User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 98

  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    In the current system, resources are rationed based on ability to pay. A better rationing system would be based on ability to benefit.
    What if everyone could benefit, but there isn't enough to go around? Then the ones who will get to the head of the queue will be those with influence. Communist countries supposedly allocate resources on the basis of need, but the end results are no different from capitalist ones when it comes to equality. On top of that, without a profit motive, productivity decreases.

  2. #32
    Freaking Ratchet Rail Tracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,041

    Default

    Either never or it'll be a long time down the road. After all, our culture still seems to be in the previous couple decades.

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    What if everyone could benefit, but there isn't enough to go around? Then the ones who will get to the head of the queue will be those with influence. Communist countries supposedly allocate resources on the basis of need, but the end results are no different from capitalist ones when it comes to equality. On top of that, without a profit motive, productivity decreases.
    False. A person may work more if the person does not need to stress about paying for their own health. If you set aside health concerns and making end's needs, you'd find many are willing to work more because there is less to worry about except for the job at hand. Productivity does increase if the worker has less to worry about outside of work.

    Also, Germany and many of the Northern European countries are doing just fine from what I heard. Of course, it is true that the U.S. is bigger compared to those countries. We can definitely learn from them even though they are smaller (but if we are going to talk about immigration, Germany... along with Japan might be the last countries to ask .)

  3. #33
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,581

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    What if everyone could benefit, but there isn't enough to go around? Then the ones who will get to the head of the queue will be those with influence. Communist countries supposedly allocate resources on the basis of need, but the end results are no different from capitalist ones when it comes to equality. On top of that, without a profit motive, productivity decreases.
    There are no true communist countries, and there never were. The U.S. is already considering a better way to allocate organs available for donation. Currently, it is first-come-first-served. A kidney, for instance, will go to the person who has been on the waiting list longest, even if it is an 82-year-old with other heath issues. or, the available kidney could have come from an 82-year-old, while the person waiting longest is 25. If this person gets the kidney, it is highly likely he/she will need another before long. A similar process could be established for other types of medical procedures. The greater transparency and freedom of expression we enjoy relative to "communist" countries are a significant difference in how benefit-based rationing schemes would play out.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  4. #34
    Senior Member The Great One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    6w7
    Posts
    3,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ReadingRainbows View Post
    Single payer insurance would be the Government. The fact that there are insurance companies at all is one of the main reasons healthcare is terribly expensive. Insurance companies get lower rates than individuals paying cash, which is sad.
    I'm not really sure how the system would work, but here is what I am afraid of: I once tried to get insurance through the government and it was hell to get, and when I did get it, the waiting list to see the doctor was ungodly long. I've heard they have similar problems in Canada.

  5. #35
    Cat Wench ReadingRainbows's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    1,899

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great One View Post
    I'm not really sure how the system would work, but here is what I am afraid of: I once tried to get insurance through the government and it was hell to get, and when I did get it, the waiting list to see the doctor was ungodly long. I've heard they have similar problems in Canada.
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/permiss...alth-care.html
    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    St. Stephen took rocks and St. Sebastian took arrows. You only have to take some jerks on an internet forum. Nut up.

  6. #36
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great One View Post
    I'm not really sure how the system would work, but here is what I am afraid of: I once tried to get insurance through the government and it was hell to get, and when I did get it, the waiting list to see the doctor was ungodly long. I've heard they have similar problems in Canada.
    Are you kidding?

    National insurance in the UK, which I presume is the same as Canada, is automatic, you pay it like income tax when you are employed, if you are not employed you are entitled to the same service, in either case you may wait but you eventually receive a service, which is better than NEVER receiving the service because you do not have the money and have no means of acquiring it either.

    I've never had to wait too long for any day procedure from the NHS, I can get an appointment with a GP if I'm ill, on an emergency basis, that day or the following day, the most I've waited for a planned consultation/appointment with my designated GP (as opposed to any GP available on an emergency basis) has been three weeks, the waiting times are reduced for children or the elderly although to me that is logical since they are less capable to waiting than most adults members of the population.

    For big procedures, such as surgery, when I was a child and experienced illness warranting those interventions I waited, at the most a month. The only obscenely long wait I've ever experienced arose as a consequence of a new hospital being built and my records being displaced or destroyed in their relocation to the new facility and my not mentioning the complaint with any regularity, ie not believing it was "that bad", it was a muscle and bone injury.

    When I did discover the problem hadnt gone away I got immediate treatment, in fact I got seen by a number of professionals, podiatrists, physiotherapists, consultants and had an scan done privately, further I had some x-rays done and finally was flown, with my dad, to a private hospital in the north of england, they laid on all transport, plane, taxi, laid on accomodation for my dad in a neighbouring holiday inn, I had surgery, got physio, got flight back, got futher physio and was cured.

    In the case of that snafu it took three to five years to get it sorted, although I was not incapacitated throughout that time or as a result, without the extenuating circumstances I'd have been seen within the year.

    When I was diagnosed with diabetes I saw a nurse specialist THAT DAY, I mean within minutes of diagnosis, I saw a range of professionals within in following weeks, tested my eyes, feet, bloods, saw a dietician. None of it at a personal expense on the days I saw them, all of which was scheduled at my convenience. If I ever want a battery of tests on my blood etc. all I have to do is go up the road to my local health centre and wait to be seen in the tratement room, which could take a couple hours but has never taken more than three.

    If I ever have an accident I can go to any hospital and be treated immediately, with no more than a three hour wait.

    Also all prescriptions I may get at a GP or A&E appointment are tax funded so I incur no personal expense having paid my taxes already.

  7. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rail Tracer View Post
    False. A person may work more if the person does not need to stress about paying for their own health. If you set aside health concerns and making end's needs, you'd find many are willing to work more because there is less to worry about except for the job at hand. Productivity does increase if the worker has less to worry about outside of work.
    You think most people will naturally gravitate towards work harder in the absence of incentives?

  8. #38
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    You think most people will naturally gravitate towards work harder in the absence of incentives?
    What incentives? Most management text books suggest people are motivated by things other than hard cash anyway.

  9. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    The greater transparency and freedom of expression we enjoy relative to "communist" countries are a significant difference in how benefit-based rationing schemes would play out.
    I think I misunderstood what you were advocating. Would the allocation be based on benefits to society, or benefits to the recipient?

  10. #40
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,881

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fia View Post
    Even though I know that nationalized healthcare is a tried and true approach throughout the world, I have some hesitation in implementing it in the U.S. I think the current system is broken and destructive to have so much money going to insurance and pharmaceutical companies who only care about profits for the stockholders. The culture of the system has to be changed because it is currently profit-oriented and exploitive. I feel concern that if it were transformed into a government based system that the culture would remain and the exploitive issues would be transferred to the new government system. I do not claim to be the expert, but I have wondered if changing the system to one in which any company that deals with vulnerable populations like the sick is required by law to be non-profit. They could still use the free-market to compete, but first eliminating this focus on stockholders, I wonder if that would help change the culture and then the question of nationalizing it could be readdressed if needed. It may be possible that non-profit status could help fix some of the worst underlying issues.
    I have government-ran health insurance.. Many of the courtesies extended to civilians are NOT extended to us. It has been a struggle to get a certain kind of birth control via government insurance, even though this is usually never a problem for others since that law passed that all forms of BC must be paid for/available for women in their insurances. Getting something as simple as a camera down my throat to confirm ulcers took a full day of me yelling on the phone and calling people over and over again. I literally spent 3 hours worth of on-the-phone talk time with people in total. I timed it. Also, the whole "You get health insurance until you're 26 !!" thing is not extended to us. Tricare is exempt from that courtesy last I heard on it. So even though civilian insurances provide insurance for college students until graduation, the government does not.

    The profit oriented mentality sucks. It really does... What sucks even worse is when they don't make a profit at all and thus get very apathetic. It didn't matter that I couldn't consume food until I was treated, they wanted me to wait 3 days to get the examination approved by their long-distance doctors that have never seen me face-to-face or know of my situation in detail like my PCM did. Because they wanted to make sure that the doctor ordering it was ordering a 'necessary' procedure. The word necessary gets turned against you really, really fast.
    Kantgirl: Just say "I'm feminine and I'll punch anyone who says otherwise!"
    Halla74: Think your way through the world. Feel your way through life.

    Cimarron: maybe Prpl will be your girl-bud
    prplchknz: i don't like it

    In Search Of... ... Kiwi Sketch Art ... Dream Journal ... Kyuuei's Cook book ... Kyu's Tiny House Blog ... Minimalist Challenge ... Kyu's Savings Challenge

Similar Threads

  1. When did the term alt-right get expanded to encompass anyone not on the far left?
    By asynartetic in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 99
    Last Post: 10-09-2017, 08:54 PM
  2. Why are we pessmistic when the world is getting better?
    By Typh0n in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 12-22-2016, 05:50 PM
  3. Replies: 34
    Last Post: 11-15-2016, 03:27 PM
  4. When will we see the return of the hero?
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 12-31-2014, 12:45 PM
  5. Replies: 81
    Last Post: 03-16-2008, 09:46 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO