The excesses also teach us. As you know, research flourishes when excesses exist.

Because we overuse the MRI, we know what it's good for and what it's not good for.

Again, we getting into a system debate without examining the way we should, in terms of costs, outcomes, available resources, and societal idiosyncrasies.

Mike, I didn't realize Texas has more uninsured than any other state. Like 25% or so. That's an enormous number. Does the state have a plan to address the problem?

Arguing in support of a system that boasts the best care available to a relative few is kinda like a conference boasting it has it's own sports channel that is only available to a relative few ;)

I can't speak for all of Texas, but in Houston and Dallas they have county hospital districts that provide both inpatient and outpatient care to the indigent. This is paid for by county residents through special hospital district property taxes.

90% of the population is a relative few?

Relative few is relative dude. We're all among those relative few. So why would we vote to worsen our care?

90% ... 1 in 7 Americans do not have health insurance!

Isn't the US the moral centre of the universe ... the greatest nation on the planet?

Didn't you say earlier only 25% have access?

I'm happy to be treated in Canada ... oh, and I live outside the US ;)

even if your number were true 86% of the country is not a relative few.

And it's the lamest part of it at that ... The MTN is GREAT :rolleyes:

I don't think anyone can site specific true numbers but one number that keeps being quoted by the American Associtation of Doctors (or what have you) is 1 in 7.

With all this talk about not wanting to pay "increased taxes," can anyone share an estimate of how much the increase will be? Is this even going to be remarkable or will it be an increase of maybe $100 a year or less of taxes (indexed for income level)?

Someone here, cannot remember who, said they would prefer to skip paying the extra taxes and use that money to privately build a better future for their children. Seems like rosy rhetoric if the tax increase will have a net effect of $55 more a year out of a paycheck.

If the net effect will be substantial, then I can see the argument.

Obama's plan is a lot more for me, and I don't make that much.

Here's some more numbers ... in the link it says 16% are uninsured.

"Why is the number of uninsured people increasing?

Millions of workers don't have the opportunity to get health coverage. A third of firms in the U.S. did not offer coverage in 2005 (4)."

http://www.nchc.org/facts/coverage.shtml

Here's some more numbers ... in the link it says 16% are uninsured.

"Why is the number of uninsured people increasing?

Millions of workers don't have the opportunity to get health coverage. A third of firms in the U.S. did not offer coverage in 2005 (4)."

http://www.nchc.org/facts/coverage.shtml

Well, the deal is, we're all already paying an invisible tax of $1000 per family to cover the cost of writing off care for the uninsured.

The percentage of people (workers and dependents) with employment-based health insurance has dropped from 70 percent in 1987 to 59.5 percent in 2005. This is the lowest level of employment-based insurance coverage in more than a decade (4, 5).

Wow!

And for those who think it's the impovrished's own fault:

Nearly 40 percent of the uninsured population reside in households that earn $50,000 or more (1). A growing number of middle-income families cannot afford health insurance payments even when coverage is offered by their employers.

Fair, but my question still stands. What is the approximate net increase (indexed) that everyone here is crowing about?

I wonder how some would have reacted had they been asked to drop their nets to be fishers of men. I wonder if a few would have said, "screw that. I would prefer to fish for my own family. Plus, if I keep giving people fish, they will never learn to fish for them selves......And another thing that has really been bothe...*lightening bolt*

JSYK, the NCHC is not necessarily an unbiased source. That number doesn't jive with the ones I found in the journal literature, though the general principle was borne out by the data.

Or God forbid we'd have been asked to pass the loaves and the fishes along down the line. There was hardly anything left, anyhow.

I can't find any hard numbers on what the tax increase would be like.

I understand completely, my posts serve to underscore the original intent of this thread ... The US needs to adopt a universal health care system.

Neither can I. If you do, please post them. This discussion would get really interesting if we can put a dollar amount to it.

Sorry, it's the American Medical Association that quotes 1 in 7 Americans are uninsured.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/93443.php

dont you think there is a little difference in being asked by JC to follow him then being compelled to pay taxes?

It would require very sophisticated economic analysis with so many unverifiable variables, that the numbers wouldn't be reliable.

Go back and research what government predicted Social Security and Medicare would cost from 1964 to 1984. You'll find, IIRC, and I don't always, that the rosy prediction of the sixties was off about 10 to 20 fold or greater. Given that knowledge using that rubric may be a good benchmark. Multiply whatever the government predicts by ten or twenty times, and you'll have what it will actually cost.

I'm glad the canadians can tell us what we NEED to do

That might be a great comment if I WERE A CANADIAN! But seeing as how I am born of the same loins as you, and red blooded through and through it lacks bite ;)

By the way Lebowski, an American living in America started this thread and is telling you what to do ... along with an Oklahoman, Californian, Texan et al!

Not really. He was asking them to give up their sources of income. He asked the same of the rich young prince. I think it was very deliberate that he asked the prince to give it all up. He could have very easily said, "Hey, keep all your stuff because it may come in handy for us in the future as we try to spread the Gospel." Today, we aren't asked to give up all our possessions, but if paying an extra little bit will really help, then I am willing to listen.

I am not even sure socialized medicine is the answer. I have stated previously that any socialized proposal would never be ratified anyway, so why is everone worried about it? But even if it were, there would be no law prohibiting the private practice of medicine (status quo). These arguments about concern over diminished quality of healthcare are really thinly veiled admissions of selfishness.

If Obama passes his health care bill, there will be a tax imposed. This tax increase has to be outlined somewhere because the bill will not pass without a specific budget. I dont know whether the numbers will be reliable. I want to know what the proposed number is that all of you are crowing about. If you dont even know how much it is, then what are you all complaining about? What if it is $65 a year?

Now I remember. The original prediction for Medicare was 4 billion per year, it was off. At the time the actual was 400 billion.

I don't care what his prediction would be.

If it's 65 dollars, then you should predict a real cost of 6500. Would you be willing to pay an extra 6500. BTW, based on the WSJ or some other economist, I did the calc and mine was much worse than 6500 dollars. So no, Obama can go screw himself.

"It would require a very sophisticated economic analysis......oh, wait, now I remember, I did my OWN calc at home on my PC....."

Listen to what you are saying. Do you really think such a bill would pass? I think it would be as successful as, say.....Hillary's attempt.

"Guess what, America, as your newly elected president, I am imposing a new tax per household of $6500 a year!"

I've covenated to give up everything to church if asked.

No, but I bet a bill that states, you guys will only be taxed $65. And then when the bill comes, "oops, we're sorry, but you have 'free' health care." That's what I fear. A lie to get us into the predicament and once we're f..ed, no way to get out.

Look at Ontario Canada versus Michigan

A single man in canada making 50k a year pays 26% federal Income tax plus 9.15% provincial tax

He also pays and average of 18% sales tax

that same single man in Michigan pays 25% federal income tax and 4% state tax. He also pay 6% sales tax

They both have about the same Social Security Tax

He doesn't pay 18% sales tax anymore -it's been reduced by the conservative government!!