Re: Here via a link; sorry to butt in.cidercupcakesAugust 25 2009, 16:13:40 UTC
What do you suggest we do to solve the problem of people with pre-existing conditions, then? I realize this probably sounds flippant, but this is my main sticking point on any health-care plan, for obvious reasons, and I'm curious what solution could be achieved under the system we've got.
I certainly don't think public health care will solve everyone's problems, but I know for a fact that the system we have now doesn't, and I think ultimately it fucks over a lot more people than it helps, which may a fundamental disagreement we're going to have here. For me (college-educated, sending out ten to twenty resumes a week for a year, able to count on one hand the number of interviews I've got, took a retail job out of desperation in the meantime, where they keep me scheduled juuuuuust shy of full-time so they don't have to give me benefits and they'd have to give me a significant raise for me to hit the poverty threshold, so private insurance is out of the question), guaranteed mediocre health care is still preferable to no health care at all, which is what I've "become accustomed to". As was pointed out elsewhere in the comments, Australians pay an extra 1.5% for health care; I can certainly manage that.
Re: Here via a link; sorry to butt in.lazypadawanAugust 26 2009, 01:40:08 UTC
I think it should be easier to get group insurance so you can't be denied coverage for a pre-existing condition, i.e. through churches, clubs, charitable organizations, etc.. I've also read about states creating high-risk pools so that poor folks with pre-existing conditions can get affordable coverage. I don't see why private organizations can't do the same. If there are laws prohibiting it, then the laws should change. There are other ideas out there.
I've been unemployed, worked the retail detail, and have been at times without coverage. Guarantees of even mediocre medical service sounds great to people who are struggling. But I've also seen how well the system worked for my dad who had a blocked artery a few years ago. It was almost miraculous in how efficient it was. On the other hand, my aunt in Spain had to wait over a year just for an appointment to see a doctor about her foot. God knows how long she would have to wait for surgery. My family members in another country had experiences with the freebie Seguro Social, which was always out of medication, had second-rate doctors, and had broken down equipment. I'd prefer the former kind of care over the latter any day of the week.
I certainly don't think public health care will solve everyone's problems, but I know for a fact that the system we have now doesn't, and I think ultimately it fucks over a lot more people than it helps, which may a fundamental disagreement we're going to have here. For me (college-educated, sending out ten to twenty resumes a week for a year, able to count on one hand the number of interviews I've got, took a retail job out of desperation in the meantime, where they keep me scheduled juuuuuust shy of full-time so they don't have to give me benefits and they'd have to give me a significant raise for me to hit the poverty threshold, so private insurance is out of the question), guaranteed mediocre health care is still preferable to no health care at all, which is what I've "become accustomed to". As was pointed out elsewhere in the comments, Australians pay an extra 1.5% for health care; I can certainly manage that.
Reply
I've been unemployed, worked the retail detail, and have been at times without coverage. Guarantees of even mediocre medical service sounds great to people who are struggling. But I've also seen how well the system worked for my dad who had a blocked artery a few years ago. It was almost miraculous in how efficient it was. On the other hand, my aunt in Spain had to wait over a year just for an appointment to see a doctor about her foot. God knows how long she would have to wait for surgery. My family members in another country had experiences with the freebie Seguro Social, which was always out of medication, had second-rate doctors, and had broken down equipment. I'd prefer the former kind of care over the latter any day of the week.
Reply
Leave a comment