Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Health & Wellness

Ruined by Health Care: My Family Learned that Even with Insurance We Weren't Safe from Financial Ruin

By Kate Michelman, The Nation. Posted April 10, 2009.


Two medical crises brought one financially stable family to its knees. And their story is happening all across America.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

It was a crisp and brilliant autumn day last October when the medical and financial crises with which my family had successfully, if barely, coped for seven years became a catastrophe.

My husband had been diagnosed with Parkinson's disease in 2002, a year after our daughter was paralyzed in a horse-riding accident. His balance had deteriorated until he fell two or three times at home last summer. In the face of his diminishing physical condition, a single fall could result in disastrous injury. We scheduled an appointment with his neurologist in Washington.

We pulled up to the main entrance of the hospital after the two-hour drive from our home near Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. My husband opened his door, grabbed the roof of the car and began to pull himself out as I walked around to help him. I was too late. In an instant -- time slowed enough for me to see the danger but raced ahead too fast for me to reach him -- he lost his grip and fell to the concrete, shattering his hip, breaking his femur and causing internal bleeding that kept him in the hospital for months.

My husband is a retired college professor, and what the teaching profession lacks in salary it often makes up for with generous benefits. His health insurance would cover most of the emergency costs related to the fall -- the surgeries, the hospitalization, the drugs. But in the astronomical sums the cost of medical care often entails, "most" is not a reassuring word. Months later, as his discharge from the hospital drew near, I sat in my living room looking at the bills piling up on the table. The co-pays, uncovered care and other costs had already reached $8,000, and we had virtually nothing left.

Seven years of caring for my husband and our daughter, who had no insurance at the time of her accident, had all but exhausted our savings. As my husband's condition deteriorated, I was caught in a trap. We needed my income, but the kind of political consulting work that was my forte was incompatible with the demands of caring for him. It was simply not possible for me to be available for him 24/7 and simultaneously to work overtime, traveling for days or weeks on the campaign trail, to bring in the income that would keep us afloat.

The fraying financial thread by which we were already hanging was now certain to snap. When I heard the awful sound of my husband's body hitting the concrete outside the hospital, I knew the modicum of independence to which he had clung for so long was gone. He was discharged into an assisted-living facility, where most of the cost was excluded from both his private long-term-care insurance and Medicare. At $9,000 a month, the bills accumulated quickly.

Recently, we decided to bring him home, although the doctors would have preferred that he stay at a facility with full-time supervision. But this was a mathematical decision, not a medical one: we do not have the money it costs to keep him there. I had already stopped working, to care for him; our savings are nearly depleted; and his pension is not nearly large enough to pay the bills.

Today he needs nearly round-the-clock professional help at home -- less than the cost of the assisted-living facility but still far more than we have. I have spent recent weeks looking for a job that can add at least enough to my husband's pension and our Social Security benefits to cover the cost of his care. It is a dilemma familiar to so many women -- finding work that can pay for care but also leave time for providing it.

The time is drawing near when, job or no job, the expenses will simply be more than we have. I am coming full circle, back to where so many women's lives begin and end -- and where my career as an activist began: jobless, unsure how to pay the next month's bills, caring for a family that depends on me for survival -- and utterly and deeply determined that something about our country must fundamentally change.

That was in 1969. My first husband had abruptly left my three young girls and me, stranding us without financial support. Our family was in crisis, and when I found out a few weeks later that I was pregnant too, I knew it was impossible to give a new baby -- whose father had already deserted it -- what it deserved while also giving my daughters what they needed. So in 1969 I made the difficult decision to have an abortion. Because state law radically restricted access to the procedure, that decision had humiliating consequences. I was forced to obtain permission both from the man who had abandoned my daughters and me and from an all-male hospital review board. The board's interrogation in a hospital conference room covered subjects like whether I was capable of dressing my children in the mornings and whether I had been satisfying my husband sexually.

That experience sparked a lifetime of activism that eventually took me to the front ranks of the prochoice movement, where I forged deep and lasting friendships with some of the most powerful political figures of the past thirty years.

Not many Republicans were among them. But there ought to have been more -- because in a distant era fast receding in time, theirs was the party of moderation and individual rights, and also because, ironically enough, I have led precisely the life Republicans claim to value. I started as a single welfare mother, then worked my way through college en route to a successful career. My second husband and I have sustained a traditional and loving marriage for thirty-five years. He purchased quality health insurance, including long-term-care insurance, so he would not be a financial burden to others. He enjoyed a long and steady career at an institution that would pay healthcare costs and a modest pension for life. Between his salary and mine, we achieved a reasonable degree of economic comfort -- never wealthy but independent, self-sufficient, responsible.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: health, health care, health care costs

Kate Michelman was president of NARAL Pro-Choice America from 1985 to 2004. She is the author of With Liberty and Justice for All: A Life Spent Protecting the Right to Choose (Penguin/Hudson Street Press, 2005).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Health and Wellness! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
You have my head scratching sympathy.
Posted by: cordas on Apr 10, 2009 12:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Coming from the UK I find it nearly impossible to get my head around the fact that you don't have something like our NHS in the States, it simply beggars belief that in a developed nation that people can be left to suffer in such horrendous situations.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: another troll? Posted by: sasquuatch55
Every American family
Posted by: Rolomax on Apr 10, 2009 12:39 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
.. would be remiss if they don't have a bankruptcy plan in place for if/when someone gets sick and needs 'insurance exempt' healthcare.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: very American family Posted by: cordas
» RE: very American family Posted by: Rolomax
» RE: very American family Posted by: Aimleft
» RE: very American family Posted by: mkruege
» RE: very American family Posted by: Rolomax
» RE: very American family Posted by: Aimleft
» RE: very American family Posted by: astockton
» RE: very American family Posted by: buzzsaw
heartrending
Posted by: emanuelegarcia on Apr 10, 2009 12:58 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a beautifully rendered description of the sad fate that afflicts millions -- even the relatively well-off. As a physician myself I have run up against a medical insurance system in the States that is horrifically unfair -- as a treater of patients who were denied coverage, and also as a recipient of (un)coverage.

How long will people stand for this??????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: heartrending Posted by: alive
» RE: heartrending Posted by: Midway54
» RE: heartrending Posted by: buzzsaw
HR 676 Medicare for All ... It's Past Time ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Apr 10, 2009 1:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Kate's story is repeated across the United States everyday thousands if not tens of thousands of times. We need a health care revolution ...

John Conyers HR 676, Medicare for All would immediately save millions of jobs and put over $ 1.5 trillion right into the economy.

HR 676 would immediately help re-capitalize business, state and local government by taking over health insurance costs.

HR 676 would insure the under- and uninsured and in so doing reduce emergency room costs due to under treatment and cut in half bankruptcies due to medical bills, which currently are 50 percent of bankruptcies.

HR 676 Medicare for All would allow standardization of records, billings and treatments based on best practice, allowing us to reduce costs overall and to once again become competitive with all the other G7 nations that provide health insurance for their workers and populations. We now spend 60 percent to 80 percent more than our counterparts per GDP yet have over 100 million people, over 25 percent of the population, either under- or uninsured.

Perhaps the most important benefit and stimulus would be the reduction of stress and the confidence-building that HR 676 would initiate. It is a proven fact that this measure would increase people's propensity to spend and sense of well-being and this would help turn the economy around.

The only problem, hundreds of millions in political contributions and thousands of lobbyists determined to maintaining our broken system for their own profit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

my hypertention medication...
Posted by: leafmen on Apr 10, 2009 3:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
costs me $150.00 a month. This is AFTER insurance pays. If I didn't have insurance, it would cost me about $500.00 per month - there's no way in hell I would be able to afford that. Is it any wonder that emergency rooms are used as doctors offices by the uninsured or underinsured?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

2 Trillion Dollars Per Year.
Posted by: PJAW on Apr 10, 2009 4:38 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's how much we currently spend on "health care". And we keep hearing stories like this one, and worse.

We need to address the issue in 3 ways.

One: we need to begin living healthier as a people. Less alcohol, tobacco and toxic foods. We also would be wise to adjust our attitude toward death and realize it is a natural end that cannot be avoided with extraordinary and immensely expensive procedures.

Two: providers need to clean up their act and charge realistic fes. At these exhorbitant prices, we still lose 119,000 people per year to medical mistakes and malpractice and another 106,000 per year to bad reactions to "properly" prescribed drugs. Medicare Part D is a huge boondoggle in its current form.

Three: financial control needs to be completely removed from the insurance industry, they keep too much for themselves and impose financial duress on clinical decision making.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 2 Trillion Dollars Per Year. Posted by: etvaugha@mtu.edu
Illusions of Security
Posted by: Urstrly on Apr 10, 2009 5:03 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As someone who has admired your advocacy, Kate, I would say that health care reform has gained a great champion at the expense of your personal tragedy.

What your example makes clear is that you can have all the insurance you can muster and still wind up broke. We've got our eyes fixed on the wrong prize; we don't need more insurance, we need access to health care. I'm glad The Nation published your story, but it should be in the Wall Street Journal where all the people who think these things only happen to people who are careless or uneducated can read it.

You may not be able to barnstorm the nation, but I'd urge you to start doing videos as well as continuing to write. And how about Facebook?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Illusions of Security Posted by: badkitty
» RE: Illusions of Security Posted by: countingdaisies
Declining Affluence Impacts the Equation, Sad to Say
Posted by: phshafe on Apr 10, 2009 5:14 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While this author deserves our empathy, and our US healthcare system, along with the warped values it reflects, need a complete reengineering, this story is not completely the poster child for the cause.

In an age of declining affluence, researchers covering this transition seem to agree that healthcare rationing is coming, even to the most progressive of communities. If you decide to smoke, drink, or ride horses, the impact of any related health consequences may be yours and not borne by communities who must increasingly resort to local resources only and cannot provide 100% coverage of the type we all seem to take for granted. Some say that this has already happened. Case in point, a friend of a friend whose liver deteriorated partly from a genetic condition and partly from alcohol abuse, who was told by doctors to take meds and go home and get comfortable because he was not, due to the drinking, a priority for liver transplant.

Horrendous, but welcome to the new reality in our post-affluent society. And while we're on the topic, some might suggest that having 3 kids at a time when tens of millions of other couples are having 0-2, precisely so that they can avoid living on the financial precipice, is unwise and also constitutes a situation that the community cannot be expected to 100% support in a pinch.

I am so sorry for the way this sounds. Sorrier, still, that we live in times in which our whole expectation set will have to be either painfully adjusted by ourselves lest it become extremely painfully adjusted by reality.

Please do not respond emotionally to this message. If you truly believe you can make the case that there is no truth to it, please educate us all by laying it out. Thank you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

OBAMA AND TEAM WILL SUCCEED THIS TIME AROUND
Posted by: drricklippin on Apr 10, 2009 5:24 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OBAMA AND TEAM WILL SUCCEED THIS TIME AROUND ON US HEALTH CARE REFORM.WE HAVE HIT BOTTOM AND ENOUGH STARS HAVE ALIGNED.

But that does NOT mean "everything for everyone"- an unrealistic goal

Here is my own Rx for US health care reform.

More incentives for-

-primary care
-chronic disease management
-home care
-prevention
-public health
-ethical and compassionate rationing especially toward the end of life

Then we will have the $ to avoid what this writer and her family tragically endured.

Dr. Rick Lippin
Southampton,Pa

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» WE ARE A YOUNG AND IMMATURE NATION Posted by: drricklippin
ridiculous
Posted by: Philor on Apr 10, 2009 5:34 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Coming from France I have to say that the state of US health care is miserable. I was recently able to compare two women, one my mother in France, and a neighbor here in Maryland who both had to go through total knee replacement.
My mother paid a copay of 400 bucks in France and the surgery was a total success. The lady I know in MD is also very satisfied by her operation and, like my mother is back walking. The difference is that she will pay 200 bucks for the rest of her life to cover what was not covered by her insurance. Pitiful.
I see only one reason: GREED!
In this country the 1% making more than 1 millions/year have decided that they would not encourage and work for a system based on solidarity, whether it's about health care or retirement. Since those guys are in control, well, we are left with the system we all know. As for the rest of the population, well, have you ever heard a conversation between two grown up males other than sports?
People here have the retirement packages and the healthcare they deserve. After almost 20 years in this country I've stopped feeling sorry for americans a long time ago.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I concur Posted by: Hiroak
» Yes, I have.... Posted by: morticia
Look at the details
Posted by: DeWriter on Apr 10, 2009 6:01 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with this account on two points: It was, indeed a tragedy; and, we do need a national, single payer healthcare plan that prevents this kind of medical bankruptcy.
However, I see two self imposed reasons this was so large a tragedy for this family: One, the writer CHOSE to assume the medical debts for a grown child for whom she was no longer legally liable. Let the child be responsible and, if necessary, declare bankruptcy herself, without dragging her parents down with her.
Two, the writer mentions that their supplemental catastrophic insurance pays only a small part of the costs for her husband's care. This means they were wise to consider this extended insurance, but negligent on reviewing the fine details of how much it would cover of they actually needed it. They bought the wrong insurance, that simple.
I have sympathy for their predicament and those like them, but any rational discussion of the healthcare problems of the US must be daylighted, with all the facts out on the table.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Look at the details Posted by: CliveStaples
» RE: Look at the details Posted by: Outsidetheboxlookingin
» RE: Look at the details Posted by: Lily H.
I hate to say this but
Posted by: Grandma Crabby on Apr 10, 2009 6:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
as it stands in the US, there are only two options for most people who become seriously ill.

1. Die
2. Go broke

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Or Both At The Same Time Posted by: FoonTheElder
» Yes Foon, you are so right Posted by: Grandma Crabby
» RE: I hate to say this but Posted by: bookie
OK Kate--ready to rumble?
Posted by: JerseyGeoff on Apr 10, 2009 6:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Kate's story is not unusual. Worse, 50 percent of this country won't do anything about the problem of healthcare finance. Well-- Kate has a bully pulpit- lots of contacts and the ability to raise tons of consciousness , but I notice she did not single out the solution- national single payer care as planned by HR 676 and S. 703.

So who is going to talk about HR 676? Nightline? no, Frontline No...
We need large disruptive rallies all over America right now- or we can all continue to live in fear of sickness and misfortune while our economy fadse away in a fog of rising healthcare costs compared to every other developed nation of the world.

Folks need to join Healthcare-Now.org and PNHP.org and get active fast before you too get bankrupted by the happy members of America's Health Insurance Plans(AHIP)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No Other Country
Posted by: snax on Apr 10, 2009 7:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No other country that falls into the category of being a first world nation has a for-profit health care system.

No other first world country has so large an epidemic of people losing everything due to circumstances largely beyond their control.

No other first world country sends people home to die because they cannot afford to pay for basic health care.

CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVE IN SUPPORT OF HR 676 NOW!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: No Other Country Posted by: Midway54
eml256
Posted by: anonymous46 on Apr 10, 2009 7:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
might be OT--wondering if the man in the article who has been diagnosed with Parkinson's was taking/is taking one of the statin drugs, esp. a fat soluble one such as Lipitor or Zocor. If he is or was taking one of these drugs, please access Dr. Duane Graveline's web site devoted to statin sufferers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Remember?
Posted by: BobKincaid on Apr 10, 2009 7:58 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ms. Michelman has crafted a beautiful, touching essay dealing with an increasingly all too familiar topic. She has spent her life in protecting the rights of others far less powerful than she and finds herself afflicted by problems many think only happen to "those" people.

This is the Kate Michelman frequently refered to by Rush Limbaugh as a "feminazi," the Kate Michelman he slimed as "ugly," all the while continuing to shill for his corporate masters who've created America's healthcare nightmare.

It is because of Rush Limbaugh and others like him that we don't have universal single payer healthcare now. They framed the issue in a vaccuum, with practically no one from our side to fight back. Why?

It is also because "liberals" and "progressives" ignored the medium of talk radio for so long that Rush, et al. acquired the power and influence they have.

I would love to see mass demonstrations for universal healthcare. That, however, is not the answer. The other side has succeeeded at keeping the door to affordable healthcare closed in favor of a for-profit system largely because they've had a small army of Rushes out there talking the issue, lying about the issue day-in and day-out. Our side? We have a rally and go home to plan the next rally six weeks, six months later. Meanwhile, everyone who attempts to mount a counter-insurgency to what the right-wing are doing on the airwaves goes begging for the funding with which to keep the message going.

Persistence of message is what changes the national dialogue. Thirty second ads on CNN don't do it. Rallies don't do it. Door-to-door campaigns don't do it. Our side simply does not have the broadcast infrastructure now to create that persistence of message, while the right-wing has tuned its megaphone to the point that its message is inescapable and the prospects for real reform, real change are becoming less and less likely.

While our side looked down its nose at the talk radio medium, the other side built it up, financed it, made superstars of morons and screwed us for another generation.

We are all paying the cost for that snobbery. We ceded the field of battle to the right and in so doing, lost a much more important overall war.


America's Liberal Voice

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Remember? Posted by: wtfo
Dog-eat-dog society
Posted by: wireup on Apr 10, 2009 8:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is what happens when you live in a dog-eat-dog society where "health care" is for-profit. WHY should "health care" be FOR PROFIT?

Long ago, in China, it was the policy to pay doctors only as long as the patient was healthy. The minute he became ill, the payments stopped. So, it was in the economic interest of the doctor to keep the patient well.

Our system is exactly the opposite: it is in the economic interest of the doctors, the hospitals, and - especially - the pharmaceutical industry to keep the patients SICK.

Think about it!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All are at risk
Posted by: Jeanne on Apr 10, 2009 8:13 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Which is the point behind pushing for single-payer health care. The minute you have the private or "non-profit" insurance company inserted in the transaction, there will always be a co-pay; there will always be the likelihood of "non-allowed" treatments and medications; there will always be denials for "pre-existing" conditions; there will always be cancellation of coverage for "non-disclosure" of inconsequential conditions like yeast infections, if that will allow the insurance company to escape the now-costly claim for, say, lung cancer. We've all seen and heard the horror stories. This is just another case of doing everything "right" and still being destroyed by the cost of your share of the medical bills.

How many people have to make the hard choice to allow themselves to die to preserve their family's financial security? Or, have to endure the anguish of knowing their continued survival means the complete ruin of all they worked to provide? Think of the palliative and healing effect that has on the patient (not!).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Typical U.S. Healthcare Nightmare, But Why Devote Your Life To Abortion?
Posted by: JohnTruth2001 on Apr 10, 2009 8:46 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Your already had 3 children, why have a forth you admit you couldn't provide for??? Ever hear of contraception? Why substitute abortion for contraception or adoption for the child???

You sound like you are caught-up in the NWO/globalist agenda of promoting eugenics!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I hear you. You're not alone.
Posted by: Benn_Miller on Apr 10, 2009 9:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm still working and taking care of my loving wife as she is recovering from an illness. When a spouse or child is seriously ill or injured, the mental and psychological impacts can be rather stressful.

Currently, my wife is trying to decide between working and being a housewife. On the one hand, she is concerned that I'm the only one earning my income and even wants to earn as well in case I get laid off and take longer to find another job. On the other hand, she believe that nowadays working as a housewife is not as stressful as a typical career in her field of medicine. She was working as a doctor until she collapsed unexpectedly. Her psychology has deteriorated for the worse at times. On some days, she even gets suicidal and keeps blaming herself for my working too hard and I often find myself in a stressful situation just getting her to calm down. I just pray that I don't get laid off at least until she fully recovers but then again I'm scared that if I'm unemployed while she's not that she may go out of her mind and stress herself to longer working hours. I can see why the issue of healthcare does not deserve to be taken carelessly the way the rightwingers do so.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
"Socialist" is not a "four letter word" –– health insurance is.
Posted by: monkeywrench on Apr 10, 2009 9:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
". . . if 'health insurance' does not pay for healthcare when people need it, then what exactly do those words mean?"
. . . . .

In America, those words mean,"license to steal" if you're a health insurance company.

In Europe, with their "socialist" healthcare system, this family's plight simply would not exist. Which is why Europeans, for the most part, are happier, healthier and more relaxed – and are growing taller each generation, a measure of security in life – than we are (in fact, we are slowly becoming shorter . . . and angrier.)

Healthcare is just as important as some other taxpayer-funded "socialist" systems we already have –– our police and fire departments. I doubt that anybody would choose to make THOSE "pay as you go" capitalistic enterprises.

"LIFE, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" needs to mean something again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My Bumper Sticker Says It All For Me
Posted by: wtfo on Apr 10, 2009 10:16 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
- it simply says "For-Profit Healthcare Is Immoral!" And, when thoughtfully analyzed and contemplated, I don't think any reasonable person should disagree.

Somehow, we in the USA have so bought into the mantra that "for-profit, private enterprise (ala. "the open market") is the only way for a moral, democratic country to organize the distribution of finite goods and services" that we want to utilize it for EVERYTHING. But, it really doesn't work well in the case of providing healthcare for all because, unfortunately, healthcare (and all its associated industries) is one of the very few things that a person or family cannot simply decide to forgo when they or a loved one is struck down by injury or illness. When healthcare services are needed in the USA, the unfortunate people involved are basically at the mercy of institutions and individuals that are completely driven by the maximization of profits - and not by the delivery of available goods and services to assist/cure/heal the human beings needing them.

Apparently, we in the USA have made our choice between the acquisition of money and the delivery of available healthcare - and the winner was money. If that was not an immoral choice than I think we need to rethink exactly what the "morals" of this country truly are.

We also apparently didn't realize that when the good or service sold or provided in such an unregulated, for-profit, open-market setting was something that was not ultimately "discretionary" it would ultimately lead to outrageous pricing and distribution to only those with the wherewithal to pay the current market price. In the case of healthcare, this is a pretty good mechanism for legalized extortion because the people in need will ultimately pay whatever price is asked when the alternative is unthinkable.

So, the end result of all this insanity is that our healthcare system is slowly grinding its way from bad to worse / unseemly to embarrassing / affecting mainly the poor to affecting all but the very rich. And it will continue down this path until we in the USA finally decide to end it once and for all.

We simply must decide if we want a national healthcare system that is available for all our citizens at a price that we all can bear and one that reflects our basic morals instead of our desire for the accumulation of wealth.

Fortunately, we don't have to invent such a system from scratch. Other nations, countries, and societies have faced this problem in the past and have come up with solutions that work far better than our current "system". If you don't think so, then please watch Frontline's excellent program "Sick Around The World". Then do some homework - e.g. read some of the excellent books on our current healthcare situation (my favorite is "A Second Opinion" by Dr. Arnold S. Relman). Then do your part to change the current system to something that better reflects the true character and morals of this nation. Do it now or be prepared to pay the ultimate price when it’s your time to "pay the piper" to get the healthcare needed to save the life of you or one of your loved ones...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Universal Health Care - Part One
Posted by: CStevenTucker on Apr 10, 2009 10:26 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What has our government done, to convince people to hand over our very health freedoms for it to govern over? Katrina……..? Fannie Mae – bailout? (this is a government entity who's employee's receive bonuses!) What other government employee receives bonuses for doing their jobs? Social security – bankrupt ? (robbed for other expenditures)Medicaid – ? (robbed for other expenditures)$2 trillion Porkulus bill - ? (and growing)AIG – bail out, yet nobody knows where's the money gone? No committee of oversight in place (was promised by our representatives to be in place immediately)Gas prices - ?(50% of every dollar at the pump goes to Washington) But who did you point your finger at as the problem????
Since our government "cannot" be sued, how will one be able to be recompensed for its malfeasance or neglect? How will the government, once it tells 300 million people "go see the doctor" we will pay all the bills, be able to control the consequences? By overwhelming our medical profession or break it, will come another grand government solution," we need more money to fix it"! You are already familiar and have accepted this excuse for too long, and know this to be their power solution. Our government has impoverished our families' financial freedom to pay our own way, by immoral taxation.
Furthermore how has Government run health care worked in other countries? Let's get past the emotions and examine the facts. A common example used to further the cause of "socialized medicine" in the United States is to point out how well it is working in countries such as France and Canada. However, those living in Canada know full well that their government run health care program is most certainly not working. As a matter of fact, many Canadian citizens choose to hire high priced brokers to find them quality health care right here in the United States because of the terrible bureaucracy that controls all forms of health care in Canada. For more about what is really going on with the Canadian health care system please watch these short but very informative documentary videos:http://www.freemarketcure.com/brainsurgery.php http://www.freemarketcure.com/twowomen.php http://www.freemarketcure.com/thelemon.php http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiXT0P3edfs The number of actual uninsured's in the US has also been grossly inflated as well. For the real numbers: http://www.freemarketcure.com/uninsuredinamerica.php See also Stuart Browning's documentary "Dead Meat" on You Tube..(to be cont.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Universal Health Care Part Two
Posted by: CStevenTucker on Apr 10, 2009 10:28 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
(continued from Part One)....Medical care in the United States is derided as miserable compared to health care systems in the rest of the developed world. Economists, government officials, insurers and academics alike are beating the drum for a far larger government role in health care. Much of the public assumes their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex. However, before turning to government as the solution, some unheralded facts about America's health care system should be considered, says Scott W. Atlas, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor at the Stanford University Medical Center. Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers: Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom.Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the United Kingdom and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher. Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries. Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease.
By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them. Lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report "excellent" health compared to Canadian seniors (11.7 percent versus 5.8 percent)Conversely, white Canadian young adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower income Americans to describe their health as "fair or poor." Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom: Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long (sometimes more than a year) to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer. All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada. In England, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.-Source: National Center for Policy Analysis, Brief Analysis No. 649, 3/24/09 http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17770
Because of how the Single Payer System is designed Canadian citizens have NO WHERE NEAR the choices that we as American citizens do. As a matter of fact, until very recently (2005) it was simply not possible for a Canadian citizen to pay for their own health care or to purchase private medical insurance that would "bump them up the long waiting list" for medical treatments. The reason Canadian citizens now have the right to do so (and it is still limited) is a direct result of long hard battles (many that are still being fought) that have been waged by brave Canadian citizens like Dr. Jacques Chaoulli who took his clients case all the way to the Canadian supreme court and won! Dr. Chaoulli (http://www.healthcoalition.ca/chaoulli.html) and his patient, George Zeliotis, launched their legal challenge to the Canadian government's monopolized healthcare system after waiting more than a year for hip-replacement surgery. Canada's high court found for the plaintiffs and in doing so issued the following statement: "The evidence in this case shows that delays in the public healthcare system are widespread, and that, in some serious cases, patients die as a result of waiting lists for public healthcare. The evidence also demonstrates that the prohibition against private health insurance and its consequence of denying people vital healthcare result in physical and psychological suffering that meets a threshold test of seriousness." ....completed in Part 3.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Government Run Health Care (Part 3)
Posted by: CStevenTucker on Apr 10, 2009 10:33 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
(continued from Part 2).... Furthermore, Justice Marie Deschamps said, "Many patients on non-urgent waiting lists are in pain and cannot fully enjoy any real quality of life. The right to life and to personal inviolability is therefore affected by the waiting times." Furthermore, the Vancouver, British Columbia-based Fraser Institute which keeps track of Canadian waiting times for various medical procedures. According to the Fraser Institute's 14th annual edition of "Waiting Your Turn: Hospital Waiting Lists in Canada (2006)," total waiting time between referral from a general practitioner and treatment, averaged across all 12 specialties and 10 provinces surveyed, rose from 17.7 weeks in 2003 to 17.9 weeks in 2006. Depending on which Canadian province you live in, a simple MRI requires a wait between 7 and 33 weeks! Orthopedic surgery could require a wait of 14 weeks for a referral from a general practitioner to the specialist and then another 24 weeks from the specialist to treatment! For even more real life horror stories about Canadian citizens left in the lurch by the Canadian healthcare system read the well researched and fact based Wall Street Journal article: "Too Old For Hip Surgery" Google it.

This is what happens when you put government in control of your health care decisions. Doing so in this country, would be nothing short of a train wreck. Anyone who thinks otherwise is simply uninformed or "willfully ignorant". Real healthcare reform can be accomplished through consumer education, weeding out abuse of existing Federal entitlement programs (via a legitimate needs assessment) and continued funding of State sponsored Risk Pools so that people who are declined for insurance have an affordable option to continue coverage if declined on the individual major medical market. Following these few simple steps will go a long way towards not only maintaining our current health care system, but also towards keeping the bulk of our nations risk where it belongs, namely with the private health insurance sector. In light of the recent multi Trillion Dollar "Bail Outs" and many other failing corporations coming to the table with their hats in their hands (and their private jets on the tarmac) the last thing our government should do is start cutting more blind "bail out" checks in an effort to "reform" the U.S. health care system.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Private insurers: The Health Blockade-Wealth Transfer System
Posted by: jawbone2 on Apr 10, 2009 10:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Based on what is coming from Team Obama, there will be changes around the edges, possibly lots of money spent on digitizing health records (with what privacy protections?), and continued for-profit Big Insurance mega profits with mandates that people buy something called "insurance," but if "affordable," will deliver little real coverage.

I live in NJ, have individual insurance due to downsizing. This year, for one person, whether early twenties or early sixties as I am, my insurance would cost me $20,140 per year. Gee, I wonder how many early 20's people sign up? With 50/50 on prescriptions, plus co-pays. There was no mention of alternatives from my insurance company, but I learned about a higher co-pay version from the NJ insurance commission. So, I'm down to a mere $12,506 per year, but with higher co-pays, which, given my ongoing cancer treatments will mount up. I just hope I can stay out of the hospital, as the per day co-pay will really mount up fast.

Rates are reviewed by the insurance commission once every five years, so the insurers hold back on increases or a forced to cut coverage and thus keep rates a bit lower that year, then make up for that loss in each of the succeeding four years. Gaming the system, plus "regulatory cognitive capture"?

My life's savings are going to pay Aetna's execs' high compensation packages.

I learned from Frontline's Sick Around America that NJ is one of 5 states, mostly in the NE, that require coverage regardless of preexisting conditions -- and run about a third more than states which permit greater cherry picking by Big Insurance. I probably would have been dropped or rated out in those other states with my cancer diagnosis.

Until I get to Medicare age, I can't move or I won't be covered for my cancer, which is considered one of the "good cancers," but requires at least 5 years of clear scans--and I'm not clear yet, may need more treatments. So, I need quarterly tests, and, once a year, a major full-body scan. Even the Aetna rep told me I would save nothing by going to their lowest rate, which has huge deductibles and 50/50 on other things. At the service providers' rate, which is not the same as the Aetna negotiated rate. They do get you coming and going.

We can't afford to NOT have single payer. Everyone in, nobody out.

Estimated annual savings range from high $200B to $350B per year with single payer, based on Medicare costs (3%). Canada has costs of 1% of each healthcare dollar; Big Insurance averages around 30% of each heatlh care dollar (profit, compensation, marketing; the payouts for actual care are labeled "losses").

Why can't our Dems get that? Bcz it's hard to make a person understand something when his or her continued political status depends on his or her not understanding it? (Play on the Upton Sinclair quote.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Money talks; bullshit walks
Posted by: willymack on Apr 10, 2009 11:03 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Except here in the good ol' US of A, that is. Bullshit talks loud and clear, here. Just look at the rubes who STILL scream "Socialism" whenever universal health care is mentioned. They're STILL under the delusion that those who would cheerfully rob them blind and not give it a second thought are good people. They have NO idea of what Socialism is and the fact that our society has Socialist underpinnings, and if they were removed, we'd no longer have police, fire fighters, a postal service, and public schools, to name a few. Another fact they seem to be unaware of is that Socialism has worked remarkably well in several European and Asian nations, where they, unlike us, STILL have thriving democracies. The rubes like to chant "we're number one!", when in fact we're half-assed, ass backwards, and decades behind the rest of the civilized world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

this is why the only drug I use is marijuana
Posted by: Naty on Apr 10, 2009 12:37 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only drug I use is marijuana for:

-insomnia
-pain
-alleviate feelings of tiredness
-concentration
-depression
-stress
-prevent substance abuse (opiates)

Thank god for marijuana, can you imagine what a statistic I'd be if I went to the doc's office? I have insurance but I want to seem like the "perfect" patient so that my rates don't go up. So that I don't have on my records that I suffer from bipolar, depression, insomnia etc. and then further suffer possible legal consequences (one woman recently left her job with out benefits because she failed to disclose her depression). Thankfully all these previously diagnosed conditions get wiped off your records ever so often and also sometimes get wiped off your records if you change providers. I recently changed providers and am hoping this is the case, that all these previous diagnoses are wiped off and want to present myself as healthy as can be (so that in December when I'm done with college, and off of my Dad's company health plan I will have the lowest rates possible, that is if I have a job to afford the insurance).


-----we live in a sick society----------
the only redeeming things are the children, natural life and formations, art, people who make me smile, and the mind-blowing grandiosity of existence. everything else is shit on reality, whatever reality is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

similar story
Posted by: nangage on Apr 10, 2009 1:04 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This was like reading a diary. I cared for my mother who lived with Parkinson's for 20 years, all while working full time and caring for two nephews whose mother, my sister, was unable to care for. My mother's insurance did not cover prescriptions, which cost approx. $900 a month--and which I paid, along with groceries, transportation, etc. As she developed Parkinson's induced dementia and could no longer live on her own, we did receive help from the county's aging services. Unfortunately, the case workers would call on my mother in person and without warning at the nursing home. With her dementia in full tilt, my mother would tell the caseworkers she owned property and had millions in the bank. Without checking with me, her designated power of attorney and health care representative, the caseworker would pull state aid, leaving me to pay thousands in nursing home costs as I worked out the mistakes. The day my mother entered hospice is the day my sister was given six months to live, her cancer having spread throughout her body. This meant becoming her caretaker too. I quit my job after my employer would not let me go half time temporarily. Over the last few years, I have emptied my savings and retirement accounts to help support my family--perhaps a mistake, given the economy now, but at the time I couldn't NOT help. Now that both my mother and sister have passed away, I'm starting over now financially. I'm healthy but left stressed and broke! It's a downright disgrace that anyone living in the richest nation in the world should be put in the position of the author of this article. I feel her pain and her willingness to fight.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pray For Health.
Posted by: melpol on Apr 10, 2009 1:13 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is impossible even for the government to cover the costs of disability. Many retarded parents raise large families. Most of their offspring range from idiots to imbeciles and cost the taxpayers millions of dollars to support. National healthcare cannot be expected to cover every type of mental and physical disability. Mother nature had the solution for the sick. But society has no escape from its overwhelming burden. Family members have nowhere to turn but to prayer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Pray For Health. Posted by: grangersmith
Response Part 2
Posted by: CStevenTucker on Apr 10, 2009 1:33 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
continued from Part One: Here stands Jefferson who feared that if citizens became lazy, apathetic, and irresponsible, government would gain ground and become tyrannical and corrupt, plundering taxpayers for special interests and violating even property rights and other freedoms:“We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or Profusion and servitude. If we run into such debts, (taxation) as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of England are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four, give the earnings of fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses; and the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live, as they now do, on OATMEAL and potatoes; have no time to think, no means of calling the mismanagers to account; (government) but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their CHAINS on the necks of our fellow-sufferers…private fortunes are destroyed by public (government) as well private extravagance. Till the bulk of the society is reduced to be mere automations of misery……than begins, indeed, the bellum omnium in omnia (War of all against all) …..and the fore horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression.” (Letter to Samuel Kerchival, July 12, 1816)(Why are we not outraged our children already, before being born are now in debt to it’s government by $35,000 !) Nice immoral profit I say by our government.“To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.” Thomas Jefferson John Adams (Vice President US for 2 terms 1788-1796, and in 1796 became our Second President) On taxation :
“Property is surely a right of mankind as real as liberty. Perhaps, at first, prejudice, habit, shame or fear, principle or religion would restrain the poor from attacking the rich, and the idle from usurping on the industrious; but the time would not be long before courage and enterprise (political opportunists) would come and pretexts be invented (socialist agenda) by degrees to countenance the majority in dividing all the property among them, or at least in sharing it equally with its present possessors. Debts would be abolished first; taxes laid HEAVY on the rich, and not at all on the others; and at last a downright equal division of everything be demanded, and voted. (conclusion in Part 3)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» CST is a paid industry troll Posted by: wolfgangmo
Kate, have you seen the movie Sicko? Thank you for speaking up...
Posted by: coachsappho on Apr 10, 2009 3:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Kate, I want to thank you for telling your story. If you aren't connected with Michael Moore yet, you need to be (he created the Sicko movie). It's time women took charge on this front too, I guess.

I know I am sending your story right on to everyone who has had great insurance and has been so far fortunate not to be 'touched' by this issue (as I have too). Most who haven't been hurt by the problem still think those of us who run into problems are 'problem children' and we just need to 'grin and bear it' or 'get a better job' or whatever.

I'm a social worker, a love coach and an activist, so, if you are looking for support in what you are 'up to' please contact me and see if I can help!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A sick Nation, sick citizens, sick enviornment
Posted by: grangersmith on Apr 10, 2009 3:15 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't help but bleat out my own take on the issue and article...Finally, finally the health care issue is being felt by the middle/upper middle class, because as long as it was just a few here and there and mostly the poor working class problem, no one cared....What can you expect in a society that has poisoned it's earth, poisoned it's citizens, conquers and destroys any other place and it's citizens for greed and power...We are such a group of dog eat dog, each person or family for themselves, blame based hateful greedy collective, we advocate, allow, and even support the hate and negativity that is going on until it invades our personal lives...This seems to be the American way, a cancer that we have spread throughout the world..Sorry about the article writer's plight, but at least it has called her to action, now that the unthinkable has happened to her she is sensitive to it...Typical American thinking...I know of much worse stories than her's that have been going on for decades...I have seen people die a kind of death that no one deserves...I have seen people who are health nuts, don't drink, smoke take drugs, exercise, use filtered water, organic food, vegetarians, who have died of cancer...Sorry to the linear people who have made grand comments that all we need to do is take three steps...It must be wonderful for the "Know it Alls out there who have no real clue that this is a very very complex subject on layers and layers of levels, that have the one core issue of what a society built on greed, love of money over anything, and power unchecked creates....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Trip to the Doctor
Posted by: ct113 on Apr 10, 2009 9:23 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
involves only 5 minutes and not 6 of his or hers time and 25 dollars of your money that is if your insured; it would be 115 dollars if your not.

Everything in this country has been turned into a business including sickness. Its surprising that someone hasn't figured out how to charge people for the air they breathe.

The health care industry is making way too much money for any effective change to happen. Also, forget about Obama trying "desperately" to change the system because he is too busy trying to preserve the status quo. If you have any doubts whatsoever you can speak to some of his "go to" people like Geinther and Summers.

Overall, the health care in this country is a sick joke; the pun definitely intended.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A successful plan of attack
Posted by: red godowar on Apr 11, 2009 1:05 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Organization, obviously, is needed. More importantly, a succinct and definite plan of attack must be developed. Our typing/blogs, and protests in the streets, just don't cut it.

HR 676 must be passed, and soon.

New or creative ideas, anybody?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bankruptcy
Posted by: democracy on Apr 12, 2009 6:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I interviewed a bankruptcy lawyer last week who described a "class of people" who typically come to him for help. They are "single mothers age 35-55 working for government contractors 37.5 hours per week." The 37.5 hours is relevant, because those contractors are not required to provide health care for an individual working less than 38 hours per week. When, predictably, a certain percentage of these women develop chronic illnesses, are injured, or have sudden health problems (heart attack), they are plunged into a financial free fall with their only recourse being bankruptcy.

It is very important as this debate is being framed that employer mandates be carefully considered. When "family-friendly" hours correspond with benefit-free employment, it means that employees have unacceptable levels of exposure to financial ruin.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

For lower class people, one illness/injury will do...
Posted by: DaBear on Apr 13, 2009 12:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's a ruptured L-5/S-1 disc on insurance: $18K (no surgery, 80% recovery after 12 months of non-covered PT--insurance allows two visits. Yeah, right.)

Here's Beijing flu (three weeks unpaid off below-minimum wage work): homeless.

I feel for Michelman, I do. But the lowers have it much MUCH worse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DEMS HIDING THE HIDDEN COSTS MAKING SOC HEALTHCARE MORE EXPENSIVE THAN OUR SYSTEM
Posted by: SassyFrassy on Apr 13, 2009 8:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here we have the DEMS always needing a bigger shovel for the level of UTOPIAN propaganda they want to throw at the UNSUSPECTING PUBLIC

the latest??? FILMAKER MICHALE MOORE even made a propaganda 'feature film' claiming that Cuba's socialized healthcare is better than America's and that USA should imitate Cuba.

WHAT THEY ARE HIDING?? THE REALITY IN CUBA---they are FORCED to BEG tourists for common medicines like allergy and asthma inhalers and even aspirin.

DO you want to know what the ACLU thinks about how 'STUPID' they view Americans. QUOTE Americans will never "knowingly" accept Socialism, but DISGUISED under "liberalism" Americans will accept every fragment; and one day wake up in a Socialist Nation and "wonder" how it all happened to them.

don't believe it??? here's what NORMAN THOMAS one of co-founder's of ACLU says about USA quote-- Americans will never "knowingly" accept Socialism, but under "liberalism" Americans will accept every fragment; and one day wake up in a Socialist Nation and "wonder" how it all happened.

Here we have the DEMS always needing a bigger shovel for the level of UTOPIAN propaganda they want to throw at the UNSUSPECTING PUBLIC.

DID YOU KNOW that under the NEW SOCIALIST healthcare if YOUR CHILD needs antibiotics and the government only wants to give them ASPIRIN THEY WILL GET ONLY ASPIRIN OR NOTHING.

see The National Center for Public Policy Research and American center for law and justice

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DEMS ATTEMPTING TO BAMBOOZLE PUBLIC BY CLAIMING SOC HEALTHC IS BETTER
Posted by: SassyFrassy on Apr 13, 2009 8:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
IN SCOTLAND-462,000 PEOPLE DIED AS A RESULT OF HEALTHCARE FAILINGS

ENGLAND---the NATIONAL HEALTHCARE JUST UP AND DECIDED TO HALT KNEE AND HIP REPLACEMENTS FOR OVERWEIGHT PEOPLE.

in SOUTH AFRICA- PATIENTS DIED after his life saving surgery was RE-CLASSIFIED as 'elective' and CANCELED seven YES THAT'S RIGHT SEVEN times until it was simply to late.

in AUSTRALIA man has been on a 90 day waiting PERIOD---for over 2 years.

in Canada -cancer patients have been DENIED life saving medicines that are standard treatment in USA and covered by USA INSURANCE.

ENGLAND AGAIN---- Alheimer's patients denied $5 a day drug that provides crucial relief because it's considered TOO EXPENSIVE.

CUBA---they are FORCED to BEG tourists for common medicines like allergy and asthma inhalers and even aspirin.

EVERYWHERE SOCIALIZED MEDICINE HAS BEEN TRIED IT HAS FAILED.

The DEMS BRAND of getting around using the term SOCIALIZED MEDICINE is to dress up their BIG GOVERNMENT schemes to bamboozle public by calling it UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE OR HEALTH CARE FOR ALL to 'diguise' the fact it should be labeled as HEALTHCARE FOR NONE so the BIG GOV can pocket the funds.

NO matter how these DEMS CALL soc med it always has the same RESULTS---RATIONED HEALTHCARE, DENIAL OF ESSENTIAL MEDICAL SERVICE, WAITING LISTS, MEDIOCRE MEDICINE, AND UNNECESSARY SUFFERING AND DEATH. and for whaaat?? so gov can pocket the funds. always the bottom line.

MEANWHILE WASH DC SLUGS end up with final say over your most intimate medical decisions NOT YOU AND NOT YOUR DOCTOR.

Here we have the DEMS always needing a bigger shovel for the level of UTOPIAN propaganda they want to throw at the UNSUSPECTING PUBLIC.

PEOPLE OUR MARKET BASED HEALTHCARE SYSTEM IS ONE OF THE BEST IN THE WORLD. Why, sure it's not perfect. BUT THE SHORTCOMINGS it faces such as high cost of drugs and insurance---are in part THE results of the inroads the SOCIALISTS AND LIBERALS have already made into our market based health care system.

THE REAL SOLUTION TO fixing HEALTHCARE ISN'T to make UNCLE SAME/DEMS your doctor ....BUT to GIVE YOU THE PUBLIC MORE CHOICE.

ALLOWING the DEMS socialize healthcare not only would prove expensive but DEADLY. Think about it?? DEMS WANT TO SPEND MORE MONEY BUT DENY PUBLIC the meds and services it needs while GOV POCKETS THE CASH TO SPEND ON PORK.

TAKE A LOOK .. 50% OF BRITISH AND NEW ZEALANDS WOMEN diagnosed with breast cancer DIE. however, HERE IN USA only 1/5th breast cancer sufferers DIE FROM IT. did you know hair dye are directly linked to breast cancer??

25 % CANADIA men and 50% of british men diagnosed with prostrate cancer die from it. HERE, IN USA less than 1/5th men die from it.

BRITISH-ER'S with serious illnesses are 7 times more likely to die from them than AMERICANS with such conditions.
BRITISH-ERS are also 4 times MORE likely to DIE during major surgery than Americans.

CANADIANS only HALF as many Canadians and only a THIRD as many british-er's as AMERICAN'S GET kidney dialysis, per capita

In NEW ZEALAND GOV WITHHOLDS kidney dialysis for patients over AGE 75.

THIS IS WHAT THE DEMS HAVE IN STORE FOR THE USA IF THEY ARE ALLOWED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR TAKEOVER OF HEALTHCARE SYSTEM.

GO SEE AMERICAN CENTER FOR LAW AND JUSTICE and THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH RIGHT AWAY

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

villager
Posted by: villager1 on Apr 14, 2009 11:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When are we going to learn that illness at some stages during life are actually part of life itself and that death is really unavoidable.

Health care is for those who are afraid to die - I have bad news for them!

In learning to accept that life is not perfect we can learn to live life better. Some folks are going to get sicker than others and some richer than others and everyone cannot have everything! Be grateful for the life that you have had, think about the good things that have happened to you and do not prolong agony any longer than is necessary. I personally see no point in prolonging terminal diseases or illnesses. This has nothing to do with the costs but with the dignity of the sufferer.

When the quality of life has gone then so has life itself!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

GO TO ENGLAND
Posted by: reelman on Apr 15, 2009 9:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wait 6 months to have a tooth removed...
IF we were not giving free everything to 12 million illegals who are also using our gas...how would that help?????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Your solution Posted by: NYmediator
» idiot liar! no wait on health care in UK Posted by: Frankenstein Dragon
Wolfgangmo is a Trogladyte.
Posted by: CStevenTucker on Apr 16, 2009 10:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
See I can call people names too! I've never seen it fail. When a Liberal Kool Aid Drinker is faced with irrefutable facts they respond with insults. You wonder why no one with a working cerebral cortex takes you and your party seriously. Why? Because you are RULED, ENSLAVED and GOVERNED by emotions. So much so that you can no longer rationally look at anything. You have lost the ability for critical thinking and plane old fashioned logic, and you wonder why the country is so divided. Frankly, those of us still capable of critical thought can no longer tolerate those governed solely by emotion. My advice to you? Grab some Kleenex, put down the Kool Aid, go read the Constitution and if you disagree, grab your passport, pack up your stuff and move to Canada where Health Care is FREE!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You Posted by: NYmediator
» RE: You Posted by: CStevenTucker
employer-based care is going away
Posted by: DrXyzzy on Apr 20, 2009 4:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I now have three close friends who are cancer survivors facing loss of employer-based health coverage. How will they pay for the treatment they need? Who will insure them? Who will hire them with full benefits?

According to the Illinois Main Street Alliance, 12% of small business polled in over a dozen states have dropped coverage altogether in the past two years while 35% report switching to coverage with less benefits. A few weeks ago, Hewitt Associates released a survey stating nearly 1/5 of U.S. employers will stop offering health benefits in the next 3-5 years, more than 5 times the number that reported that just last year.

This can't be about insurance. Insurers consider money spent taking care of people as a loss and premiums they keep for themselves as profit.

As a nation, we already pay more than enough to cover everyone. We need to remove profit-taking and the perverse, care-denying bureaucracy it engenders. Do that and we start saving lives tomorrow.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

you all slaves! Rise up!
Posted by: Frankenstein Dragon on Apr 22, 2009 12:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We dont need any bills or letters--they won't work and they won't listen. People--these evil thugs have very powerful interests--and they do not care about you--not one bit. They get billions from the evil powers that be--Big Pharma, insurance, WMD, polutting industries--causing your diseases! NO bill will ever ever ever pass! NO letters wil ever work!

Rise up! Take them down burn them out--rise up! Violence is the only way forward! Obama isnt listening. Obama is a slave!

Ending the war off the table
impeachment off the table
inquiries into 911 fraud--off the table
crimes against humanity on GB and cheney-off the table
torture off the table
national health care --off the table

Obama is a liar! Fuck obama! Fuck them all!
They are lairs! They don't care. Rise up! Burn them out!

Stop work stop work stop work! They need you. Stop work. Stop production. Stop service. Sabotage! Demand national health care and an investigation into war crimes!

Rise up! You live in a fascist nazi nation! They don't care what color you are--nor should they--you are all slaves!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement