An interesting article about how we talk about the healthcare debate.

mguar wrote: In reply to MrJoshua: You couldn't be more wrong.. The vast majority of people who get help on your tax dollars are middle class without insurance... When I go into the hospital you might assume I'm poor because typically I'm in grubby clothes..I've been working or will be working. As far as preventative health care? I had a problem with acid reflux.. I take a cheap pill daily and I've avoided tens of thousands of dollars worth of surgery for a stomach ulcer.. I also fell off a building and the potassium that surged as a result slightly damaged my heart. so I take a cheap simple pill and avoid heart surgery. In time the damage from the flood of potassium will be minimized. and I'll probably be able to stop taking that.. until that happens having an annual check up is good.. Now my wife has terminal cancer. She takes a pill that's extremely expensive and won't do a thing to cure her cancer.. but it allows her to live comfortably (and work because she likes work better than sitting at home) You simply have been listening to toooooo many talk shows and fail to search for the real information yourself..

What's your sources?

Most expensive health conditions (from AHRQ - agency for healthcare research and quality) - heart disease #1, cancer, diabetes, osteoarthritis - over $200 billion. Like car maintenance - your body gives warning signs before going full blown with most of these conditions - meaning if you're paying attention you have the opportunity to intervene (without meds) early rather than waiting till you feel bad enough to go get a diagnosis. People taking an "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" approach is a contributing factor (one of many) to high medical costs. Then again, meds are more likely to be an out of pocket expense - where if you wait for things to crash - insurance will cover it... Also interesting that most of the top conditions are chronic and highly correlated with lifestyle choices.

My last employer paid $500 per month towards every employees health insurance. We had two options. A low deductible plan that cost employees $60 per month additional. And a high deductible ($7k) with HSA account that cost less than $500 so the company contributed $65 per month into your HSA. I now pay $2500 per year for my REQUIRED student insurance with $1k deductible. I'm lucky in that I am a funded student but that is still nearly 10% of my annual pre-tax stipend. My wife owns her own medical testing lab and has to buy her own insurance. Basically emergency insurance that doesn't cover E36 M3 except catastrophic at $100 per month. Thankfully, CO passed a law saying that ALL health insurance has to cover pregnancy. Otherwise we would have been berkeleyed. They have already stated that they will not cover the baby beyond the 30 days or whatever it is required by law. I can add her (our coming baby due June 28th, 2012) to my health insurance for $2832. I can add my wife for $3780. So our family of three can not have to worry about medical expenses for the super affordable cost of $9200. What a steal.

From a dude who has his E36 M3 together, just had a kid, and I respect on another forum. To me, this sounds bad.

In reply to mguar:

-Sources for middle income people bankrupting health care.

-Sources for preventative health care saving money. (Oldtin pointed out the most expensive ailments and that lifestyle changes can fix them-not medicine/healthcare)

mguar wrote: In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac: What are my sources? For what? The fact that most civilized countries spend less than 1/2 of what America does and yet have better healthcare? About 5 dozen pieces of information in various magazine. The fact that preventative health care saves lives and money? Old tin right below answers you best..

For this:

"You couldn't be more wrong.. The vast majority of people who get help on your tax dollars are middle class without insurance... When I go into the hospital you might assume I'm poor because typically I'm in grubby clothes..I've been working or will be working. "

Also this:

"You simply have been listening to toooooo many talk shows and fail to search for the real information yourself.."

(Ok, you won't have a source for that, because it's not fact, and simply nothing other than plain old rude.)

But really, let's see the source for the first one.

I'm well aware of the others. I'm not exactly "new" to or "ignorant" concerning the whole Health Care/Insurance thing.

mguar,

Don't debate the people, debate the issues. Your focusing your answers at people based on your opinions, and they have their own opinions. Its very difficult to say someone is wrong and then not cite sources. It's perfectly acceptable to say "in my opinion" but that won't win the debate.

Do what I do, give yourself a limit to how many times you reply in a thread. Otherwise you (and whoever else replies to you) will drag a thread on forever, and it only goes downhill from there.

From the original article said: The rhetoric of intransigence favors extreme predictions, which are seldom borne out. Troubles do arise, but the reforms evolve, as they must. Adjustments are made. And, when people are determined to succeed, progress generally happens. The reality of trying to solve a wicked problem is that action of any kind presents risks and uncertainties. Yet so does inaction. All that leaders can do is weigh the possibilities as best they can and find a way forward. They must want to make the effort, however. That’s a key factor. The major social advances of the past three centuries have required widening our sphere of moral inclusion. During the nineteenth century, for instance, most American leaders believed in a right to vote—but not in extending it to women and black people. Likewise, most American leaders, regardless of their politics, believe that people’s health-care needs should be met; they’ve sought to insure that soldiers, the elderly, the disabled, and children, not to mention themselves, have access to good care. But many draw their circle of concern narrowly; they continue to resist the idea that people without adequate insurance are anything like these deserving others. And so the fate of the uninsured remains embattled—vulnerable, in particular, to the maneuvering for political control. The partisan desire to deny the President success remains powerful. Many levers of obstruction remain; many hands will be reaching for them. For all that, the Court’s ruling keeps alive the prospect that our society will expand its circle of moral concern to include the millions who now lack insurance. Beneath the intricacies of the Affordable Care Act lies a simple truth. We are all born frail and mortal—and, in the course of our lives, we all need health care. Americans are on our way to recognizing this. If we actually do—now, that would be wicked. Read more http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2012/06/something-wicked-this-way-comes.html#ixzz1zqz4KDL7

That analogy completely ignores the reason toll roads exist.

mguar wrote: In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac: Toll roads exist where the potential for added revenue exist.. Most major cities are now converting or have converted some lanes of public freeways into private revenue streams. They don't add any value to society however they do add costs while providing those with the means to ease their daily commute.. OK don't like the comment about socialized roads? How about the socialized Military? Yep we all pay for it and enjoy the freedom it provides.. Socialized Fire Department? Socialized Police? Socialized air traffic control, etc..

Orrrrr.... they exist because the governments in those areas might not be able to afford to maintain the road on their own.

I had no comment on socialized anything. No need to go off on a tangent/rant.

mguar wrote: In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac: Have you followed the money stream on any of those so called public private partnerships? Basically the private company takes 50% and the other 50% goes into the general coffers rather than directly to road maintenance. Oh and if you notice the roads are snow plowed and maintained by the same trucks etc that maintain the public sector on the tax payer's dime.. Classic case of public money used for private purposes.. (Like Pro sports teams?)

That's fine... But again, i said that some of them exist for the reason that i said. Not that they're great at it.

The worst roads i've driven on were public freeways. The best kept high-volume roads were tollways. Beyond that, i didn't care enough to look further into it.