e-wok
|
Joined: 9/25/2006
Msg: 51 | |
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/23/2007 6:23:19 PM | Ok, Suzzane, here's some more: 35% to 40% of missed diagnoses causing death
were discovered after autopsy results.
More? 1995, a report in JAMA (Prestigious medical journal) stated that:
In Canada with a population of just 32 odd million " it is estimated that 24,000 people die per year because of doctor error, infections from hospital stays ect"
Alright...regarding Doctor error (which is off topic ANYWAY).......
"Over a million patients are injured in U.S. hospitals each year, and approximately 280,000 die annually as a result of these injuries.
JAMA states it's not 18k but more like 280k when you count the injuries
that the medical professionals CAUSE.
Bottom line, the United States, despite the hype about it's lack of medical
wait times.......a good chance you might die on the table anyway.
Let's not turn this into a pissing contest. | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/23/2007 6:35:05 PM | Really me
Don't confuse a private clinic that charges a fee to take you on as a patient as the actual cost of health care. I don't know what treatments you had (and certainly wouldn't dream of asking you to divulge this information on an open forum) but the public health care system did pick up the tab.
The fee you paid was for priority service only!
Michelle | |
|
| |
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/23/2007 7:08:25 PM | "Illogical medicare/provincial health plans."
What is illogical to some, is logical to others.
Who runs health care? Businesses and Governments.
Why do people get sick? Environment and Food.
Who controls our environment? Businesses and Governments.
Who promotes "healthy" foods? Mostly governments, through the food guides.
Who helps governments formulate food guides? Businesses.
Why do businesses do this? Promote themselves...generate profit.
Here's a clear example....food guides tell you cows milk is the best source of calcium...that you should drink 1 to 2 cups a day...more if you are at risk for ostioporosis. North Americans drink vast quanities of cows milk, yet we have the highest incedies of ostioporosis in the world.
Go figure.
I pay my health care bill in full, once a year, in advance...about $650. I'm happy to pay it...dirt cheap, if you ask me.
I am my own health care...I pay for it through the foods I choose to eat...not what
a industry supported government suggests. | |
|
e-wok
|
Joined: 9/25/2006
Msg: 55 | |
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/23/2007 7:14:13 PM |
ummmm actually they are doctors who have completely signed out of the public system:
NOT completely, they still have to pay their taxes and the corporate
tax collected from their businesses go towards paying universal health
care.  | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/23/2007 8:43:33 PM | ReallyMe
I notice that what this clinic offers is check-ups and assessments only. Do they have hospital priviledges, do they perform surgeries or do they simply perform the services of a general physician?
I am very very surprised and I will need to check into this some more - In Canada, nobody is allowed to charge for medical services covered by health care. All doctors work for the government. | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/24/2007 7:02:16 AM | Yes... just check ups and assessments... and onsight lab... however, they will actually allow you to go through another (public) lab (like a clsc) for lab work. It is up to the patient to choose. They can also refer you to another specialist who works in the public sector as well.
To my knowledge they have completely opted out of the RAMQ, (Regis de l'Assurance Maladie du Quebec) since that is the first thing you are advised about walking into this clinic. There's a great big sign in the waiting room, and the staff will also advise you as such.
Another such clinic opened up in Laval.
http://avenirmd.com/ Dre Bessette was actually part of the team of doctors at MdPlus... she left to start her own private practice in Laval. Around October of 2006. (i know this because she was my doctor at the Montreal clinic) She left public practice because she wanted to have more "reasonable" working hours. Opting out of RAMQ means she doesn't have to work at the hospital anymore.
and here is a link to a surgical clinic also in Laval: http://www.opmedic.com/en/suite.htm
Anyway, private clinics are good for those of us who like to be treated like human beings. (and don't want to have to wait 4 months for a simple pap test or go to a semi-private clinic on a walk in basis to have a different doctor everytime performing this) Again, for those who have a family physician this isn't an issue.
I realize that some people believe that health care is a right and not a privilege despite your social status... however, I'm one of those who believes that the fruits of my labour should give me a little more than what I am currently getting. I shouldn't have to pay for people who make poor choices in life, and I am not talking about smoking or obesity. I'm talking about those who end up with government handouts as a generational "right". They don't contribute to society, and get all the pirks that come from living in this welfare state that is Canada. | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/24/2007 7:36:10 AM | Reallyme
I agree with you completely.
I looked at MD plus - its illegal under the Canada Health Act but nobody is enforcing the Act on these private clinics.
The problem here is that you are paying for private health care and public health care at the same time. If doctors can opt out of the public health care - why can't patients?
My problem with public health care is not the same as yours. I have never really had any significant health problems to date. My problem is with people thinking that they own my body and my life just because I participate in a public health plan. I don't mind giving the money but I do mind very very much having my body owned by the state with a duty to be healthy as defined by the state.
I find the best way to handle control freaks and bullies is to take whatever weapon that they want to use against you away from them immediately.
If you want to control what I put in my mouth as part of the requirements for a public health care plan - guess what - shove your health care where the sun don't shine!
Funny though - I am on the group that gives in the top of the contribution chain. | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/24/2007 1:20:12 PM | "If doctors can opt out of the public health care - why can't patients?"
he he he my thoughts exactly Suzanne... yup aquarius minds think alike!
as for having significant health problems, mine wasn't anything physical at the time... just work related stress leading to burn out (6yrs of dealing with customers in all their moods can do that to a person) and I knew that if someone could deal with the private insurance company, it would be a doctor working in a private office. A public doctor at a drop in clinic won't/can't take the time for these types of issues. For instance, I once went to a clinic to get a prescription for the nicotine patch: (one needs a prescription for the insurance to pay) he didn't even look at me.... scribbled the prescription on a note pad and said, "good luck". Wonder how much the gov was charged for this 1 min visit. | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/24/2007 5:00:24 PM | I am a Regional Clinical Director who works primariloy with the elderly that hae to rely on Medicare or medicaid for their health care.
I am appauled every day to see how children they have raised banish them to nursing homes and never ocme to see them or assist with their needs. We are a society that has abandoned our elderly. The cost in this country is because we have the best health care in the world. You dont go buy a mercedes on a ford escort budget do you. For some reason we throw our money away on material thing and then **** about the cost of healthcare.
Think about the house you live in, the car you drive, the meals you eat out and then think of your parents and the life they lead either in a nursing home or at home trying to pay for their medicines. We have the science to prolong life but at what cost?
Mary Ann | |
|
e-wok
|
Joined: 9/25/2006
Msg: 61 | |
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/24/2007 5:16:37 PM | I personally don't have a problem with choice provided everybody pay
into a pool that they may not actually use. Most of the taxes
collected today or a huge chunk is allocated to public health care
whether you use it or not....I'm fine by that. | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/24/2007 5:18:24 PM | IveyPond1
I have absolutely no hesitation in giving my money for healthcare to those in need. Certainly not our elderly, our children and our disabled.
I am just not willing to become a slave to the government in order of having the priviledge. Tell you what - next time the government proposes regulation to control personal lifestyle choices by law (like drinking, smoking eating, not exercising) - you vote against it and I will continue to support health care!
Cost of smoke-free air - 1 health care system - think about it! | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/24/2007 8:26:26 PM |
Anyway, private clinics are good for those of us who like to be treated like human beings.
We all like to be treated like human beings... "private clinics are good for those of us" who can afford it.
I shouldn't have to pay for people who make poor choices in life, and I am not talking about smoking or obesity. I'm talking about those who end up with government handouts as a generational "right". They don't contribute to society, and get all the pirks that come from living in this welfare state that is Canada.
Whom are you talking about?
...but I do mind very very much having my body owned by the state with a duty to be healthy as defined by the state.
Since when is your body owned by the state? I agree with the last part...(except for the word duty)...it relates to my previous post...
If you want to control what I put in my mouth as part of the requirements for a public health care plan
They don't control...one look at the freezer section of a grocery store tells you that.
Wonder how much the gov was charged for this 1 min visit.
Wonder how much a private clinic would have charged to your private insurer...furthermore...would your rates go up because of it? Probably....much like car insurance.
IveyPond1
I have absolutely no hesitation in giving my money for healthcare to those in need.
She's talking about a much deeper issue. Maybe you missed that. I trust "not" in your next sentence was a typo...
next time the government proposes regulation to control personal lifestyle choices by law
There's never been a first time! You can drink, eat, smoke, and not exercise as much as you want! When it directly affects other in a potentally harmful manner....drinking and driving being the prime example...then they'll step in.
Industries run governments - think about it! | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/24/2007 10:03:42 PM | Also depending on the surgery, some procedures in the USA do have a waiting time, it's dependant on where you live within the states.
I live in the USA and have my entire life. I am unaware of any state in which there is a waiting time for surgery. If you are please enlighten me.
This is the kind of talk of somebody who likes their income from private practice, and hasn't done any research.
I think you are assuming that since singlemaninMD has "MD" after his name this means he is a doctor. In his case, it means he is from the state of Maryland, and from what he said previously in the thread you should know what he does for a living.
"private clinics are good for those of us" who can afford it
Agreed. This is why I don't live in a Communist country. Part of living in a free society means that you should be able to buy better services if you can afford them. Mercedes versus Volkswagen, country club versus membership at the Y, house in the country versus apartment in the inner city. That's the way it's always been.
Should we have some minimum health care plan for every person here in the US? I think we should. Even if we don't care about the human costs of untreated illness, in dollar costs it's not economical either. The working poor don't get seen by doctors until they are very sick, and then cost the system more than if they got regular health care. So for a lot of reasons, what we have doesn't work.
But I don't think going to something else that doesn't work is the answer. People in the US who currently have private insurance would be sorely tested by huge waits to see a doctor, waiting weeks and months for surgery, and the unavailability of the latest treatments and screening devices for cancer, heart disease and other ailments.
I've been pretty healthy all my life and haven't been a large user of healthcare services. The same can't be said for my family and my two spouses. So I know how important a good healthcare plan can be, not only in terms of getting needed services, but also in being able to make your own choices without having to cut a whole lot of red tape.
When my husband had cancer three and a half years ago good insurance meant we were able to make all decisions about treatment for him, go to California for some of his treatment (because what we wanted was available there and not here in Virginia), get newly approved medications without problem, get state of the art testing without explanation, get medications switched when one was no longer working without arguments from the formulary, get medical equipment, home care nurses dispatched to our home when he was in his final stages without "referrals".
By the time he died I had received a stack of Blue Cross/Blue Shield forms that reached up to my thighs. Of all of those, I think there was one time in which I had to call the company because of a problem. Otherwise everything was approved and paid for, minus our deductables. We met our catastrophic deductables for all three years, and had some travel expenses for treatments in California -- but the bulk of everything else was paid for. I think there was an out of pocket expense of $10k or $15k each year (excluding travel costs).
I can't imagine having to go through something like that, and more importantly having someone I love who is ill having to go through something like that in a socialized medical system.
 | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/24/2007 11:12:15 PM |
Agreed. This is why I don't live in a Communist country.
Last time I checked, Canada wasn't a "Communist country"
That's the way it's always been.
Agreed....in a individualistic sort of way.
I think there was an out of pocket expense of $10k or $15k each year (excluding travel costs).
More than what most people make in a year.
...having to go through something like that in a socialized medical system
Of course you can't imagine....many in the US (some in Canada too) actually think they can purchase health. | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/25/2007 2:46:20 AM | this is a topic i have devoted most of my life to addressing here in the usa. now i'm on the other side of the fence with a serious disablity. since it's late, i will answer just a few things and more later.
first of all in the usa, if the kind of autism you cite falls under "developmental disability" the state will often take on that role of delivering a full range of services vua a separate funding mechanism of combined health, educational and social services . if higher level autism only requires an educational approach, then an iep (individualized education plan) and later in college a qualificaiton under the disability act will provide for that individual. with respect to the regular continuum of medical care, that will mirror the rest of the population and for the most part will depend upon income and ability to pay for a good private health plan or qualify for medicare and medicaid.
most mental health services' funding has been cut here. in the past some very high quality and comprehensive delivery mechanisms were well funded and successful. the "economy" and it's decline paralleled the decline in those services. many vary by county and state as this was a cooperative effort.
there were medicare experiments in the usa which had documented successes but were politically overturned almost 15 years ago. in nj, one of the medicare "experiments" spread the costs of indigency and bad debt over ALL hospitals and all insurors. the daily rate was further broken down into drg's (diagnostic related groups) with a built in mechanism for appeal of unusual circumstances.
unfortnnately, because this was only a medicare experiment and not full insurance coverage experimnet, some of the discounts received by medicare were assummedly passed on to other payors. the carpenter's union which was self-funded sued to end the experiment based on this inequity, ultimately won and the experimnent was toppled. my understanding is that sadly the union ended up costing itself more than if they had begrudgingly just accepted the inequity, but realized the benefits.
aside from the indigency/ bad debt issue and the inequity amongst hospitals and the poorer constituencies, since a significant portion of the cost of the delivery system is overhead, administration, technology and research there was also a certificate of need and regionalization series of regulations. thus since not all hospitals could have all sorts of fancy stuff, the occupancy rates went up in the existing facilities as lesser beds and specialized services were available. however, with lesser costs of construction, there were lesser jobs!
in states such as California where there was resistance to such "govt. control" the costs skyrocketed and so industry took over and then re-designed the original intent of the hmo concept which emphasized prevention to instead be a herald of cost containment. this means they werent' willing to pay the high cost of health insurance for their employees and indeed those costs were accelerating at a rapid and disproportionate pace!
the feeling of industry was that if companies individually flipped the bill for prevention services, they would not necessarily reap the ultimate benefit/decreased cost because of the mobility of the employees who would not stick around long enough to stop accessing the health care delivery system once they became "healthier"--therefore decreasing spending for the company who originally invested in their long term improvements (as opposed to making it better for the future employers).
thus industry focused on cheaper hmo plans who focused on regulating coverage even moreso than the federal govt. would have proposed. if we had national health insurance and coverd more prevention services, ultimately the cost of prevention could be measured and it wouldn't matter that the population moved around from job to job. the cost would be spread amongst all individuals and all employers and would probably go up in the beginning until the benefits of prevention could be demonstrated.
of course you would have the tobacco industry and disgruntled smokers and other individuals quite unhappy if you were to "mandate" this prevention. my guess is however that more people would voluntarily avail themselves as has been proven in some of the industry packages with higher level and fancier health care coverage.
later on the costs of aids became a big issue and i'm sure a host of new diseases have added themselves to the traditional causes of death.
medicare itself was a political tradeoff here for ALL the elderly in order to get it passed. originally it was designed for the poor. most illnesses that are new on the horizon or very costly or not in sufficent numbers to warrant a sizeable lobby group or scare society into treatment (such as AIDS) will take quite a while to get out of experimental stages of treatment(such as my disease, lymes). most private carriers will not fund experimental delivery of care until enough people make a big stink.
regulation of issues such as smoking is more of a local issue and here is not a health care issue that is mandatory. we are still using the carrot opposed to the stick.
having had my firm called into canada (after i sold it), my understanding was that many of the issues were similar to england and at that time, many issues were yet to catch up with the usa. back then "electrolysis" was covered medically whereas here it was cosmetic. also the lengths of hospital stays were longer and the access to research /technology was less at that time. i would imagine these aspects have been addressed. my understanding is that most of the canadian "middle class" will follow britains practice of purchasing additional private insurance.
in additon many of the services previously provided in patient and in non profit facilities have gone outpatient and proprietary. this has it's pluses and it's minuses. most of the minues are passed onto the poor in the usa. this includes the working poor. also many in their 30's have childlike "magical thinking" and cannot conceive that they will need serious health care coverage at some point in their lives and that once pre-existing conditions set in, they might not even get health insurance. this also applies to disability coverage and even to writing up wills/estate plans to protect their own children should anything happen to them.
so that is just a bit of the "why". as to what is prioiritzed, that is based on economics and politics--plain and simple. | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/25/2007 3:05:39 AM |
I shouldn't have to pay for people who make poor choices in life, and I am not talking about smoking or obesity. I'm talking about those who end up with government handouts as a generational "right". They don't contribute to society, and get all the pirks that come from living in this welfare state that is Canada.
Ok, so say Canada does go private. You'll still be paying taxes to subsidize state (or government) healthcare, because any responsible government will mandate govt sponsored insurance for the poor/underserved. So you'll still be paying taxes, and you'll be paying insurance premiums, copays, and more on top of it. Instead of paying out once, you'll be paying out twice. Think about it. | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/25/2007 4:53:18 AM | SimmahDahnNah
Right now I pay health care premiums through taxation, then I pay another $900.00 in a special health care tax, and I then pay another $4,000 or so for health care through tobacco taxes, Now the government has launched a law suit against the tobacco companies. If they win they will get money that the tobacco company will recoup from me!
They also want to introduce a fat tax on food so that I can pay health care costs again.
I count that as 5 times paying for the same health care!
Screw it - Give me back my health care premiums and my health care tax, stop charging me for health care again through sin taxes. In exchange, I will be responsible for my own health care directly (no insurance). And I will pay some portion of health care tax for children, disabled and the elderly.
Its called the cost of smoke-free air, the cost of imposing your will on others through government regulation.
You see - its very very easy for the majority to vote that the minority should pay more for something or that the minority should live their lives the way the majority think they should. I think that those priviledges should cost you as much as they cost me.
Think about it. | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/25/2007 11:54:43 PM | Suzanne10
"Right now I pay health care premiums through taxation, then I pay another $900.00 in a special health care tax"
I trust you mean through general federal/provincial taxes and OHIP.
and I then pay another $4,000 or so for health care through tobacco taxes,
That would be called an OPTIONAL tax...you choose to pay it...
... introduce a fat tax on food...
Hell-of-an-idea...I'm all for it...better yet...tax the sh1t out of companies that refine whole foods into worthless calories.
I will be responsible for my own health care directly (no insurance).
You must have oodlies of money...able to walk in to a hospital for one reason or another...and plunk down cold hard cash...upfront, of course...before anyone would even consider looking at you.
Hell...even the uber-rich know better than that.... | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/26/2007 12:01:38 AM | | Anybody who talks about having to pay tobacco tax shouldn't be calling for privatization, odd's are we're going to be paying for your palliative care. | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/26/2007 3:16:40 AM | | Speaking from someone who has done medical insurance billing and collections for nearly 10 years, let me tell you that your way doesn't work as nicely as you think it would, suzanne. People are very irresponsible when it comes to their medical bills. They come to the doctor and 'forget' to bring their wallet. If we don't collect the copay up front, then they are seen, and then it's too late. They have other bills to pay--utilities, house payment, etc, and the medical bills are the last ones to be paid. Usually this mindset works this way for them because the services have already been provided. If they had to pay up front, they'd be waiting just like you're talking about. If someone has crappy private insurance, and needs an emergency surgery, we're talking thousands of dollars....all payable after the care has been rendered. Let me tell you the majority do not pay these bills responsibly. There was an article in a women's magazine several years ago on 'tips for women and their money'. It listed medical bills as the LAST ones to pay! Your theory sounds good on paper, but it really is not very realistic. It's extremely difficult to get someone to pay something 1) after the fact, 2) when they feel they have a 'personal relationship' with the physician and he 'won't mind', and 3) most people feel that doctors make ungodly amounts of money and don't need theirs. And I agree....if you don't like paying the tobacco tax, there is an alternative. | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/26/2007 8:31:09 AM | SimmahDahnNah and Charlesedm
You are just not getting my point - either one of you. So here is my position once again.
1. I don't mind paying for healthcare for children, the disabled, the elderly.
2. I don't mind paying for nationalized health care through my taxes at all.
3. When the cost of nationalized health care includes the right of others to coerce lifestyle changes that I am not willing to make and to intrude on my privacy in the manner proposed by anti-tobacco, anti-fat, anti-drinking and anti whatever they come up with next - NOW I AM OPPOSED.
I am not willing to be coerced by governments or the health care community on issues that are absolutely not your business in exchange for being allowed to "participate" and pay for nationalized health care.
The proper role of government in these very private matters is to educate and to establish regulation and standards to protect public health and safety. Not to socially engineer private behavior.
The proper role of medical practictioners is to educate, advise and assist those whose seek your assistance. Not to threaten and coerce those who disregard your advice on the grounds that "I know what is best for you"!
Are either of you unaware that people have the right to refuse medical intervention and treatments? Like smoking cessation treatments, like addiction councilling, like forced weight loss?
How is it ethical if I can say no to my doctor and then find I am taxed unreasonably for my refusal to accept medical intervention and treatment. Or if I am refused treatment for other related disorders. Considering I have already paid for the health care - which doctor or hospital can ethically now choose to refuse me health care for a broken leg on the grounds that I refuse to quit smoking? How is that not coercan?
I feel no particularly pressing urge to change my lifestyle in order to reduce health costs and if health care costs are too high - here is a clue for you - the cost of health care is not driven by lifestyle diseases. It is driven by salary rates for health care practitioners and the costs of pharmaceutical.
I do not consider death to be an avoidable inconvenience. I consider it a sure and certain event that is going to happen. And the goal of my life is NOT to enter into a race to see who can deliver the healthiest and best preserved corpse to the undertaker.
I consider pleasure, in all its many and diverse forms, including sex and sports and even sometimes risky behavior to be an absolute necessity for a well-lived life. I will ski down mountains at 25 miles an hour on waxed sticks for the sheer thrill of it, even though I am risking broken limbs, paralysis or death. Life without chocolate is unacceptable. I will choose to have sex with whomever I please.
And if I die of some catastrophic disease like cancer without treatment - guess what folks - billions of people have done it before me and tens of thousands of people do it every day around the world!!!
I will not live my life in fear of death and I will not have fear instilled in me by epidimiologists and junk science!
You consider it acceptable to rob me blind through taxation in order to fund health care. I do not! and will vote to remove health care as a weapon used to "socially engineer" my lifestyle choices.
Now if you value nationalized health care and wish to preserve it - you might want to think twice about using it as a weapon to bully and coerce others.
And if nationalized healthcare is lost in this process - consider it the cost of the smoke-free air that you value so highly. Remember - if it saves even 1 life it will be worth it! Think of the children! | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/26/2007 8:37:49 AM | | Suzanne, I understand your position on nationalized health care. And I do agree with you on many points. They should be picking on me, because I'm the one who would abolish nationalized health care because I just don't like to pay for others. What can I say? I'm selfish that way... | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/26/2007 11:20:18 AM | ReallyMe
Unless you are a smoker or obese or wear perfume, or like to drink (otherwise wise referred to as smokers, eaters, drinkers and smellers), you are not on the target list to be a social leper yet and punished to the full extent of societal disapproval and the law!
Wait just a little bit though - I am confident that sooner or later they will get to something you like. Then you can join the "cool" outcasts!.
but hey - maybe we can add people who like to spend their own money instead of donating it to the government, health and environmental crusaders by calling them "cheapers".
Anyway - don't worry, you can hang with me anytime! | |
|
| Illogical medicare/provincial health plans.
Posted: 4/26/2007 12:53:51 PM |
You are just not getting my point - either one of you. So here is my position once again.
1. I don't mind paying for healthcare for children, the disabled, the elderly.
2. I don't mind paying for nationalized health care through my taxes at all.
3. When the cost of nationalized health care includes the right of others to coerce lifestyle changes that I am not willing to make and to intrude on my privacy in the manner proposed by anti-tobacco, anti-fat, anti-drinking and anti whatever they come up with next - NOW I AM OPPOSED.
Suzanne....perhaps you don't get the point. You said
The Canadian Health system works great - as long as you are NOT sick! Once you get sick - its a dud.
Ok....so why is it such a hardship for you to swallow the fact that they are trying to impose a healthier lifestyle on the general populus?
And the cost of health care will only continue to grow as long as the taxpayer is footing the bill! The cost of health care is going to continue to grow whether it's nationalized or privatized. Moot point.
So I can pay for my own health care and own my body. All I have to do is set aside fear - fear of getting sick and fear of dying. Talk to us when you have emphysema and can't breathe.....people find fear real quick then.
I see your point that you don't want rules imposed on your lifestyle. But if you read one of my earlier posts, private health insurance companies are doing the same thing these days, it's the general trend and getting more and more strict. | |
|
Home
login 
