Login  
 
 
Go Back   Chamber of Secrets > Forum Archives > Non Harry Potter Archives

International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!



 
 
Thread Tools
  #61  
Old June 9th, 2007, 2:41 am
RiverIsis's Avatar
RiverIsis  Female.gif RiverIsis is offline
Fourth Year
 
Joined: 4349 days
Location: sometimes England others USA..
Posts: 582
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

Your homeland is also mine – though I am well travelled - I have friends and acquaintances that can not afford health insurance or ongoing medical care under the US system. It is broken. It is humanity to help fellow humans; otherwise there is no need to be charitable. Even with separation of church and state, the US was found on Christian ethos - all those pilgrims escaping religious persecution. Many politicians use this "Christianity" to sway voters to vote for them such as George Bush evoking the "right to life" element of belief for political gain. So though there is an official separation many policy decisions are made with religious beliefs in mind - it is nigh on impossible for them not to be.

If you can not afford insurance or the physical then you are ineligible to play in the state of Kentucky because of liability issues. Kentucky is where I attended the private doctors offices with the young man getting the physical (may I reiterate this was NOT a government run clinic - apparently they charge more). Most probably this program was set up for the poor school in the area - the one with the highest number of kids with families on assistance and in government housing. (Charity in Healthcare for Americans - if one doctor's office can do why can't the US find a way to do it) Kentucky is well recognized as poorer state in the US. When you can't afford insurance you forego healthcare - you put up with flu, you brush your teeth but maybe not with the best toothbrush/pastes, you don't keep all your prescriptions if you think you can take a tablet every other day, you hope everyday that you survive without an incident requiring you to have healthcare.

My belief is that a forward looking government is concerned about the entire welfare of its citizens. It is basic logic that you need a relatively healthy, working population to pay taxes to keep the government running. While I do not hold the current British NHS as a perfect example there are other models to learn from. I would be interested to learn more about the French and Australian healthcare models - though their taxes pay for it, from the outside their populations seem to be relatively healthy and well cared for by their Healthcare systems, without seriously long waits.

I didn't use universal generalization - I spoke from my personal experience and reiterated that throughout my post. If it is not of your liking then change my experience. Make healthcare and health insurance affordable for every citizen of the United States - not just the rich and the very poor who are taken care of by the government already. Introduce laws limiting malpractice suits to actual ongoing costs and not extortionate payouts for the ridiculous. Protect those that provide Healthcare with laws so they can provide the best they can offer. I hope that those in the US in full belief of an "I'm alright Jack" attitude never have to rely on the kindness of strangers or charity if you will.

BTW the doctor I used in my example was from Johns Hopkins - of course not every doctor in the Johns Hopkins program was on the exchange, apparently they chose the best of the best - I was not part of the selection process so can only relay what I was told. They were all very nice but I do hope their medical "practice" got better and was enriched by their experience with world renown experts.

I also have medical friends who have trained in both countries (UK and USA) - they were the ones that point out the fallibility of the different systems to me. I presume (again my opinion) they seemed of the belief that you can not change something you do not acknowledge.

I hope the altruistic nature of the world’s best medical minds will be able to come to a healthful conclusion for the greater good of all humankind not just those that can afford it.


__________________

Well Done ASA!

In the words of 1980's Wham t-shirt "Choose Life" Harry!!!!! (and Hermione, Ron, Ginny, Molly, Arthur, Neville, Luna, Lupin, Tonks, Hagrid, McGonagall, Fred, George, Charlie, Bill Fleur...well you get the idea!)
*wonders off embarrassed because I now sound like Hagrid at the end of "Chamber of Secrets" movie *
Sponsored Links
  #62  
Old June 9th, 2007, 12:33 pm
SSJ_Jup81's Avatar
SSJ_Jup81  Female.gif SSJ_Jup81 is offline
Secret Chocolate Keeper
 
Joined: 4996 days
Location: 東京
Age: 36
Posts: 6,232
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

Quote:
Originally Posted by RiverIsis View Post
When you can't afford insurance you forego healthcare - you put up with flu, you brush your teeth but maybe not with the best toothbrush/pastes, you don't keep all your prescriptions if you think you can take a tablet every other day, you hope everyday that you survive without an incident requiring you to have healthcare.
That's exactly my problem. What you said right there. I'm a diabetic, and I take tablets, but, to make it last, I take it every other day. The actual medication doesn't cost much, but the actual doctor's visit is for me since I don't have insurance or healthcare, and can't, unless I pay an outrageous price for having a "pre-existing condition". Now I'm out of my tablets, have been for a good while, so in order to really keep my levels low, I have to exercise extremely hard (much more than usual), pretty much everyday, but its still not as low as it could be or should be so I have to really really really watch what I eat. Since my tablets are out, and I had no refills left, I have to go back to the doctor to get their permission for the refill. If I didn't need to use a credit card just for a doctor's visit since I'd be forced to pay out of pocket for the whole bill, I'd go, but I just can't afford that with my income and I don't get paid for days off...not yet anyway...I haven't "re-accumulated" the hours yet for this year to qualify for it and I have no "sick days".

That aside, I'd rather pay an extra tax and budget around that, so that every citizen can afford insurance (the way it should be anyway since the gov't should be concerned of its citizens), which includes the "legal immigrants" who are citizens, or in the process of becoming citizens, as opposed to our having a big group of people without it. This was mentioned on the news a while back. I forgot the percentage of those without insurance/healthcare, but it was pretty high, especially in the 18 - 30 age-range (IIRC). The reason they gave was a bogus one, imo, "Young people don't get insurance because they feel they're invincible and have no need for it." No way.

That aside, I just pray to god that I don't ever get pregnant even though I'd use pretty much every precaution available. There's no way I could afford to pay for the healthcare needed for that, unless I marry my boyfriend (I don't like him enough for this...yet since it hasn't even been a year yet and I guess I still don't "know him", so to speak).


  #63  
Old June 9th, 2007, 2:31 pm
Overdose  Undisclosed.gif Overdose is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 4800 days
Posts: 1,421
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

Quote:
It isn't run by the U.S. government and serves a fraction of the people that would be covered in the U.S.
Is the US not divided into states, none of which as far as I remember have 60 million people? Surely that by giving responsibility for universal health programs to different states would make it much more manageable.

Quote:
Government healthcare won't be free like people seem to think. It will force much higher taxes on everybody and for most that will equate to paying more for less actual care.
I'm aware of this however, I would always rather pay a higher tax so that if I ever hit hard times I'd have good health cover regardless. Similarly, there are plenty of people who as has been shown above have not the ability to get insurance and I do not believe that they should have to be ruined simply through some sort of accident/illness just for the terrible crime of not being able to afford insurance.

Quote:
Not to mention the government would have authority to authorize or not authorize procedures that are other than life threatening, not a power I trust them with, especially since I won't have the disposable income to pay out of pocket in the new tax system.
I'll concede that this has been an issue previously, for example it is now basically impossible to get orthodontic treatment on the NHS, yet such treatment is so expensive in the private sector that basically noone can afford to pay it.

Quote:
We already treat all life-threatening illnesses and provide care for everyone at the baser level, why do we want to force everyone down to that basest level?
Again, the NHS manages well enough.

Quote:
It isn't the government's job to provide healthcare, there is nothing that gives them either that right or that responsibility, that is up to the individual and we need to stop taking everything from the individual and putting it on the collective.
Ah, well I suppose here is the crux of where we disagree. Your view of healthcare is that it is up to the individual to be responsible of however, I view it as a basic right so I suppose we probably will never agree in regards to medicine.


__________________


i'm in slytherin!
  #64  
Old June 9th, 2007, 11:14 pm
Keakealani  Female.gif Keakealani is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 4280 days
Location: Hawaii
Age: 28
Posts: 291
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

First off, I give major kudos to anyone in the medical field because it's just awesome that anyone would want to save lives and help people the way that doctors, nurses, technicians, etc. do.

I guess I have a lot of different opinions about healthcare. I really feel that it's getting to be very expensive and while that's not a huge problem for me, many people are just not able to afford the kinds of healthcare that they need to stay healthy. I do feel that the government should be giving more aid for medicaid and similar programs.

I also really feel that the pharmaceutical industry is getting to be really outrageous. Now, there are many drugs that are very useful and can really help people. However, there are also a lot of drugs out there that aren't really that necessary and are huge wastes of time, money, and energy. In addition, I've noticed that a huge percentage of advertisements seem to be related to the latest and greatest in the drug sector, and this bothers me because it shows a flagrant and arrogant wealth.

I also have serious gripes with the mental health community right now, although that is not entirely the fault of the health aspect. I do really feel, though, that mental illness is stigmatized and that it is ridiculously hard to get insurance coverage for mental health care compared to regular health care. Because I am someone who struggles with mental illness, I find this particular situation to be rather unfair and difficult to handle.

In general, I only wish that healthcare was more available to parts of the world where there is less surplus affluence, but that is a very difficult thing to do and I don't really expect anything to come of such an endeavour.


__________________
Peace and love.

He was the bravest man Harry knew. ~Long Live Severus Snape~
  #65  
Old June 14th, 2007, 3:29 am
rigdoctorbri's Avatar
rigdoctorbri  Male.gif rigdoctorbri is offline
Purveyor of Prophesy
 
Joined: 4908 days
Location: Arguing with myself
Age: 46
Posts: 2,336
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

Dostoyetzky once said you can judge a nation by the way it treats its prisoners. I say that you can judge a nation by how it treats its elderly. In America we generally have been dismissive of our elderly; thinking of them as a burden rather than ones to be shown reverence.

I am currently at odds with my mother and uncle concerning my grandmother. She is 93, clearly failing in health and mental capacity, and frail and weak. Both my mother and uncle live within minutes of one another and my grandmother. She can no longer take care of herself, and nursing home care has been advised. This is where I am at odds.

Both my mother and uncle are retired, but healthy. They have the space, but neither wishes to take her in. All she needs is someone to look after her. She is not in such a state that she drools, but she is slightly incontinent, which is controlled with Depends undergarments. She can walk, but slowly with a cane. Mom has been her primary source of care for the last ten or so years, but my uncle is by far more hands-off.

I suggested that they trade off one week at a time. My mother thinks it is a great idea, but my uncle is not so thrilled. He just does not wish to be inconvenienced. So, it appears that she is off to the nursing home. That is just like giving her a death sentence.


__________________
Special thanks to storyteller for the Banner
Thanks to all who voted for me in the Through The Trapdoor: Fourth Challenge!

When faced with a choice between two evils, I always choose the one I have never tried before.
  #66  
Old June 14th, 2007, 3:38 am
Pegasus's Avatar
Pegasus  Female.gif Pegasus is offline
Zonko's Employee
 
Joined: 5306 days
Posts: 3,492
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

Why is that like giving her a death sentence? There are some really good facilities out there. My grandpa (Alzheimer's) was in a good facility where the people who took care of him really cared about him. A few showed up at his funeral.
The biggest problem, as far as I know, is the expense of rest homes. Those who have too much money for Medicare to pick up the cost quickly end up with nothing.

To answer the original question, health care in my area is quite good. We have top-notch hospitals and facilities, and we have free or discounted clinics for the needy. My only annoyance is the cracks between employer-provided health insurance and CHIP or Medicaid. If you make too much for Medicaid, CHIP takes care of the kids (which is wonderful), but the parents are left out to dry.


__________________
  #67  
Old June 14th, 2007, 4:15 am
SSJ_Jup81's Avatar
SSJ_Jup81  Female.gif SSJ_Jup81 is offline
Secret Chocolate Keeper
 
Joined: 4996 days
Location: 東京
Age: 36
Posts: 6,232
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

I couldn't imagine my grandmother in a home. She lives with us and always has, pretty much. A retirement home just isn't an option for us, since we feel that family should stick together. Unless my grandmother got really sick (like alzheimer or some other illness where she would need medical care), we wouldn't even consider putting her in one.

My grandmother, though, doesn't seem that she can live by herself now. Her leg is weak (she had polio as a kid) now, and she has to use a walker to get around to keep her balance and stuff.


  #68  
Old June 14th, 2007, 5:54 am
rigdoctorbri's Avatar
rigdoctorbri  Male.gif rigdoctorbri is offline
Purveyor of Prophesy
 
Joined: 4908 days
Location: Arguing with myself
Age: 46
Posts: 2,336
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pegasus View Post
Why is that like giving her a death sentence? There are some really good facilities out there. My grandpa (Alzheimer's) was in a good facility where the people who took care of him really cared about him. A few showed up at his funeral.
The biggest problem, as far as I know, is the expense of rest homes. Those who have too much money for Medicare to pick up the cost quickly end up with nothing.

To answer the original question, health care in my area is quite good. We have top-notch hospitals and facilities, and we have free or discounted clinics for the needy. My only annoyance is the cracks between employer-provided health insurance and CHIP or Medicaid. If you make too much for Medicaid, CHIP takes care of the kids (which is wonderful), but the parents are left out to dry.
Having worked in Emergency Medical Services since 1993, I can consider myself an expert witness when it comes to Long Term Care facilities; particularly those in my area. They are holes. No nurse worth his or her salt would be caught dead working in these places. They get substandard caregivers, they cut services to maintain profits, and routinely keep inadequate numbers of staff.

The options for LTC in my grandmother's case is even more limited, and more substandard. All have received multiple violations, but are allowed to continue because there is no other option to place the residents.


__________________
Special thanks to storyteller for the Banner
Thanks to all who voted for me in the Through The Trapdoor: Fourth Challenge!

When faced with a choice between two evils, I always choose the one I have never tried before.
  #69  
Old June 14th, 2007, 7:06 am
Pegasus's Avatar
Pegasus  Female.gif Pegasus is offline
Zonko's Employee
 
Joined: 5306 days
Posts: 3,492
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

Wow. I guess I should be more grateful for what we have here.


__________________
  #70  
Old June 14th, 2007, 11:03 am
Mundungus Fletc's Avatar
Mundungus Fletc  Male.gif Mundungus Fletc is offline
Head of the Dept of
Magical Fundraising
 
Joined: 5208 days
Location: England
Posts: 4,489
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

Quote:
Originally Posted by rigdoctorbri View Post
Having worked in Emergency Medical Services since 1993, I can consider myself an expert witness when it comes to Long Term Care facilities; particularly those in my area. They are holes. No nurse worth his or her salt would be caught dead working in these places. They get substandard caregivers, they cut services to maintain profits, and routinely keep inadequate numbers of staff.

The options for LTC in my grandmother's case is even more limited, and more substandard. All have received multiple violations, but are allowed to continue because there is no other option to place the residents.
It's pretty much the same in Britain - and it doesn't relate to how much you pay. When my father was alive he went into a home for a month a year to give me a break. It cost over £3,000 a month and whilst the building was lovely and the food excellent the nursing care was rubbish


__________________
Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank. Give him a bank and he can rob the world.
  #71  
Old June 14th, 2007, 12:35 pm
guad's Avatar
guad  Undisclosed.gif guad is offline
Mrs Grawp
 
Joined: 4797 days
Location: Rocking with BAS DÖSE
Posts: 3,618
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

Spain:

Healthcare is 100% free here. Meaning that from the moment that you work automatically a part of your brutto salary is for the public Healthcare system. But you still have a right for full service, even if you are unemployed.

Disadvantage: Very long waiting times. Also the system is not very practical. You have to go to your general practician, who will give you a petition for the specialist. To get the appointment for the specialists (for example gynecologist) you often have to wait several month, only for consultation.
If you need an intervention, the waiting lists are very long too. It has happened that the person who had to be intervened was already dead when they called to give the appointment.

Therefore many people here recurr to private insurances.


__________________

guads random creative moments: Fanart and Fanfiction

Support the True Heroes! Joins Squiddies Army!


BAS DÖSE! More META L than EVER!
  #72  
Old June 14th, 2007, 1:16 pm
OldLupin's Avatar
OldLupin  Male.gif OldLupin is offline
Forum Elephant
 
Joined: 4924 days
Location: Absurdistan
Age: 47
Posts: 2,412
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Overdose View Post
Is the US not divided into states, none of which as far as I remember have 60 million people? Surely that by giving responsibility for universal health programs to different states would make it much more manageable.
That would then require all 50 states to locally ratify a single action, which has never happened, and then would require state taxes to be increased even more than federal taxes would as each state would have to have a seperate infrastructure for their individual health systems. This excludes the fact that states like Kentucky (where my family is originally from) and others would be heavily reliant on federal help because their liability for this one enterprise would eat an inordinate amount of their revenue, with schools roads and all other existing liabilities still in place. So no, it would not be more managable if farmed out to the states.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Overdose View Post
I'm aware of this however, I would always rather pay a higher tax so that if I ever hit hard times I'd have good health cover regardless. Similarly, there are plenty of people who as has been shown above have not the ability to get insurance and I do not believe that they should have to be ruined simply through some sort of accident/illness just for the terrible crime of not being able to afford insurance.
I work with diabetics, asthmatics and people with heart conditions and other persistent and chronic illness and they are as insured as I am, unless you are an entrepreneur (they have ways of making care more affordable) or are unemployed (the government already cares for these people) then why don't people have health care? If their current job doesn't provide it, get a different job. Join a trade union, or any union for that matter, or take a job with benefits. Don't tell me you can't, these jobs are always available, unions don't usually turn people away, and most full time jobs have benefits that can't refuse for pre-existing conditions. If people are willing to pay more taxes for government healthcare, why don't they just pay more out of their pockets on their own instead of attempting to spend every body else's money? How about making the law that everyone actually uses the insurance that is available to him or her? There are plenty of people who refuse insurance through work to keep more of their money, yet when they are ill or injured they are still treated on everybody else's dime. In short, these Robin Hood philosophies of take from the rich and give to the poor, sounds good, but it never works that way. The poor stay poor, the rich stay rich and the rest of us get poorer in the process. Why does anyone think that the government will efficiently run healthcare? Is there an example of anything the government has ever done that reassures me that they won’t turn healthcare into an endless bureaucratic nightmare with poor results that only a few people will benefit from and the rest of us are worse off for in both care and financially?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Overdose View Post
Ah, well I suppose here is the crux of where we disagree. Your view of healthcare is that it is up to the individual to be responsible of however, I view it as a basic right so I suppose we probably will never agree in regards to medicine.
Life saving treatment, if available, is a right for any human being. Why is it unreasonable to ask the individual to make the effort to secure his or her own insurance for everything else? There are hundreds of programs for small business owners and unemployed people to help them get better medical care. The problem is that most require that people pay for their medical treatment and some answers require taking a different job to secure insurance. Why is that less reasonable than asking the hundreds of millions of other people to pick up the tab at the cost of their hard earned money?
Anything the state runs eventually becomes mediocre and poorly managed and eventually an excuse to raise taxes and provide minimal service in return. I say it a lot, but these are the people who give us a ridiculously under-performing public school system, that takes billions of dollars and turns it into very little for us. We have reached the point where public school is more expensive per child than private school, but to use a private school for your children means paying for both. If we reach that point in medicine, I have four children with ailments ranging from asthma to stigmatism to heart defects. The thought that the government may have the choice to allow them to have any or all of their medical treatments scares me. I have worked hard and sacrificed to ensure my children are provided for and if I lost my job, the government will pick up the slack until I am employed again. It is incumbent on me to find a job that offers benefits, even if it is at a lower pay rate or harder work. I have done this before and would again if needed. The question is, why is that an unreasonable expectation of an individual?

Quote:
Originally Posted by guad View Post
Spain:

Healthcare is 100% free here. Meaning that from the moment that you work automatically a part of your brutto salary is for the public Healthcare system. But you still have a right for full service, even if you are unemployed.

Disadvantage: Very long waiting times. Also the system is not very practical. You have to go to your general practician, who will give you a petition for the specialist. To get the appointment for the specialists (for example gynecologist) you often have to wait several month, only for consultation.
If you need an intervention, the waiting lists are very long too. It has happened that the person who had to be intervened was already dead when they called to give the appointment.

Therefore many people here recurr to private insurances.
Do you feel that since the care is free, people may be more disposed to frivolously go to the doctor, where they might not had they been responsible to pay for it? Even if they were only paying a small fee? I noticed that when I was in the military people were quicker to take their children to the hospital for minor concerns because they wouldn't have to pay anything for it, while private sector I have seen a less capricious attitude toward going to the doctor or Emergency Room.

Just curious of what you think.


__________________


Vote your own issues. Nah, just vote the way I tell you to.

Last edited by OldLupin; June 14th, 2007 at 1:29 pm.
  #73  
Old June 14th, 2007, 1:46 pm
SSJ_Jup81's Avatar
SSJ_Jup81  Female.gif SSJ_Jup81 is offline
Secret Chocolate Keeper
 
Joined: 4996 days
Location: 東京
Age: 36
Posts: 6,232
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldLupin View Post
I work with diabetics, asthmatics and people with heart conditions and other persistent and chronic illness and they are as insured as I am, unless you are an entrepreneur (they have ways of making care more affordable) or are unemployed (the government already cares for these people) then why don't people have health care? If their current job doesn't provide it, get a different job.
This is easier said than done. Have you seen the job market lately? You're either over-qualified or under-qualified for decent jobs that provide health insurance and benefits or either they offer it part-time, so they won't have to pay out for benefits because it saves them money.
Quote:
Join a trade union, or any union for that matter, or take a job with benefits. Don't tell me you can't, these jobs are always available, unions don't usually turn people away, and most full time jobs have benefits that can't refuse for pre-existing conditions.
I have a full-time job, and it doesn't provide health insurance, but, I am a "temp employee" too. The ad said "temp to hire", and next month, it will have been two years since I've been here, and they still haven't hired me. I've been looking for more jobs (ever since last year), but in my area, for where my expertise lies, there isn't anything available, or either, they want someone with a high up degree instead of someone who went to school specifically for whatever field you were trying to get into. All I know is Administrative/Clerical type work. I went to school for it and Accounting. No one is hiring someone who's not particularly experienced.
Quote:
If people are willing to pay more taxes for government healthcare, why don't they just pay more out of their pockets on their own instead of attempting to spend every body else's money?
I don't see anything wrong with helping out the citizens who need healthcare that can't afford to pay out of pocket every time one needs to go to a doctor for a routine check up. Do you know how much a doctor's visit costs where lab work needs to be done? It's horrific! I went to Patient First (a place who takes people without insurance or affordable healthcare plans), and I had to pay for that visit with a credit card, because my entire paycheck for that week, couldn't cover the visit. I had to borrow money just to go because I needed to go to the pharmacy too, which I hate doing (borrowing money).
Quote:
How about making the law that everyone actually uses the insurance that is available to him or her?
How about a law where no matter where you work, if it's full-time and you're legal citizen, regardless of what type of worker you are, you should be allowed insurance or given it, like any other job, or either base it on one's income. It sucks that we have people out here who work hard (I have a laid-back job, so I don't feel I fit this category), but has nothing to show for it in terms of medical care and it's sad that a lot of people in general are without it. IMO, there are too many people of this country who works who doesn't have or can't afford health insurance. I was given options, but my entire weekly paycheck couldn't cover the monthly fee for it, because of my having a "pre-existing" condition. I didn't ask for this hereditary condition.


  #74  
Old June 14th, 2007, 2:42 pm
guad's Avatar
guad  Undisclosed.gif guad is offline
Mrs Grawp
 
Joined: 4797 days
Location: Rocking with BAS DÖSE
Posts: 3,618
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldLupin View Post
Do you feel that since the care is free, people may be more disposed to frivolously go to the doctor, where they might not had they been responsible to pay for it? Even if they were only paying a small fee? I noticed that when I was in the military people were quicker to take their children to the hospital for minor concerns because they wouldn't have to pay anything for it, while private sector I have seen a less capricious attitude toward going to the doctor or Emergency Room.
Well, I don't know, but personally I don't think so. I personally prefer to go to private even if I have to pay, because I hate waiting. If you have to wait for hours in ER you think twice of going, unless it's really necessary.

I think that a free health systhem is a good thing. It's frankly appalling if somebody has to cancel a medical treatment or diagnostic procedure only because they don't have the money for it.


__________________

guads random creative moments: Fanart and Fanfiction

Support the True Heroes! Joins Squiddies Army!


BAS DÖSE! More META L than EVER!
  #75  
Old June 14th, 2007, 3:05 pm
OldLupin's Avatar
OldLupin  Male.gif OldLupin is offline
Forum Elephant
 
Joined: 4924 days
Location: Absurdistan
Age: 47
Posts: 2,412
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSJ_Jup81 View Post
This is easier said than done. Have you seen the job market lately? You're either over-qualified or under-qualified for decent jobs that provide health insurance and benefits or either they offer it part-time, so they won't have to pay out for benefits because it saves them money.I have a full-time job, and it doesn't provide health insurance, but, I am a "temp employee" too. The ad said "temp to hire", and next month, it will have been two years since I've been here, and they still haven't hired me. I've been looking for more jobs (ever since last year), but in my area, for where my expertise lies, there isn't anything available, or either, they want someone with a high up degree instead of someone who went to school specifically for whatever field you were trying to get into. All I know is Administrative/Clerical type work. I went to school for it and Accounting. No one is hiring someone who's not particularly experienced.I don't see anything wrong with helping out the citizens who need healthcare that can't afford to pay out of pocket every time one needs to go to a doctor for a routine check up. Do you know how much a doctor's visit costs where lab work needs to be done? It's horrific! I went to Patient First (a place who takes people without insurance or affordable healthcare plans), and I had to pay for that visit with a credit card, because my entire paycheck for that week, couldn't cover the visit. I had to borrow money just to go because I needed to go to the pharmacy too, which I hate doing (borrowing money).
I hope this doesn't sound unsympathetic, it isn't intended to, but what about a trade union? I worked for 2 years as a union electrician because it paid benefits and didn't have exclusions on benefits. It isn't what I love or was trained to do, but it paid decent and kept my youngest daughter covered both for her asthma and her astigmatism. I was a single father at the time and starting pay was low, but we made it until I was offered a better job in my chosen field. Even starting out, the benefits made up for entry-level pay, we just had to tighten our belts a little.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSJ_Jup81 View Post
How about a law where no matter where you work, if it's full-time and you're legal citizen, regardless of what type of worker you are, you should be allowed insurance or given it, like any other job, or either base it on one's income. It sucks that we have people out here who work hard (I have a laid-back job, so I don't feel I fit this category), but has nothing to show for it in terms of medical care and it's sad that a lot of people in general are without it. IMO, there are too many people of this country who works who doesn't have or can't afford health insurance. I was given options, but my entire weekly paycheck couldn't cover the monthly fee for it, because of my having a "pre-existing" condition. I didn't ask for this hereditary condition.

I love that idea of forcing employers to provide benefits for full-time workers and still think that "opting out" should only be allowed for people with existing coverage from another source. Forcing businesses to provide and workers to maintain coverage would increase total policies and reduce premiums and reduce federal liabilities for healthcare. My company has used "Temps" in the past, but usually either dismiss them or hire them directly within 3-4 months (since they have already been working for us, benefits begin at the time of hire). Of course the gentleman I work for is an honest person and has a policy of not taking advantage of people. It works well, we are all very loyal to the company and actually care that it succeeds. Wish I could hook you up with a job. It should be illegal to keep you in the "temp" status for that long, it is exploitation and I think it is disgraceful. I truly hope you get something better very soon, or at least an offer to leverage your current employer with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by guad View Post
Well, I don't know, but personally I don't think so. I personally prefer to go to private even if I have to pay, because I hate waiting. If you have to wait for hours in ER you think twice of going, unless it's really necessary.

I think that a free health systhem is a good thing. It's frankly appalling if somebody has to cancel a medical treatment or diagnostic procedure only because they don't have the money for it.
I don't personally know anyone who has had to cancel treatments or diagnostic procedures because of money. It would be interesting to see how many people actually are being denied important care because of finances in America. I would specify important to avoid minor cases where direct medical care isn’t actually required.
I do know people that have treated minor injuries, colds and flu at home instead of going to the emergency room for it though, which is probably better in the long run as there isn't much more the ER can do for them anyway. Again, in the military, those minor cases were much more prevalent and added to the waiting time. Obviously, very serious injuries and illnesses were given priority in the ER.


__________________


Vote your own issues. Nah, just vote the way I tell you to.
  #76  
Old June 14th, 2007, 4:16 pm
SSJ_Jup81's Avatar
SSJ_Jup81  Female.gif SSJ_Jup81 is offline
Secret Chocolate Keeper
 
Joined: 4996 days
Location: 東京
Age: 36
Posts: 6,232
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldLupin View Post
I hope this doesn't sound unsympathetic, it isn't intended to, but what about a trade union? I worked for 2 years as a union electrician because it paid benefits and didn't have exclusions on benefits. It isn't what I love or was trained to do, but it paid decent and kept my youngest daughter covered both for her asthma and her astigmatism. I was a single father at the time and starting pay was low, but we made it until I was offered a better job in my chosen field. Even starting out, the benefits made up for entry-level pay, we just had to tighten our belts a little.
Oh no, you didn't come across as unsympathetic. I don't know much about Trade Union, aside from the fact, that they usually consist of jobs like "tech" stuff. I'm no good at that type of stuff, since I don't know much about it or anything about it. All I know is office work, and have been doing either clerical/office/data-entry type work since I've entered the workfield and those are the only types of jobs I ever had. All of my educational background (regular school, starting as early as middle school), has consisted of this.
Quote:
I love that idea of forcing employers to provide benefits for full-time workers and still think that "opting out" should only be allowed for people with existing coverage from another source.
I semi-agree with this too. Too bad I've never had a job that's offered benefits to me period, but, back then, I had no problem because I was still on my parents' insurance, since I was still in school and I becaue of my age. I think for my mother, she can only carry her kid up until they reach the age of...23, but I guess that's a logical number. By then, most people do have jobs by then.
Quote:
My company has used "Temps" in the past, but usually either dismiss them or hire them directly within 3-4 months (since they have already been working for us, benefits begin at the time of hire).
I wish SunTrust would think this way. I really like it here, but the fact they haven't hired me on permenantly yet is frustrating and annoying. I've come close to wanting to quit so many times, but, I also know you shouldn't quit an old job until you find a new one first. So far, no luck. I go on interviews and stuff, but no one seems to want someone with my very miniscule level of experience, lack of a Bachelor's degree (which is why I want to go back to school), even though I can do the work presented to me or asked of me. I also hate the fact that I can't move out of my parents' home since I don't have "stable work". I'd hate for me to move out, and then they let me go or something, and of course, being a temp, means no unemployment benefits. Oh, can you believe that even Wal-Mart has turned me down for cashier positions? I just don't get why I have a hard time finding a job. I guess I picked up on dad's bad luck. He went to school for banking; he couldn't find a job, and ended up working in a job he hates; a clerk at a gas station.
Quote:
Wish I could hook you up with a job.
Aww, that's nice of you. ^_^
Quote:
It should be illegal to keep you in the "temp" status for that long, it is exploitation and I think it is disgraceful.
The feeling is mutual there. ><; It is disgraceful for them to keep on so many temps, just so they can save themselves money. The only thing good about it, is that you get paid weekly instead of bi-weekly.
Quote:
I truly hope you get something better very soon, or at least an offer to leverage your current employer with.
Well, I wish I could. I finally broke down and questioned them about that this past January, and after the answer I got, I started looking pretty much all the time, even online/at-home jobs...but, as usual, "not experienced enough" or some other reason.

Anywho, my title here, is an FHA Connection Submissions Coordinator. I'm doing a lot of data entry, for the most part, as well as filing, delivering, picking up (files), sending out uninsured loans via FedEx to HUD so that whatever was missing with said file, can be fixed, returned, and insured, etc. (clerical stuff)., as well as other miscellaneous tasks. When asking my manager about making this "permenant", she said something like, "Well, technically, the job title isn't listed" or something like that. In other words, seems like I have a "made up job" for their benefit, and until SunTrust acknowledges this title (whatever), I don't think I'll ever be hired on permenantly. I still wonder if I can complain or something, since I was told from the start that this was a "temp to hire" position, not "permenant temp". I'm not very knowledgable when it comes to stuff like this. I should sue SunTrust and the temp company for false advertising, and get an ridiculously large sum of money. =P lol (j/k)


  #77  
Old June 14th, 2007, 4:43 pm
Overdose  Undisclosed.gif Overdose is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 4800 days
Posts: 1,421
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

Quote:
I love that idea of forcing employers to provide benefits for full-time workers and still think that "opting out" should only be allowed for people with existing coverage from another source. Forcing businesses to provide and workers to maintain coverage would increase total policies and reduce premiums and reduce federal liabilities for healthcare. My company has used "Temps" in the past, but usually either dismiss them or hire them directly within 3-4 months (since they have already been working for us, benefits begin at the time of hire).
Do you think that maybe if an employer was forced to offer insurance options in a contract for employees then maybe people with a pre-existing condition who thus have to pay more expensive health insurance would become less employable?

Also, would this not have an adverse effect on smaller business?


__________________


i'm in slytherin!
  #78  
Old June 14th, 2007, 5:00 pm
OldLupin's Avatar
OldLupin  Male.gif OldLupin is offline
Forum Elephant
 
Joined: 4924 days
Location: Absurdistan
Age: 47
Posts: 2,412
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSJ_Jup81 View Post
Oh no, you didn't come across as unsympathetic. I don't know much about Trade Union, aside from the fact, that they usually consist of jobs like "tech" stuff. I'm no good at that type of stuff, since I don't know much about it or anything about it. All I know is office work, and have been doing either clerical/office/data-entry type work since I've entered the workfield and those are the only types of jobs I ever had. All of my educational background (regular school, starting as early as middle school), has consisted of this.I semi-agree with this too. Too bad I've never had a job that's offered benefits to me period, but, back then, I had no problem because I was still on my parents' insurance, since I was still in school and I becaue of my age. I think for my mother, she can only carry her kid up until they reach the age of...23, but I guess that's a logical number. By then, most people do have jobs by then.I wish SunTrust would think this way. I really like it here, but the fact they haven't hired me on permenantly yet is frustrating and annoying. I've come close to wanting to quit so many times, but, I also know you shouldn't quit an old job until you find a new one first. So far, no luck. I go on interviews and stuff, but no one seems to want someone with my very miniscule level of experience, lack of a Bachelor's degree (which is why I want to go back to school), even though I can do the work presented to me or asked of me. I also hate the fact that I can't move out of my parents' home since I don't have "stable work". I'd hate for me to move out, and then they let me go or something, and of course, being a temp, means no unemployment benefits. Oh, can you believe that even Wal-Mart has turned me down for cashier positions? I just don't get why I have a hard time finding a job. I guess I picked up on dad's bad luck. He went to school for banking; he couldn't find a job, and ended up working in a job he hates; a clerk at a gas station.Aww, that's nice of you. ^_^The feeling is mutual there. ><; It is disgraceful for them to keep on so many temps, just so they can save themselves money. The only thing good about it, is that you get paid weekly instead of bi-weekly.Well, I wish I could. I finally broke down and questioned them about that this past January, and after the answer I got, I started looking pretty much all the time, even online/at-home jobs...but, as usual, "not experienced enough" or some other reason.

Anywho, my title here, is an FHA Connection Submissions Coordinator. I'm doing a lot of data entry, for the most part, as well as filing, delivering, picking up (files), sending out uninsured loans via FedEx to HUD so that whatever was missing with said file, can be fixed, returned, and insured, etc. (clerical stuff)., as well as other miscellaneous tasks. When asking my manager about making this "permenant", she said something like, "Well, technically, the job title isn't listed" or something like that. In other words, seems like I have a "made up job" for their benefit, and until SunTrust acknowledges this title (whatever), I don't think I'll ever be hired on permenantly. I still wonder if I can complain or something, since I was told from the start that this was a "temp to hire" position, not "permenant temp". I'm not very knowledgable when it comes to stuff like this. I should sue SunTrust and the temp company for false advertising, and get an ridiculously large sum of money. =P lol (j/k)
I wish I knew an answer that would work for you. Apprenticeships are offered by some IT and engineering firms and probably by other types of companies, but they are usually competitive, because like my company, most pay for school and a salary with benefits during the training period. We still have five of the last six interns we brought in. The other gentleman took a government job, but we all wish him well. I just thought I would throw that out there in case you hadn't checked for any of those yet. Something has to go your way soon, even bad luck has its limits… I hope.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Overdose View Post
Do you think that maybe if an employer was forced to offer insurance options in a contract for employees then maybe people with a pre-existing condition who thus have to pay more expensive health insurance would become less employable?

Also, would this not have an adverse effect on smaller business?
Discrimination laws already exist, but a little tax credit as incentive might regulate that aspect pretty well coupled with existing preferences for disabled employees it should mitigate any blowback. As for small businesses, they have been attempting for years to push small companies into giving benefits and form associations for them. It will force adjustment, but there is already a move in construction trades and data technologies to form conglomerates for insurance coverage. That is currently motivated to avoid unionization of companies. It is possible that labor unions would take the bigger hit as their leverage would diminish if every employer had to offer packages. The companies that would be in jeopardy would be temp agencies who make money off of less expensive labor under the "temp" tag and would all but disappear if either they or the companies they provide labor for lost that advantage of not providing benefits for full time help.
The real danger is that smaller companies will begin to slot too many "part-time" jobs to avoid the requirement. It would almost demand a limit on that type of dodge as well, IMHO.
If they can require liability insurance to drive, why not medical insurance to work? Uninsured employees should be finable to the company, just like uninsured motorist is to the driver.


__________________


Vote your own issues. Nah, just vote the way I tell you to.
  #79  
Old June 14th, 2007, 9:15 pm
Overdose  Undisclosed.gif Overdose is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 4800 days
Posts: 1,421
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

I think I generally agree with what you are saying then in regards to insurance reform then. To be honest I'm not sure what the Trade Union situation is in America, though I imagine it's fairly similar to post-Thatcher UK i.e. right to peacefully picket workplaces, no compulsory membership, no sympathy strikes, secret ballots etc so I suppose benefits like insurance are one of the few things Unions have as leverage for membership.

I think then from what I've gathered from this thread that implementing a universal healthcare system in the US would be impractical however, I still don't advocate a switch in the UK from nationalised to private, partly because as more and more treatments i.e. orthodontic become only available on private insurance, the higher demand for insurance which has sent prices for basic insurance skyrocketing and I would fear severe fallout for the lower end of the middle classes who would not be entitled to the lower tier of state funding, but unable to afford the changeover. I also think that the nature of beurocracy in healthcare in the UK mainly comes from Labour's obsession with micromanagement from Westminster (a trait that despite dropping their old socialist commitments still remains true of the party as whole).


__________________


i'm in slytherin!
  #80  
Old June 14th, 2007, 9:28 pm
OldLupin's Avatar
OldLupin  Male.gif OldLupin is offline
Forum Elephant
 
Joined: 4924 days
Location: Absurdistan
Age: 47
Posts: 2,412
Re: International Healthcare: The good and bad of your area!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Overdose View Post
I think I generally agree with what you are saying then in regards to insurance reform then. To be honest I'm not sure what the Trade Union situation is in America, though I imagine it's fairly similar to post-Thatcher UK i.e. right to peacefully picket workplaces, no compulsory membership, no sympathy strikes, secret ballots etc so I suppose benefits like insurance are one of the few things Unions have as leverage for membership.

I think then from what I've gathered from this thread that implementing a universal healthcare system in the US would be impractical however, I still don't advocate a switch in the UK from nationalised to private, partly because as more and more treatments i.e. orthodontic become only available on private insurance, the higher demand for insurance which has sent prices for basic insurance skyrocketing and I would fear severe fallout for the lower end of the middle classes who would not be entitled to the lower tier of state funding, but unable to afford the changeover. I also think that the nature of beurocracy in healthcare in the UK mainly comes from Labour's obsession with micromanagement from Westminster (a trait that despite dropping their old socialist commitments still remains true of the party as whole).
I can see where changing a system that large back to a private one would be almost impossible and have vastly unpredictable side effects and some really bad predictable side effects.
I should point out that I have not said anything negative about the British system because, aside from what I read on these threads I am unfamiliar with it, but it seems to be fairly new, isn't it? I am also curious if it has significantly effected taxation yet or if it would likely do in the near future. While I don't see it working in the U.S., Britain in many ways is a different society and is at a different stage of development than the U.S. Also both have uniquely national issues that effect the implementation and success of this type of program.
Our people may be very similar in a lot of ways, but our national circumstances are very different for a variety of reasons.


__________________


Vote your own issues. Nah, just vote the way I tell you to.
 
Go Back  Chamber of Secrets > Forum Archives > Non Harry Potter Archives

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 2:52 am.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Original content is Copyright © MMII - MMVIII, CoSForums.com. All Rights Reserved.
Other content (posts, images, etc) is Copyright © its respective owners.