Why not compare meals at the most expensive restaurant with meals eaten by welfare recipients? A health care system for the poor will certainly not look like a system for everyone.
It sounds like Philly is using what funds it can to help people without any other safety net. It is immoral and shameful that the state of PA does not care for its own, adequately and that the nation does not.
Your article just proves the need for universal health care for all. Every other G7 Industrialized nation provides this core service that any civilized, humane society should provide. There is NO excuse for the US not doing it. And the halfway measures that Clinton and Obama offer are not good enough.
by
Rob Kall (761 articles, 3850 quicklinks, 320 diaries, 1642 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 5:34:07 AM
Wouldn't it be smarter to reverse philly's ridiculous tax structure, bloated government, & business climate so the economy can recover & people could afford healthcare there? Instead you propose doing exactly what will make Philly poorer, more gov expence, which means more taxes, which means more poverty.
To make healthcare more affordable how about stopping the government's paying for 1/2 of all medical care in this country. Pumping that kind of money into the system inevitably rises prices. (Think higher education.)
Since healthcare is the coming together of three of the most regulated industries there are (medical, pharmceutical, & insurance) it's no wonder that it's in crisis. Let free markets work & you'll see it turn around.
n the developed nations that do have universal health care .
. . . coverage, you see the same types of things. In our neighbors to the north, a referral to a specialist has an average wait of between 14 weeks in the best province, to over half a year in a couple of them. Take a trip across the pond, and you'll find where some regions of the British National Health Service have been ordered by the government to delay appointments for eight weeks, all because of the money.
Let's be brutally honest here: there is no free ride, and universal health care coverage, whether an idiotic plan like Mrs Clintons or a single payer system, is going to cost huge amounts of money and provide far worse service than that to which we are accustomed.
You live near Philly; if you listen to the radio, you've certainly heard the commercials for centers suggesting you come in for a "baseline" MRI. We've got scads of MRI machines, purchased to make a profit, while in Canada, if you need an MR through the government health care system, the average wait is six weeks.
Look at the city oovernment in Philadelphia, Mr Kall: they foul up virtually everything! The city fathers may be well intentioned, they may be "progressive," they may want onlty the best for the citizens of Philadelphia, but they couldn't manage a one-employee video store.
You complain that Philadelphia is doing all that it can with limited resources. Well, the city taxes and taxes and taxes some more, trying everything it can to suck money out of commuters, and all that they do is drive people and businesses out of the city.
by
Dana Pico (5 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 142 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 8:05:52 PM
Your comments indicate that you are clueless about what single-payer healthcare is. If we had it the horrendous conditions outlined in that article would be a thing of the past.
What single-payer does is to give all our citizens access to private healthcare by creating a government apparatus to administer the mechanism by which the deliverers of healthcare are compensated. It is a good thing that the City of Philadelphia has clinics to help the poor who often must do without healthcare, but obviously they are poorly funded. Under a single-payer system those clinics would get paid for the care they administer.
Single-payer healthcare is not government-run healthcare. It is privately delivered healthcare that is publicly funded. There is a huge difference. Perhaps you should learn a little more about the subject before you write about it further. Your good intentions do not make up for the fact that you are spreading disinformation.
by
Jerry Policoff (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 12:29:29 PM
It's true that the first paragraph is a non sequitor, or maybe I should say the article is the non sequitor. That doesn't change the facts presented. Gov health care, whether outright socialism or single payer, don't work. They result in long waits & are terribly expensive.
It works for the rest of the civilized world, and they have healthcare that is better, cheaper, and very often delivered with shorter wait times than we do. I don't think you have any diea what you are talking about. Don't waste my time with links. Explain yourself if you are capable of doing that.
by
Jerry Policoff (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 3:14:55 PM
My aren't we testy, I must be doing something right.
The ones who don't know what they're talking about are those who say that governments are providing good healthcare. I saw in Venezuela how poor the public hospitals were compared to the private ones. Matter of fact, many docs over there volunteer their time at the public hospitals. Something they couldn't do if they weren't making enough in their private practices. This is an example of the private sector saving the socialist sector from itself.
The stories of people waiting for or being denied treatment in Canada are legion. Often money is "saved", but at what cost? Watch this video.
by
Darren Wolfe (4 articles, 125 quicklinks, 79 diaries, 598 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 6:38:24 PM
i don't know much about government run health care or single payer health coverage as I have experienced neither. Let me tell you what I have experienced as an insured American using private pay health care. When I go to the doctor very little time is spent with me as a patient, drugs are suggested for any ailments I may have,very seldom do they mention diet or exercise as solutions. I feel the pharmaceutical companies have trained the doctors to basically push their product regardless of actual need. Increasing profits seems to be the main goal of health care providers not the well being of the patient. My family members have gotten good results when procedures requiring hospital stay or surgery most of the time but when they did make a mistake they charged for correcting it and my sister paid the bill and did not sue them. surgeries and procedures are very expensive, this is a problem that gets very little print.
by
Gary Denson (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 208 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 7:19:16 PM
