Health care in Colorado
Each plan creates new state bureaucracies, anticipates increased federal health care subsidies to Colorado, and call for new and/or increased taxes.
Moreover, these plans assume that government’s role is to ensure that each individual has a doctor (a medical home) and that the patient is forced to seek medical care from that doctor as controlled by the plan.
Many today, even with insurance, choose not to go to doctors until they are so ill they end up in hospitals. The answer is force?
These plans assume that people cannot be informed about healthy lifestyles and alternatives. They assume that people must be forced to limit consumption of junk food, coffee, alcohol, or cigarettes
Civilization began when people used reason rather than force in human transactions. The mark of a developed civilization is the extent to which people are free and are not compelled
This letter has not been edited.
and your point is what? the nanny state of democrats for colorado know everything that is good for you. not everyone will see increased taxes to pay for this only those who smoke or drink as the are now going to increase those taxes to once again afford insurance for uninsured kids. at some point they are going to tax the real issue of unhealthly living and start to tax junk food.
dont worry though it will all be force upon you because these all knowing wonderful people are just out for their egos, oops I mean you.
Lin says: "The mark of a developed civilization is the extent to which people are free and are not compelled "
Hmm, the more anarchy there is, the more freedom there is. That is civilization?
Posted by Truth on August 7, 2007 02:57 PMI do have some questions that I will throw out there.
The numbers that I see are 15.9% of American's are uninsured. 15.9% So, my questions are:
How many of those 15.9% choose not to be insured, because they are gambling on not getting ill?
Why is it that of the uninsured, Hispanics (32.7%) and African Americans (19.6%) represent the highest amount percentages?
Is this really a "national crisis" when less than 16% are without insurance?
I mean really, when looking at the numbers and the numbers alone, what could we be thinking in having an overwhelming majority change everything for such a minor problem?
Posted by Dan2 on August 7, 2007 03:03 PMLin said ” Civilization began when people used reason rather than force in human transactions”
In that case it hasn’t started yet, when can we expect this wonderful day to dawn?
More likely it “started” when we began to have governments and standardization of money, law, and language.
” Many today, even with insurance, choose not to go to doctors until they are so ill they end up in hospitals. The answer is force?”
Nope, although that seems to be the natural expectation of the Conservative. The answer is to educate and make access easier. But more to the point, to remove the need for clinical care wherever possible through social and healthcare changes.
Why wait until you need a doctor to address a problem?
Dan2 said ” How many of those 15.9% choose not to be insured, because they are gambling on not getting ill? “
I give up Dan, please tell me.
While you are doing that, could you also explain why it should be necessary for somebody to gamble on healthcare?
02:46 said ” at some point they are going to tax the real issue of unhealthly living and start to tax junk food”
Nice idea, but how about we just stop subsidizing junk food?
Like if we stopped taking tax money to subsidize corn we wouldn’t have people selling our corn in Mexico at lower than it cost to produce and thus producing unemployment there leading to illegal immigration here, and all those unhealthy illegals needing our health services?
It would also bring corn-syrup laced softdrinks up to their rightful price and lead to fewer kids taking in excess kilojoules and getting obese – which of course leads to increased healthcare costs and lost productivity.
Shall we do that at least, or is it preferable to have high healthcare costs in order to subsidize corn production?
Posted by Bango Skank on August 7, 2007 03:45 PMBango - Many in the 18 - 35 range choose not be buy health insurance because they are healthy and prefer to pay for any needed services out of pocket. I lived this way for many years and paid less than if I had paid for insurance.
In Dan2's 15.9% there are also appx 8.5 million making $50000 - $75000 and another 8.5 million making over $75000.
Median income is appx $45000. These 17 million I listed are obvioulsy not in need of government intervention.
If you subtract these people, and the roughly 12 million here illegally, we've just cut the "involuntarily" uninsured number down to less than 10%. And as Dan2 askes, why do we need to overhaul the entire system to help such a small percentage when minor adjustments to the system would cover them?
I've asked before but never get an answer. Why can't we have a voluntary system to help those that truly need the insurance and let the rest of us continue with private insurance. Without being force to buy into something we don't want or need?
Posted by KW on August 7, 2007 04:19 PMDan 2: "I mean really, when looking at the numbers and the numbers alone, what could we be thinking in having an overwhelming majority change everything for such a minor problem?"
We spend twice as much for health care as many universal health care countries. If we spent at the same rate as they do, we would save about a trillion dollars.
Minor problem?
15.9% of 300 million is about 47 million, including some 8.3 million children. By the way, each of these people is a human being, not just a statistic. Some people don't seem to know the difference.
Minor problem?
Posted by Truth on August 7, 2007 04:36 PMTruth: "If we spent at the same rate as they do, we would save about a trillion dollars."
Who's we? The money being spent is primarily private dollars, not public. This is a free country where people get to choose how they spend their money, is it not?
Now you can list several other programs that require our contribution and say see, we do it already. But listing other failures isn't a good argument to expand on those failures, is it?
KW said ” Many in the 18 - 35 range choose not be buy health insurance because they are healthy and prefer to pay for any needed services out of pocket. I lived this way for many years and paid less than if I had paid for insurance.”
So you are one of the bastards driving up healthcare costs eh?
The rates are worked out according to lifetime risks and the insurance companies rely on the fact that the subscribers will be paying in more than drawing when they are young and healthy which offsets the costs later when they are old and needing clinical care.
By opting out as you have done, you have placed an additional burden on everybody else – who will have contributed towards your old age.
If we stuck you with the full bill for your actual risk burden, you would be paying significantly more than you are now.
How does is feel to be a freeloader and parasite eh KW?
If everybody who was healthy opted out as you did, the costs of healthcare later when you wanted it would be orders of magnitude higher. In fact if we go that way then pooled risk and insurance cease to be functional and we might as well make everybody just pay as they go. So what you would find then is at age 55 when you need to visit a doctor to sort out why it hurts when you pee, consultation would cost maybe $3,000 per visit.
Bango,
I was actually asking the question, to discover the answer. I don't know, and I would like to.
Thanks for checking on those facts KW. I appreciate it.
Truth,
To overhaul a system entirely, based on 15.9% of the population, needs to be justified. And in using KW's numbers, that number drops to 28 million, or about 9.3% of the population. You don't think that we can assist those 9.3% without a total over-haul of our system? A gamble system in which we put our faith in our GOVERNMENT?
I have stated many times, a state system is the way to go. It would be constitutional, have direct over-sight and adjustment as needed on a state by state basis, and not a one size fits all approach. We have tried the one size fits all approach on education, and it has failed terribly.
But, in Truth's mind, he would rather take the same approach we did in Iraq, when it comes to national health care. Let's dive right in and we'll figure it out as we go along... That is working out really well, isn't it?
Posted by Dan2 on August 7, 2007 04:53 PMSo Bango, you would prefer that we "make" those that are healthy, buy insurance to offset the amount that those who VOLUNTARILY purchase health insurance? Seems rather totalitarian doesn't it?
What if we ALL decided not to pay for insurance, but instead put money in our own health savings accounts (tax free or not)? Wouldn't that, in theory, drive the cost of health care down, because it would remove the paper work of the health industry, and it's associated costs?
These are all good discussions to have, as they influence the spending habits of our citizens, and the cost in health care.
We discuss the cost, but right now it is not a MANDATED cost, but instead a voluntary cost. One we can choose to make or not make.
Posted by Dan2 on August 7, 2007 05:01 PMBango: "So you are one of the bastards driving up healthcare costs eh? (and) How does is feel to be a freeloader and parasite eh KW?"
Getting a wee bit testy are we Bango?
I just love it when people like you get so frustrated when confronted and exposed for your socialistic diatribe that you have to resort to insults.
I'll respond to your drival just to correct you're illogical, mindless approach to this.
You my friend, who sees it as your right to tax everyone to cover a small percentage of uninsured, are the real parasite. A leach on society that will eventually become an open, festering pusshole.
I've never collected one thing from the government. No welfare, no state provided healthcare and I've never even filed for unemployment. You on the other hand probably have your rent paid by section 8 and cashed in your food stamps for drugs.
I was raised to be self sufficient, to budget my expenses, to plan ahead for shortfalls, to choose an employer who provides the salary and benefits I need to live a long and healthy life, and I would NEVER expect anyone else to be picking up my tab.
Now go earn something for a change and quit posting such ridiculous drivel.
Posted by KW on August 7, 2007 05:15 PMFace it, Bango Skank is just a flaming socialist who will reply to anything as if it's only natural for everybody to pony for the welfare of everybody else.
The concepts of self control, self determination, and, especially, self sufficiency via personal responsibility are totally alien to him. He's apparently been on the public dole all his life and doesn't know that there's a real world out there. A real world of people who actually do take responsibility for their own well being.
I know that sounds amazing; but he's just an example of a whole subset of society which can't think and care for themselves -- and they walk among us pretending to be "normal"
Posted by Trinity on August 7, 2007 05:28 PMI am hurting people, I know I am just .000001 % of the population, but i need your money, help!
whos going to help ?
Posted by Fresh on August 7, 2007 05:52 PMFor all of you who think your personal choices led to your healthy life and ability to pay for your own health care, read a good book on statistics.
Pay attention to the bell curve, and realise that it is statistically predictable that a certain % of a population will be in your category.
You could have been hit with an accident, a genetic disorder or a contagious disease that would not respect your life choices.
In other words, fellows, you have been lucky. The gods of chance and happenstance have smiled on you and kept you from ruin over a medical problem.
Don`t feel so smug, others made the same good choices and failed, because statistically speaking, it was possible, probable or the odds were just against them.
We can`t run a health care system only on the assumption that people will be like you.
Also the % of uninsured is then around 48 million people out of 300 million. That is pathetic.
If I am spelling this right there is a great book about why bad things happen to good people called "innumeracy" a take off on illiteracy.
People who do not understand stats and probability quite often pat themselves on the back for their good choices. But the longer you live, the greater your odds, chances or probability of disaster rises.
Bully for you KW and all like you, now let us sensibly discuss the health care system in this country and not your great personal lives and choices.
Posted by Sharon B. on August 7, 2007 06:15 PMAnd here I thought Conservatives were against freeloaders, who knew that they aspire to it.
KW said ” I just love it when people like you get so frustrated when confronted and exposed for your socialistic diatribe that you have to resort to insults.”
That’s because you didn’t understand.
I don’t resort to insults, especially in your case, I take glee in insulting you, it is a source of inestimable pleasure to me.
” I've never collected one thing from the government. No welfare, no state provided healthcare and I've never even filed for unemployment.”
Your problem is that you don’t really understand how things work, whether that be government, economics, health, science, climate, and so on and so forth.
So this leads you to think that getting education isn’t subsidized, that getting protection isn’t subsidized, and getting healthcare isn’t subsidized.
You have sucked deeply on the social teat KW, and the milk is still wet on your turkey neck.
You also obviously are clueless about insurance.
As I said, you are right at this moment sponging off others because you didn’t pay in your fair share when you were younger.
You will do so even more when you get older, and in the last two years of your life you will cost everyone money because you get coverage without being a full contributer.
You are a sponger KW, face it.
Luckily most people aren’t.
” You on the other hand probably have your rent paid by section 8 and cashed in your food stamps for drugs.”
Nope, paid my own way, invest in the social good, buy American wherever possible, pay taxes (even though I cant vote) and Social Security (for which I can never claim), and I understood when I was young that I had to contribute to the insurance because the risks were calculated over a lifetime. I invested in education, paid my own way, did my military service, and contribute to the social good.
Whereas of course, you are just a freeloader.
” I was raised to be self sufficient, to budget my expenses, to plan ahead for shortfalls, to choose an employer who provides the salary and benefits I …[blah blah blah]”
Pity you didn’t honour that upbringing and turned into a tightwad scrounger.
The problem is that you don’t realise that you have been scrounging.
You think that by opting out when you were young you were being clever and sulf-sufficient, but that’s because you were ignorant about how insurance works.
” Now go earn something for a change”
I get a six-figure salary, is that enough or should I be greedy and hide it offshore to avoid taxes?
You would respect that, wouldn’t you?
Trinity grizzled ” Face it, Bango Skank is just a flaming socialist who will reply to anything as if it's only natural for everybody to pony for the welfare of everybody else. “
Yup, yup, yup, I believe that I should pony up my taxes and social capital to provide for everybody here. I buy American to support local industry, and I obey your laws and don’t mock your customs too much.
Terrible, I know. I should offshore my earnings, buy foreign, and outsource jobs.
” The concepts of self control, self determination, and, especially, self sufficiency via personal responsibility are totally alien to him. He's apparently been on the public dole all his life and doesn't know that there's a real world out there. A real world of people who actually do take responsibility for their own well being.”
Wow, hope you don’t rely on your predictive accuracy for a living.
Actually I am pretty above average on all those nice things, don’t do dole but contribute to the Colorado fund as an employer, and have been in enough wars to have caught on to reality.
You think that I must be a bum just because I think that we must all contribute to the social safety-net – especially those of us who enjoy good lineage, good pay, good health, and good luck. I do it because it’s the right thing to do, not because I will ever profit from it.
I take responsibility for my own well being, always have, but I also care about yours.
Amazing eh?
Dan 2: "But, in Truth's mind, he would rather take the same approach we did in Iraq, when it comes to national health care. Let's dive right in and we'll figure it out as we go along... That is working out really well, isn't it?"
Boy, Dan 2, you really get wild sometimes.
You know the examples of universal health care that have worked. Can you point out the examples of getting into a mess like we are in in Iraq that have worked? Of course not. There aren't any. In fact, all of the examples are of failures. We had nothing to go on. We have plenty to go on with regard to universal health care, plenty of successes.
Posted by Truth on August 7, 2007 06:47 PMFresh said ” I am hurting people, I know I am just .000001 % of the population, but i need your money, help!”
Ok.
First stop hurting people, it isn’t nice and makes you a bad person.
Next, I will call the police to help you with that, they are funded by all of us to deal with situations like this.
Dan 2: "To overhaul a system entirely, based on 15.9% of the population, needs to be justified. And in using KW's numbers, that number drops to 28 million, or about 9.3% of the population. You don't think that we can assist those 9.3% without a total over-haul of our system?"
Dan 2 doesn't realize, as do both liberal and conservative leaders, that our health care system is a mess, and not just because of the uninsured. It is also a mess because, even though it leaves millions of people uninsured, it also costs us twice what many universal health care countries pay. To translate that into dollars, try cutting two trillion dollars in half. It's not just a trivial amount, that one trillion dollars. If we could only save half of that with universal health coverage, that would be half a trillion dollars. A lot of people would say that is more than minor.
"A gamble system in which we put our faith in our GOVERNMENT?"
You seem to like red herring. Like the one about our education system being a one size fits all system. Of course, while our education system has many problems, to say it is a one size fits all is simply ridiculous. But, more to the point, the reason no one of prominence, either liberal or conservative, is proposing turning health care over to the states is because it is a terrible idea. You seem to badly want to take us back fifty or seventy-five years or so when people were more separated than they are now, when society was not so mobile as it is now. You'll not get any support for that outside of this forum.
Of course, it is not a gamble. Many, many countries have had many, many years of experience with universal health care and it has worked out well, as shown by the surveys which rate many of these countries ahead of the United States, even though thy spend as little as half as much as we do.
And you say that our highest priority is national defense. Guess who we put our faith in for our highest priority? Do you also think we should also turn defense over to the states?
KW to Bango: "You on the other hand probably have your rent paid by section 8 and cashed in your food stamps for drugs."
KW, boy, you don't care how far into the sewer you have to reach for you comments, do you? As far as what you have gotten from the government, a person would have to be really dumb to believe you since you have neither honesty nor integrity.
Posted by Truth on August 7, 2007 07:29 PMBango Skank,
"Nope, paid my own way, invest in the social good, buy American wherever possible, pay taxes (even though I cant vote) and Social Security (for which I can never claim)"
Would I be correct in assuming you are in the US illegally?
"I get a six-figure salary, is that enough or should I be greedy and hide it offshore to avoid taxes?"
Six figure income? You must have one of those jobs that legal Americans won't do,
Posted by on August 7, 2007 07:41 PM07:41 fished with ” Would I be correct in assuming you are in the US illegally? “
Nope, wrong guess. L1 Management transfer visa.
However, even though I pay taxes and SS, unless I become a citizen, I can’t vote and can’t ever claim SS.
No taxation without representation eh? Har har.
” Six figure income? You must have one of those jobs that legal Americans won't do,”
Nope, more like one of those jobs that they recruited for for two years and then asked me to come over and do. Beats me why they couldn’t find somebody with customer skills, management experience, software experience, automation experience, healthcare experience, psychology and statistical training, and knowledge of the mining industry over here. Seems a doddle.
nameless posted a reference to "the nanny state of democrats" when it was the Republicans who chose to ban smoking even in private establishments (stopping just short of homes & cars) in Colorado - and and are working on reversing Roe v Wade. The smokers (who were even denied private smoking clubs - based on the argument that those clubs 'might not charge enough dues') warned you that something like this was next, but until your personal ox was gored, you didn't care. GOTCHA!
Posted by Mary on August 8, 2007 03:02 AMThe President of our Coalition for Equal Rights cannot make the meeting today because she has been forced to take over two shifts as a bartender in her pool hall/tavern because the smoking ban has directly and negatively effected the amount of business she does. The truth is, and I will post the results from the Colorado liquor excise tax statistics soon, there are for more bars and taverns on the verge of demise than anyone knows and, it is not because they are, as tobacco control lies about, marginal businesses. It is and will continue to be, a direct cause of the smoking ban.
And as for those who think only drinkers and smokers will pay to make up for the tax revenue loss, your out of your bleeding minds. Think about it, when the casino's revenue drops by $35,000,000, as projected by that industry, and is added to the already proven losses suffered by bars and taverns, proven by statistical records from the Colorado Department of Revenue, just who do you think is going to be tapped for that revenue loss. Look in the mirror you idiots who backed a false and fraudulently justified law, it's you. The bars and taverns aren't making enough to make it up, not unless the stupid legislators want to increase the taxes on them and wipe out an entire tax paying industry so you have to take on an even greater burden of loss because no one wanted to look down the road to the end, they just swallowed the lies and deceptions of tobacco control.
That stupidity is going to come back to you with a vengenance that will cost you. I can't wait to hear the whining and gnashing of teeth of the zealots who's unthinking garbage caused this insane loss of revenue when their pockets are ripped open. by additional taxes.
Posted by Allen Campbell on August 8, 2007 06:26 AMi assumed w/a name like bango skank u were female,as i read on the name becomes skink?just curious
Posted by nappiho on August 8, 2007 06:55 AMMary,
You are wrong and you need to get your facts straight - it was the Democratic controlled state Legislature (along with a few repugs sponsors) that pushed and subsequently passed the smoking ban in Colorado in Early 2006 governor Owens did sign it- LOOK IT UP.
But you never seem to let the facts skew or get in your way of being an anti-business anti-conservative anything.
In fact this past session they extended it to include the Casinos. GOTCHA!
Truth:
"KW, boy, you don't care how far into the sewer you have to reach for you comments, do you?"
Considering Ms. Skank "Takes glee in insults" and called me a b*astered, I figured I was just returning the love without resorting to profanity.
And as for honesty and integrity Truth, I didn't think you'd remember the meaning of these words. At least, you never display them in your posts.
Posted by KW on August 8, 2007 08:49 AMNothing but a bunch of adolescent comments.
Posted by What? on August 8, 2007 09:56 AMTruth,
I am going to resort to this one time, and one time only.
You are an IDIOT. You have no understanding or knowledge of the Constitution (obvious by your usage of the preamble, vs the actual articles of the Constitution and the Amendments to the Constitution. You use WHO statistics, even though you KNOW that they give 50% weight to mortality rate (it is a statistical and historical fact that blacks and hispanics skew that mortality rate in the United States), and you give passing acknowledgment that single payer health systems do indeed ration health care.
You piss and moan about Iraq, but you don't have even a thought on what to do. You instead prefer to point fingers and lay blame, yet not once have I seen you provide your solution to Iraq.
You are a socialist, I understand that, and as such, we will NEVER agree philosophically. But your lack of understanding the system in which you reside and are a part of boggles my mind. My guess is you are a senior citizen, probably over 65, feel you have "paid your dues" and now you are "owed" something. Typical.
I think you have done one thing though that you have set out to do, and that is you have bored me with your idiotic cry baby complaints without really understanding the full scope of the issues in which you comment. So, congratulations, by virtue of my increased personal and professional responsibilities, and your continued pissing and moaning about our current system, I am done.
Thanks everyone for a wonderful time on these blogs. Maybe see ya next year
Posted by Dan2 on August 8, 2007 10:40 AM"KW, boy, you don't care how far into the sewer you have to reach for you comments, do you? "
KW, I apologize for the foregoing comment. While you and Dan 2 have the juvenile need to make up stories about the kind of lives the posters you disagree with lead, even though you obviously don't have any idea what kind of lives they lead, that doesn't deserve the language I used.
Posted by Truth on August 8, 2007 07:11 PMWhat?
Dittos. Woops! Mega dittos!
Posted by Stan Broyles on August 9, 2007 07:40 PM