make such decisions (or his/her loved ones). It then becomes difficult to expect the government and/or the health care industry to make those decisions, even more risky it becomes when the lawyers get into the act. In the other societies, such decisions are ACCEPTED, because society there is not as free as it is here, plus more cost is borne by the person.

IF this country wants to evolve to a fairer as is claimed, all sides have to be accommodating, and realistic. This is a private enterprise society, all companies are public entities, I own stock in some of them. I expect public responsibility, but I do look at the stock price and dividends too. I do think this country is the cutting edge in terms of medical ressearch and procedures, do I think we're perfect, not by a long shot. Do I think we need to destroy what we have to get better, NO. I agree with Galaxee, the thread downing street now is health care. I disagree with the 1980's claims about going backwards, I think we have progressed medically, it is just more expensive. I think that rationing and careful evaluations will have to be made under ANY system, be it run by the GOVT, private enterprise, and even a combination. Using a more educated consumer and giving the consumer some choices seems to be a good idea. Having a fair safety net is a must, I think we have some of that. Again the class warfare "make the rich" pay philosophy sounds great but will not solve the problems. The systems in combination as mentioned, mostly provide less innovative and standard care to the masses, and the "rich" just go to private doctors and clinics and pay an arm and a leg. It is all a question of how much the consumer is willing to pay and for whom, in the end the money for it all will come from there.

 

Well, I return to the thread and my observation is that Galaxee's intervention drove comments to being more civil. I am particularly impressed at IALTMANN's civility. I agree that "make the rich pay philosophy" will not solve the problem, and that may be the way he sees the issue. I am not comfortable with that representing my point of view. Spreading the cost means just that and removing the control of drug companies and insurers to bring the cost down. I am comfortable that everyone has made some good points and credit a fellow "Durhamite" for forcing the focus on that. (Even if she is only temporarily there.)
Stick around Galaxee, you're needed. Ignore the temporary sarcasm of EmilyJohn. It is harmless.

 

As far as health care, we have to accept some harsh truths right now before they become insurmountable:

1. Our population is aging, and elderly people usually require more medical care and more expensive care at that (Dementia/Alzheimers, knee replacement, hip replacement, Mitral valve, cataract operations, Type II diabetes, prostate enlargement, etc etc).

2. There are many new and novel diagnostics and modalities available, but it comes at usually a steep price.

3. There are a lot of high risk lifestyle choices out there that are placing an unfair burden on everybody else.

My Mom is 80 and my Dad is 85, and they looked after themselves very well their entire lives. Always in good health until around 10 years ago: Type II diabetes, Mitral valves, high blood pressure, cataracts, prostate, all the usual fun stuff elderly folks have to deal with.

They have also had numerous CAT, MRI, and carotid doppler (Ultrasound) performed at Mayo Clinic as "routine" diagnostics. If I recall, over the past 10 years they've had Medicare and their private insurance cough up around $72,000 for the diagnostics and various operations.

Are they worth it? Well, naturally I sure think so. Maybe somebody else would make a cold financial decision and determine they are no longer of any "use" to society and let them croak of "natural" causes.

Elderly care is very important and is also very expensive. Are we willing to pay for it?

There are many new diagnostic procedures now available that have really helped in disease detection and applying an appropriate modality. Things like CAT, MRI, PET, Ultrasound, etc. These gadgets, especially the MRI and PET, are *not* cheap by any measure.

Is it "worth" it to provide such advanced diagnostics? Who pays for it? When should they be performed? What about more emphasis on lifestyle choices?

On the topic of lifestyle choices, if we find an OD on the pavement do we pump them full of Narcan and bring them back to life? What about very high risk sports? Smoking? A big can of worms to be sure, but those lifestyle choices impose a cost on our society.

I think far sooner than later, there is going to be a day of reckoning wrt health care costs. It's already happened in Canada, as witnessed by the Romanow Commission and Ray Romanow's resultant final report.

 

jayman: The points you raise seem important enough to me. You do not seem like someone who hasn't given this a lot of thought. What do you see solution wise?

 

OK. The topic has returned so I will return too.

Jayman brings up a good point about high risk lifestyles. Some people just feel the need to do stupid things to validate their existence. I don't think the higher cost of Mr. I-drive-100mph-in-my-new-Porsche should have to be paid by Mr. Plays-it-safe. There has to be a way to differentiate between these kinds of people. Maybe as in auto insurance there could be a "high risk" category where additional premiums are charged to the individual? Life insurance companies (I think.. I've never applied for it) evaluate your lifestyle to see what the cost of insuring you would be. Maybe this could be tossed into the equation?

My student government sent out a questionnaire last spring regarding rising health insurance rates. One question was whether rates for all students regardless of coverage should be increased to help out those who had families. While a great idea in theory, if I had to insure a family I wouldn't want to place my burden on others...

I still think that a nation that ensures the well-being of its citizens will be more progressive than one that leaves them to their own devices. As someone temporarily without health insurance, I can tell you that if something hurts and a visit to get it checked out costs me 10% of my monthly income... I'm not going unless it's an emergency. But we all know that small things can be warning signs for worse problems down the road. Which is a very strong point IALTMANN brought up. Routine checkups are what people here aren't getting. It's the high-tech treatments for things that could have been prevented that go on here.

There are many other things that need to be regulated more strongly. Street drug overdoses (to differentiate from prescriptions) are so common but that wouldn't be a problem if there were no street drugs out there, or if they were harder to come by. I know that's an entirely different subject so I'll leave it at that. Prescription drug overdoses are sometimes accidental, and simply require the practitioner to place a strong emphasis on correct dosage. Sometimes it's because a person needs psychological help, doesn't go and ends up attempting suicide. If counseling programs were available to more people that may happen less. We'll never know until it happens. This eliminates quite a few expensive situations.

At some point the cost of healthcare is simply going to be too much for the majority of us. Sickness in workplaces goes up as healthcare costs increase. Productivity suffers. People get fired. Because the employer didn't give them means to take care of themselves. This hurts us and everyone around us. The economy suffers, unemployment goes up and unemployment insurance checks start going out in the mail. The day is coming when things are going to have to go through some major changes.

 

galaxee: You seem to be in the same boat as jayman, you see the problem clearly. What should be done?