YAY for Nationalized healthcare!

13 are injured in Pamplona's running of the bulls BUT THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY FOR THE HOSPITAL STAY! THE REST OF SPAIN PAYS FOR THESE IDIOTS!
YAY FOR NATIONALIZED HEALTHCARE!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080707/ap_on_re_eu/spain_running_of_the_bul...

PAMPLONA, Spain - Daredevils kicked off the running of the bulls Monday with a long, messy and particularly dangerous dash through the streets of Pamplona, with 13 people injured but none gored, officials said.

The half-mile sprint through cobblestone streets turned chaotic because the pack of six half-ton beasts became separated early in the route after plowing into a crowd of people, some of them spectators.

Some of the bulls fell and two ended up running on their own. One of those became disoriented, trying several times to turn around and go back toward the starting point. But herders waving sticks eventually guided it to the bull ring where the course ends.

Inside the ring one black bull fell down and stayed there for nearly a minute, as jubilant runners scampered about.

The Spanish Red Cross said 13 people were injured, with head, rib or other injuries from falling or getting trampled.
___________________________________________________
"Spain has a very good national health service that works alongside a wonderful private sector. Hospitals are of a very high standard. - You are best advised to take your own private travel insurance"
http://www.idealspain.com/Pages/Information/Healthcare.htm

No votes yet

Don't most industrial nations have socialized medicine? I mean, with the notable exception of the historically wealthiest nation on earth, the USA?

Don't those nations also permit people to do things like, say, running the bulls, skydiving, running motocross, lighting off fireworks, and all those other things which are dangerous but socially necessary to Human living?

What's the real difference here, with running the bulls, and in the USA, with attending an airshow? Some airshow accidents have impacted the crowd. Did the victims lay there in pools of their own blood while desperately seeking the proper paperwork, which they could wave to entrepreneurial ambulance drivers who showed up? No, they are ALL hauled off to the hospital, and those who couldn't pay for their care were forgiven.

THAT is why we actually have socialized medicine in the USA -- it's just perverse and dishonest. To get your socialized medicine dose, you either have to be poor, or your care require such a large cost that you can bankrupt out of it.

Yes, even private insurance exists to spread the costs on everyone in the plan, so this is sort of a socialized scheme. Should I have been penalized when I sliced my hand open on a piece of glass in a trash bag a few years ago? After all, I should have been more careful, right?

Or am I going to be denied a trip to the ER someday if I have a heart attack, since I knew I shouldn't have eaten those greasy french fries when I was in my 20s and 30s?

No, the bull runners got what they deserved: a good goring or trampling. No need to punish them further by throwing them in the street.

http://historymike.blogspot.com/

libs - so you think it's a good thing that people can injure themselves doing stupid shit like bull runs, and the public is expected to pay for their stupidity?

So if we adopt socialized medicine, we'll have to pass laws against smoking - ah, Ok, something else. Drinking! We'll pass a law against drinking!

Well, perhaps not. I'd suggest fast food, but then what would we do with all those workers from the now defunct grease pit. Plus, the cops will have no where to hang out, since dough nuts are bad for all of us.

Mandatory gym workouts! We'll pass a law stating that for every 500 calories we hog down, we must complete 1 hour of exercise. There now. That will take care of everything.

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack

Since I and the rest of America will be paying part of YOUR health insurance, I am totally within my rights to:
1) ban fast food for you stupid Americans who do not know that trans-fat is bad for you and results in me paying part of your cardiology visit

2) demand that you and your fat kids exercize daily because you stupid Americans are too fat and lazy to get off your butts, put down the Gameboy and take care of yourself.

3) I demand that America OUTLAW alcohol since I would have to pay part of your Cerosis treatments.

4) I demand that you stupid Americans GET RID OF YOUR CARS since all traffic fatalities are caused by people driving cars AND cars pollute, spewing 2nd hand smoke (a known carcinogen) into the ari.

5) Since I am paying part of YOUR healthcare, I demand that we OUTLAW all hazardous activities such as:
HIGH SCHOOL SPORTS
NASCAR
PRO FOOTBALL
PRO BASKETBALL
JAYWALKING
TWINKIES
BURGER KING
CIGAR SMOKING
BEER AND WINE
SWIMMING
ETC.

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a
socialist.

Why would we need to establish laws to ban anything?

The idea behind health care is to provide care related to health, not banning anything from the public consumption. There's money in people with ill health, if we were all healthy and not afflicted with health issues like diabetes, which is not always lifestyle related, we would have no need for health care.

The countries with nationalized health care do not have laws pertaining to stopping the practice of lighting up or popping into the pub for a pint or two.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_health_care

leave your mitts off NASCAR!

pick on the National Hockey League!

Did it ever occur to you that you don't need to demand restrictions on anything just to cover the "moron margin" in the public costs for nationalized healthcare?

You can just set standards which are easily detected at the clinic or hospital ("hey look, this guy's fuckin' FAT"), and instead of getting your service for "free", you are sent a BILL.

In fact, by using a periodic physical program combined with the national system of healthcare, all this can be determined BEFORE service is ever granted, and then you are simply FINED. That "fine" can be called an INSURANCE PREMIUM. Massachusetts is effectively doing that now, by mandating that everyone be covered by insurance. At least in my proposed case, you can CHOOSE your level of participation. If you dare to show up for your physical all fat, with cheetos remnants around your mouth, and blood test results that you frankly FAILED, then you are then CHOOSING to pay health insurance for the next year ... until you shape up, or continue to decide that you want to be an insurance payer.

Whaddaya think of that, LCBM? You can't possibly have a rational argument against it. It brings back personal responsibility, and forces the voluntarily-unhealthy fatties to pay for that "moron margin" you're so hot about.

"Why would we need to establish laws to ban anything?
The idea behind health care is to provide care related to health, not banning anything from the public consumption."

Yet even without socialized healthcare, Ohio has banned smoking in public because of the "health concerns over second-hand smoke".

It is already happening. What makes you so nieve to think that, with the success of banning smoking, other items and actions cannot be far behind? And when the un-insured currently living in America have a voice on YOUR healthcare, you know that you will loose some rights.

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a
socialist.

...Under a national law that came into effect two months ago, companies and local governments must now measure the waistlines of Japanese people between the ages of 40 and 74 as part of their annual checkups...To reach its goals of shrinking the overweight population by 10 percent over the next four years and 25 percent over the next seven years, the government will impose financial penalties on companies and local governments that fail to meet specific targets.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/world/asia/13fat.html?_r=1&no_intersti...

- Just the KAT, thinking out loud again.

If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth. ~Japanese Proverb

"CHOOSING to pay health insurance for the next year ... until you shape up, or continue to decide that you want to be an insurance payer."

So the "choice" YOU want to force people to take invades their personal choice ALONG with mine? Seems like the only "choice" you liberals want people to have is whether or not you can abort a baby.

Well, those who decide not to purchase health insurance NOW also have the choice not to purchase healthcare. If YOU want those irresponsible people to have healthcare, why don't you DONATE money to them? Leave my healthcare plan alone and keep your hands out of my pocket. Or, if you are so eager to help, give your paycheck to me.

If YOU want to force the uninsured to have healthcare, pass a law making them buy it and pay for it. It has worked so well for your car insurance.

THEY have already made the choice NOT to purchase healthcare. You want to take away their choice to be morons by forcing law-abiding responsible people to take up their slack.

Think about this. You live in Ohio. Ohio has a LAW that you MUST have car insurance.

Yet you, assuming you are a responsible person, have auto insurance. And, in Ohio, that auto insurance HAS to have "un-insured motorist" coverage, right?

WHY? If those people can afford cars, can afford gas, can afford to repair those cars and can afford the license plates, why do YOU have to have "uninsured motorist" coverage? Could it be that those other people forcing YOU to buy uninsured motorist coverage have made the choice to be irresponsible? And now you want to reward the irresponsible by giving them healthcare too?

Because THEIR irresponsibility is costing YOU money. And now you want to make it worse. Liberals like you giving people free money, free food, a free place to live, and now free healthcare ARE TAKING AWAY EVERY INCENTIVE TO WORK FOR A LIVING. Why should ANYONE get a job, get an education or try to improve themselves at all?

Socialism didn't work in the Soviet Union and it won't work here.

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a
socialist.

In other words, you don't accept any way the system is arranged.

You DO realize that people get free healthcare all the time in the USA, don't you? They are taking YOUR money right the fuck out of YOUR wallet, which you hold so dear. They get treatment due to life-threat, and then they just don't pay, or bankrupt out of it. Want to toss a guess at who really pays those stranded costs, smart ass?

You wanted to know how a national healthcare system could work, by holding those responsible who NEEDED to be held responsible. So I told you. You then tore into that. What do you want, guy? You won't accept ANY system, since any possible system supports some fraction of free-loaders.

And if you have healthcare through your place of work, YOU are just being another freeloader. The average premium paid by workplaces in the Toledo area is about $500/month. Are YOUR premiums through your employer $500/month? FUCK NO. So that makes you just another welfare recipient.

Bother to make sense about what healthcare REALLY looks like, and what it COULD look like, and you'll end up looking less foolish than you do now. Remember, we ALREADY have socialized medicine in the USA -- it's just DISHONEST. And it can't change at the point of service since our society will NEVER get so demented that we'll leave people to die at the entryways of hospitals for their failure to provide payment for their emergency needs. Is that what you're hoping will happen? It seems that's what you're aiming for.

Besides NOT being able to discriminate against FAT people like you said you want to do in an earlier post?

Yes, currently we all pay for those who are NOT insured. Isn't that what you wanted with your socialist healthcare anyway?

The biggest difference NOW is that we do not reward those irresponsible twits by proactively giving them money. If they want "free" healthcare now, THEY can be taken to collections and penalized for being irresponsible and the healthcare industry can at least attempt to collect some of the debt that the lazy incurred, sometimes successfully. If they want "free" healthcare now, they CAN declare bankruptcy like you say, and get out of paying for it. There is SOME money you and I have to come up with, but the irresponsible are STILL punished by not being able to take out loans due to bad credit.

It is the Democratic idea of "survival of the fittest". Like Darwins theory, those who do not adapt, die out. And I know Libs LOVE that.

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a
socialist.

LCBM, you have a real reading disability and I urge you to get some professional education to help you overcome it. I said:

"Remember, we ALREADY have socialized medicine in the USA -- it's just DISHONEST."

I even put the word "dishonest" in capital letters to attract your attention. Did you really NOT notice?

The current system is DISHONEST. It only allocates healthcare for the helpless based upon deceit. That's a problem and that should be fixed.

However, we cannot fix it by denying service based upon ability to pay. That's not how our culture is constructed. What's the Hippocratic Oath, again? How old is that oath?

Apparently I do not understand your point, if you actually have one.

I did read your post. It made very little sense to me. You want to fix healthcare how? And why?

For instance, you said "we cannot fix it by denying service based upon ability to pay. That's not how our culture is constructed." somehow implying that I want the stupid and uninsured to die in the streets. That is NOT what I said and, if your opinion mattered to me, I would be offended at your insinuation.

What I said was, if people currently CHOOSE not to have health insurance, then they have choosen to PAY CASH OUT OF POCKET for healthcare. Same as car insurance. Not carrying car insurance does NOT mean I have to fix YOUR car for YOU. Not carrying car insurance does NOT mean you are "off the hook" for paying damages if you are in an accident.

Not having car insurance just means you are going to pay out of pocket. And if you don't have the money to pay for damages caused by you out of pocket, then someone (a lawyer) WILL DOCK YOUR WAGES including everything you may make in the future. And once a judgement is rendered, the ONLY way out is chapter 13, which means you WILL give up your house, your car, etc. etc and the value will go to pay your creditors. Too bad for you if you choose NOT to have car insurance., but NOT MY PROBLEM so don't try and make it my problem.

So, if the uninsured show up at the hospital, treat them, bill them. and when they don't pay, SUE THEM. Just like every other business in the WORLD does to deadbeats. Why should the "poor" get special treatment when you and I will get treated to a lawsuit if we don't pay. (assuming you actually work for a living).

I guess I don't understand what is so MAGICAL about health insurance. It is just like life insurance, car insurance, home insurance etc. etc. If you don't buy it, you and ONLY you, are taking YOUR chances.

Don't have health or car insurance and you (or your family, NOT mine) is sh!t out of luck.

If you want to make health insurance and healthcare free, then why not make car insurance, car repairs, oil changes, house repairs, house insurance and everything else free? After all, driving and a house are equally a "right" afforded by the Constitution right?

The only difference is that if you get caught without health insurance, you don't have to go to court like you do without car insurance.

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a
socialist.

I realize that you may not be aware of this, but uninsured lower-income people already get free care.

State law requires that hospitals provide free care to anyone with an income at or below the federal poverty level. And there is a sliding fee scale for individuals with incomes up to 150% of the federal poverty level.

A family of 4 with an household income of $35-40K would qualify to have a huge chunk of their cost of care waived. (Can't think of the exact percentage for that bracket right now...think the discount would be over 50% though.)

Part of this uncompensated care is reimbursed by the federal government through HCAP (Hospital Care Assurance Program)...in other words, free care for uninsured lower income individuals.

Here's a fact sheet on HCAP from the Ohio Hospital Association:
http://www.ohanet.org/hcap/

(If you check out that link, you can see what's required as far as charity care goes, who is eligible, etc.)

At least in Ohio, you all already are paying for socialized healthcare. How much are you Ohioians paying out of your taxes for FREE healthcare for the irresponsible?
2007 Total Available HCAP Funds $547,960,000

That's 1/2 a BILLION dollars of YOUR taxes. 1/2 a BILLION dollars TAKEN OUT OF YOUR PAYCHECKS. I wonder how many Ohio taxpayers CANNOT AFFORD TO SEE A DOCTOR because they are unlucky enough to HAVE A JOB?

"Provider assessments levied against all acute care and freestanding hospitals in Ohio generate the basic funding source for this program. These assessment dollars are pooled with matching federal Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) funds. This pool is then distributed back to the hospitals based on a formula that uses Medicaid costs and uncompensated care costs as proxies for measuring the relative level of each hospital's indigent care services to statewide indigent care services."
http://www.ohanet.org/hcap/default.htm

"Under the provisions of section 5112.17 of the Revised Code, each hospital that receives payment under the provisions of Chapter 5112. of the Revised Code, shall provide, without charge to the individual, basic, medically necessary hospital-level services to the individual who is a resident of this state, is not a recipient of the medicaid program and whose income is at or below the federal poverty line"
http://codes.ohio.gov/oac/5101:3-2-07.17

So whatever BOTH of the candidates are saying about socialized medicine is BS, at least for Ohioians.

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a
socialist.

Michigan suffers the same fate, with regards to health insurance as does most of the states.

" * The percent of Michigan residents without health insurance (including both private and governmental) for an entire year has been below the national average every year since 1987 with the greatest difference in 1988 (5.5 percent in Michigan vs. 12.2 percent U.S.) and the least difference in 1998 (15.1 percent vs. 11.5 percent)
* The highest percentage of uninsured occurred in 1998 near the height of the 1990's economic boom.
* The number of Michigan residents without health insurance decreased each year from 1998 through 2000.
* In 2000, 72.7 percent of those with insurance in Michigan were covered through an employer-based plan compared with 64.1 percent nationwide.
* Michigan hospitals reported charges of $1.1 billion for uninsured and uncompensated care in 2000 with associated costs of $456.2 million after accounting for recoveries, offsets and private payment receipts.
* Of the 150 hospitals, 129 showed losses from uninsured and uncompensated care in amounts ranging from $48.6 million to $1,967 million. Ten hospitals reported no cost and 12 hospitals showed positive income as receipts exceeded costs. "

http://www.crcmich.org/PUBLICAT/2000s/2002/memo1061.html

"* Michigan, Maine and Denver County, Colo., are providing subsidies or other financial incentives to encourage small employers to start providing health insurance. The Oregon Legislature voted this year to offer tax credits to small employers that provide coverage to previously uninsured workers. Florida is setting up a nonprofit corporation to help arrange health insurance for such workers."

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DEEDE1E3FF931A15752C1A...

My husband pays dearly for our health insurance, deducted out of his paycheck automatically (a good sum), & also 'sold' vacation time & half his life insurance - just to be able to 'afford' Daimler's health insurance (for him & me, nobody else) - which amounts to a deductable of $2,400. - it's like having no insurance at all really. (and this was the most 'affordable' plan). We've been buried in medical bills over the years. Meanwhile, I know of many unemployed, and/or alcoholic people who've gotten free medical & dental care for decades. And yet, my 25 yr old unemployed daughter has had problems getting on plans to help her, because they base it on our income because she lives here. So we've been paying for her medical & dental care. In this country, if you are poor, you've got it made as far as free medical & dental care.

On the flip side - I oppose govt. controlled health care because if the govt pays, it will also dictate the quality & cost of care, and also how we live our lives.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.