U.S. vs UK

All items relating to Healthcare: Medical insurance, company policies, insurance coverage, policy costs, and more!
hoppy
Posts: 4561
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 8:58 am

U.S. vs UK

Post by hoppy »

Raven;1251921 wrote: Oh for cryin out loud! I posted an article by a UK journalist in the U.S.! She writes for the guardian. It's called a newspaper. She is called a journalist. And I challenge you to go down any street U.S.A and not see all the cardboard signs appealing for help of some kind! She wrote about what she saw. You see it too. Everyday! You have turned into a country of heartless ba$tards that see terrorists in everybody. You make me bloody sick! People like you make me ashamed to call myself American.

Hoppy I hope you never have to ask for anything from anybody.


If you are an American, then you must know how things work. Lon put it well. We just freakin plain don't trust our government. What? You are so trusting that you believe everything that dribbles out of their lieing mouths? Over here, most of the news media has a less than sterling reputation these days as well. As far as signs go, I've seen people begging as long as I can remember. Even when jobs were plentiful. It's called a scam.
hoppy
Posts: 4561
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 8:58 am

U.S. vs UK

Post by hoppy »

These stories are a ploy by the lieing liberal left. They are expert at preying on the public's sympathies.Take gun control as an example. Every time a gun control issue comes up, Tons of stats are published showing how many children were killed by guns. Never mind that these stats include "children" 17 years of age that were killed attempting to hold up a place or by cops. Don't fall for all you read.
User avatar
Peg
Posts: 8673
Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:00 pm

U.S. vs UK

Post by Peg »

hoppy;1251935 wrote: If you are an American, then you must know how things work. Lon put it well. We just freakin plain don't trust our government. What? You are so trusting that you believe everything that dribbles out of their lieing mouths? Over here, most of the news media has a less than sterling reputation these days as well. As far as signs go, I've seen people begging as long as I can remember. Even when jobs were plentiful. It's called a scam.


I have no health insurance. I'll take whatever the government can give me. It sure as hell beats being in pain every freaken day. :-5
User avatar
Bryn Mawr
Posts: 15897
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:54 pm

U.S. vs UK

Post by Bryn Mawr »

hoppy;1251942 wrote: These stories are a ploy by the lieing liberal left. They are expert at preying on the public's sympathies.Take gun control as an example. Every time a gun control issue comes up, Tons of stats are published showing how many children were killed by guns. Never mind that these stats include "children" 17 years of age that were killed attempting to hold up a place or by cops. Don't fall for all you read.


Like the stat that was produced from the NRA last time the gun control subject came up on here proving that there was more gun crime in the UK since the gun ban than in the US?

I had great fun puncturing that one :wah:
User avatar
Raven
Posts: 4069
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 5:21 am

U.S. vs UK

Post by Raven »

hoppy;1251935 wrote: If you are an American, then you must know how things work. Lon put it well. We just freakin plain don't trust our government. What? You are so trusting that you believe everything that dribbles out of their lieing mouths? Over here, most of the news media has a less than sterling reputation these days as well.
Since when, did average joe yank stop caring about the less fortunate? Especially on home turf? It's not the place I remember. Me? I dont believe anything but what my eyes and heart tell me. Anarchist to the last breath, me. And my heart would break thinking it was one of my own who had to beg for cancer treatment. I know we have charities, and teaching hospitals, and county hospitals. But did someone care enough to ask if they knew? I know some folks can take advantage of gullible Brits, and connive them out of a few bob, with a bleeding heart story. It just goes to show how awful your society has become with that kind of rot. Trust me mate, most Americans dont know what 'want' really is. You try living over here for awhile. Then you'll see. You will see what kind of folks you are becoming. And it isnt pretty. The paranoia that you seem to collectively suffer with is appalling. The healthcare system in America needs tweaking. Shame on you for opposing it.
~Quoth the Raven, Nevermore!~
hoppy
Posts: 4561
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 8:58 am

U.S. vs UK

Post by hoppy »

I'm only opposing what Obama proposed. His "plan" suks, so far. I tend to agree with Lon on this health care.
User avatar
Raven
Posts: 4069
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 5:21 am

U.S. vs UK

Post by Raven »

Peg;1251943 wrote: I have no health insurance. I'll take whatever the government can give me. It sure as hell beats being in pain every freaken day. :-5
Yes it does sweetheart, yes it does. Explain to the kind folks here that WITHOUT insurance, your chances of procuring a family doctor for things like that are almost NIL! Doc in the box and ER are about the only options for folks without insurance.
~Quoth the Raven, Nevermore!~
User avatar
Raven
Posts: 4069
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 5:21 am

U.S. vs UK

Post by Raven »

hoppy;1251959 wrote: I'm only opposing what Obama proposed. His "plan" suks, so far. I tend to agree with Lon on this health care.
So write to congress with a better one! What the hell are you people afraid of? What is wrong with DECENT healthcare available to everyone? Tell me! What is wrong with it?
~Quoth the Raven, Nevermore!~
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

U.S. vs UK

Post by gmc »

hoppy;1251747 wrote: You can come up with all the sob story scenarios you want but it boils down to this. Suppose you are buying a new car. You ask about a warranty and what it covers. Salesman says, "sure, we have a warranty. Sign the papers, we'll work out what it covers sometime later". Well, lots of Americans ain't buying it.:mad:


Why do you think it should be up to the employer to provide health insurance? Apart from anything else does it not give an extra hold over an employee? It's kind of hard to argue with the boss if you know it means no healthcare especially if they can sack you any time they like (don't know the actual situation in the states but that is the impression I have). Why would you trust your employer to actually pay for it or provide the level of cover you want? I'm self employed as it happens-no Bastard is going to decide I'm redundant or how much I earn (no offence yzgi I'm sure you ae a good employer I've had a couple of hard experiences)

As a free man why would you want to give an employer that kind of hold over you. From the employer's perspective it must be a real disincentive to take on staff-especially if the costs keep on growing. Why should they be social workers providing for their employees family instead of just paying them a fair wage for a fair days work.

posted by hoppy

I don't trust the 'crat's to do anything but fill their own pockets as they lead us into a socialism like you never saw before.




You already have socialism but what you have now is corporate socialism where instead of things coming from the state it comes from the employer and you are dependant on a benevolent corporation (the insurance company) to provide you with benefits. If you;re not happy you can take your money elsewhere in a free market economy-except i suspect pre-existing conditions have exclusions

Personally I think that's a whole lot worse-at least if it's govt you get a chance to say who runs it and what they provide. That any state run healthcare monitored by elected govt officials would refuse treatment because it was too expensive or not cost effective i.e. not profitable is kind of hard to imagine. Not saying they wouldn't try it but they have to cope with the public outcry that results. A company does it you are on your own.

We just freakin plain don't trust our government.


You elected them so whose fault is that? Actually why should you trust them. Anyone who wants to govern should be disbarred from standing and the best selected instead. If only that was actually practical. That's one are we beat the states hands down. Our politicians are bigger tosspots and liars than yours they even make george bush look like a fine upstanding individual.

posted by hoppy

You can come up with all the sob story scenarios you want but it boils down to this. Suppose you are buying a new car. You ask about a warranty and what it covers. Salesman says, "sure, we have a warranty. Sign the papers, we'll work out what it covers sometime later". Well, lots of Americans ain't buying it




But surely what you have just now is a warranty which if you don't keep up payments lapses or it is at the discretion of the garage if the warranty claim is valid with no right of appeal-as opposed to a legal requirement for free cover regardless of your ability to pay for a warranty or not? Actually in the UK manufacturers HAVE to offer a warranty-a years warranty is the legal minimum though most manufacturers offer more nowadays.

Saw a traffic accident today- ambulances in attendance and a biker scraped up and carted off to hospital. No one will be asking if he has insurance and all the specialists he needs are there if he/she needs them. Course he might lose his job if he's off work for too long.
hoppy
Posts: 4561
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 8:58 am

U.S. vs UK

Post by hoppy »

gmc;1251971 wrote: Why do you think it should be up to the employer to provide health insurance? Apart from anything else does it not give an extra hold over an employee? It's kind of hard to argue with the boss if you know it means no healthcare especially if they can sack you any time they like (don't know the actual situation in the states but that is the impression I have). Why would you trust your employer to actually pay for it or provide the level of cover you want? I'm self employed as it happens-no Bastard is going to decide I'm redundant or how much I earn (no offence yzgi I'm sure you ae a good employer I've had a couple of hard experiences)

As a free man why would you want to give an employer that kind of hold over you. From the employer's perspective it must be a real disincentive to take on staff-especially if the costs keep on growing. Why should they be social workers providing for their employees family instead of just paying them a fair wage for a fair days work.

posted by hoppy



You already have socialism but what you have now is corporate socialism where instead of things coming from the state it comes from the employer and you are dependant on a benevolent corporation (the insurance company) to provide you with benefits. If you;re not happy you can take your money elsewhere in a free market economy-except i suspect pre-existing conditions have exclusions

Personally I think that's a whole lot worse-at least if it's govt you get a chance to say who runs it and what they provide. That any state run healthcare monitored by elected govt officials would refuse treatment because it was too expensive or not cost effective i.e. not profitable is kind of hard to imagine. Not saying they wouldn't try it but they have to cope with the public outcry that results. A company does it you are on your own.



You elected them so whose fault is that? Actually why should you trust them. Anyone who wants to govern should be disbarred from standing and the best selected instead. If only that was actually practical. That's one are we beat the states hands down. Our politicians are bigger tosspots and liars than yours they even make george bush look like a fine upstanding individual.

posted by hoppy



But surely what you have just now is a warranty which if you don't keep up payments lapses or it is at the discretion of the garage if the warranty claim is valid with no right of appeal-as opposed to a legal requirement for free cover regardless of your ability to pay for a warranty or not? Actually in the UK manufacturers HAVE to offer a warranty-a years warranty is the legal minimum though most manufacturers offer more nowadays.

Saw a traffic accident today- ambulances in attendance and a biker scraped up and carted off to hospital. No one will be asking if he has insurance and all the specialists he needs are there if he/she needs them. Course he might lose his job if he's off work for too long.


You ain't even makin sense. You just want to take cheap shots at me.:p
hoppy
Posts: 4561
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 8:58 am

U.S. vs UK

Post by hoppy »

Raven;1251963 wrote: So write to congress with a better one! What the hell are you people afraid of? What is wrong with DECENT healthcare available to everyone? Tell me! What is wrong with it?


Well sweetheart, when we see a DECENT health care plan, maybe we'll support it.
Clodhopper
Posts: 5115
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm

U.S. vs UK

Post by Clodhopper »

(wryly) The NHS is not perfect. See Raven's earlier comments about the dirtiness of NHS wards. And I have certainly been taken in by scams.

But in the end, do you want to be treated by people who are there by vocation, or by financial incentive?

At the scale of national policy, all you can do is shift the emphasis.
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"

Lone voice: "I'm not."
User avatar
Bryn Mawr
Posts: 15897
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:54 pm

U.S. vs UK

Post by Bryn Mawr »

hoppy;1252058 wrote: You ain't even makin sense. You just want to take cheap shots at me.:p


Ah well, you tried gmc - not a lot more you can do than that :-(
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

U.S. vs UK

Post by gmc »

hoppy;1252058 wrote: You ain't even makin sense. You just want to take cheap shots at me.:p


No I'm not I was actually being quite serious but the same time trying to phrase it carefully so that you wouldn't just assume-as seems to be your wont-that I was having a cheap shot. I don't feel any need to take cheap shots and poking fun is no fun at all because you never spot when someone is pulling your leg. I was asking a question the answer to which I can't make sense of.

You worry about socialism because you think it will take away your freedom yet accept the fact that you are dependant on the largesse of the companies you work for and think they should provide for you. You don't have the freedom to change employer or stand up to them if you think you are being unfairly treated because at the back of your mind is the fear you might lose your medical cover. Speaking hypothetically of course and not about you in particular since apart from anything else I know nothing about your circumstances. It is something that features rather a lot in American dramas-you even make films about people driven to extremes they take hostages to demand their kids receive treatment-can't remember the film because I didn't go and see it (john Q just starring denzil Washington just looked it up) cos the story line is a bit nonsensical if you're not an american.

Personally I would not want to be so dependant on an employer for such a basic thing. I suppose you can form a union and defend yourself that way but isn't that a bit-well-socialist? Worker's rights and all that-power to the people, guaranteed to give any blue blooded capitalist employer who sees his employees as human resources apoplexy.

In any case for a small employer that's not practical. From what yzgi is saying it must also be hurting your economy since it makes taking on a new employee as it is an an extra cost centre.

Rather than buying a car as an analogy how about taking on a job that has a tied house as part of the package? Lose the job lose the house. Lose the job lose the medical benefits. A tied house is something I personally would never agree to. Seriously, why would you want to be in a position where an employer has that kind of control over such an important part of your life? What about those on very low incomes or self employed and seeing their turnover going through the floor because of the recession who can't pay any more?

I do not now how your system works and frankly i am not going to spend any time finding out about it.

But seriously, not having a cheap shot or trying to take the ****, pull your leg, pull your plonker or any other phrases you feel like using.

Why do you find the notion that everyone should have access to free healthcare at the point of need (obviously not free so forget the pedantry but free at the point when you need the care)

Why do you prefer having a private company making decisions as to what care is paid for and what treatment is available and if you haven't been able to pay for insurance it seems you need to be dying before you can get treatment. As against a system-however it is set up where the basic principle is that everyone gets access to medical care regardless of their financial circumstances?

There are some things that are too important to be left to the market, imo medical care is one of them. I want my doctor deciding on treatment based on need rather than wasting time on tests I don't need just so he gets paid by the insurance company. I want referred to the best specialist if I need one without having to worry if he is any good or how much he/she will cost and without the doctor asking me how I will pay.

It seems to me you object in principle to the idea that everyone should be able to get medical care if they need it. That I just don't understand-so perhaps you could clarify your reasoning.
hoppy
Posts: 4561
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 8:58 am

U.S. vs UK

Post by hoppy »

Lon;1251832 wrote: There are many of us that are not opposed to some form of Universal Health Care for the U.S., we just do not like the proposed plans. There are a number of issues that are going unaddressed that would streamline national health care and lower costs. Caps on malpractice awards, better usage of R.N. Certified Nurse Midwives by the Medical Profession (wife is retired RN-CNM). It's a no brainer to think that the insurance industry could insure people with pre-existing illnesses without drastically increasing premiums for coverage. That's like insuring your house after the fire has started. It's also the mis handling of our Social Security System and it's funding. There was supposed to be a Trust Fund:wah:. The pay as you go is going, going, going-----------Gone. Maybe folks in the UK have more confidence in their leaders to more effectively administer their Social Welfare Programs than we have of ours.


Once again. I pretty much agree with Lon's response. It's right there above. Read it. Look up the big words if you must. I agree with it. He put it better than I could. We think alike on this. I like the way he put it. I wish I'd have said it that way. Lon explains it well. Get it?
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

U.S. vs UK

Post by gmc »

hoppy;1252162 wrote: Once again. I pretty much agree with Lon's response. It's right there above. Read it. Look up the big words if you must. I agree with it. He put it better than I could. We think alike on this. I like the way he put it. I wish I'd have said it that way. Lon explains it well. Get it?


Now that was a cheap shot. I always try and use simple words so as not to confuse americans and type slowly so the accent doesn't confuse you either and also refrain from pointing out the inevitable spelling mistakes. Still you do well for foreigners using a bastardised form of the english language. Note you use not english but a version called american english which is why you get the meaning of words like liberal and socialist wrong:sneaky:

No we don't actually have any more confidence in our leaders than you do but at least you can do something about them. The only way you can do something about a private company is by taking legal action or getting your elected leaders to pass legislation to control them.

Return to “Healthcare”