Health Care

Well, I try not to be too political on this blog, but the comments character limitations won't let me reply with everything I've written (see comments on Monarchy and Mosquitoes for full debate). So here's a blog post dedicated to my thoughts on health care.

For anyone curious why we're talking about health care, I'm referring to this post on Ælfhere's blog. So most of this is addressed to him, but I don't mind anyone else reading it.

I would like to preface this with the fact that I'm really not usually a very argumentative person, and sincerely respect your responses even if I may not entirely agree. The only reason I continue to hold my point is because you have thus far responded in a perfectly civilized manner (such a rare thing on the Internet) and I truly appreciate that. Also, before you get too fed up with me, I'd love to know how you found my blog. Like I said, I never imagined people I didn't know read it.

Thank you for your thoughts. You've certainly answered my challenge, though, from your description, I feel it sounds like the monarchy is just something Britain is stuck with since breaking down the system now would be more trouble than it's worth. I know countries that ceased having monarchies ages ago obviously don't have to share properties with the disposed parties. I've visited castles in Europe that belong entirely to the government, but understandably it would be an ugly battle if Britain tried to take everything away. Though, I'm curious what is the current function of the crown jewels? Are they just for the royalty to wear? Admittedly it would be ridiculous for the prime minister to wear them (rather amusing image, though). But once again, I would just imagine they'd be on display in some museum. Still, I do acknowledge that many governments, mine included, spend a lot of money on maintaining the look of government. That is always what I imagined the monarchy were for, and it would seem silly for present day Britain to revolt against the monarcy since it's no longer telling them what to do.

But just as I seem ill-informed concerning the intricacies of your monarchy, you seem ill-informed concerning our health care system. Here is my argument with all my sources which you're free to check for accuracy. The percentage of uninsured Americans in 2008 according to our Census Bureau is 15.4 percent. (http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/hlthins/hlthin08/hlth08asc.html) So, broadly speaking, yes, "most Americans can get it." (Whether they can keep it is an entirely different matter). I suppose it's relative whether you consider 46.3 million uninsured people to be worrisome or not. I see that the current population of the United Kingdom is about 61,113,205 (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/uk.html). So that would be about 75% of the UK.

Here is the actual proposed health care bill: http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf

It's VERY long but I challenge you to find ANY mention of "death doctors" under ANY name. The binoculars button is a word search if that helps. I don't know what you read, but the bill does NOT cover abortion (I have my own feelings about this but they are irrelevant to this debate). Most importantly, the bill does NOT require people to have government run health care. I admittedly don't know a lot about your NHS, but I don't think this is the same. The public health care would be ONE option only. All current health care companies would continue to run. Everyone who already has health care would be unaffected unless they chose to change. Health care simply wouldn't have the monopoly they currently have. The health care companies have the strangely conflicting argument that govenment health care won't be as good but that they also can't possibly hope to compete with it if people have a choice.

If the bill's too long, here's the president's speech where he summarizes what is and is NOT in the bill: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/09/obama-health-care-speech_n_281265.html

I have also run into the stereotype of the health obsessed American before. I find it hilarious my nation, a nation with one of the world's highest obesity rates, home to McDonalds, is often stereotyped as obsessed with health. I promise you I'm not (luckily nor am I obese). I don't need to be the world's healthiest human. As for dental care, the thought never crossed my mind. I'm not sure I've ever had dental insurance and many people don't. Most my dental care consisted of being a guinea pig for a bunch of university students learning how to be dentists because that's the cheapest thing to do here. Dental and eye care are often separate insurances. One may have basic health insurance and not have these covered. I confess to not having even bothered to check if they'll give us dental or eye care. All I want to know is that I won't go bankrupt if I break a leg or develop some condition. But MOST importantly, I also want the peace of mind that I can get insurance if I have a pre-exisiting condition. I have a friend with epilepsy whose health insurance has run out and she recently lost her job (as many Americans in this economy have). And here's the story of a man who would HAPPILY pay for health care if they would only sell it to him, but they won't because he has a disease. They won't even just charge him more. They just won't sell it to him:



I could go on longer, but this is already probably trying your patience. If you've gotten this far, thank you very much.