[Walks_in_islam]

I have been busy. So do allow me to take the time to answer your comments 1x1. First, your assumption that I am in any way, shape, or form a liberal is hooey. I am…hmmmm...lol a capitalist I guess. Here is your answer from someone who does not accept the current system and has decided that being paid for the value of your work, being responsible for your own retirement, and taking care of your own family is one's personal responsibility

I also did not say "America needs healthcare reform because the Brits live longer than us". I did note that on a statistical basis America, with the "best healthcare system in the world" ranks nearly dead last among industrialized nations. I also noted that the difference between America and these nations is that they have public healthcare systems. These are statistical facts and worthy of note.

Sure Healthcare is one factor in a nation’s life expectancy.

It is kind of you to admit that. Statistics show, time and again, between neighbors, in the same city and the same state, same foods, same lifestyles, that access to basic, routine healthcare makes a difference in both the length and quality of life. Residents of the countries mentioned have the same lifestyles, same bad habits, same or in case more (lol) access to "alternate" substances, that Americans do. Yet there is a marked difference. In some cases not months, but years of difference in how long they live. Healthcare access can and does make a difference. Swaziland is not a viable basis for comparison. Australia, Canada, the UK, and western Europe is. I do not deny or question that there are reporting discrepencies in things like "infant mortality". Healthcare is about people who are already born and living. You, Coadie, and the rest of your excuses for being on the bottom of the list do not compute. You have either never been to Europe or Australia or don't know anyone from Europe or Australia or if you have been there you sure did not mingle with those people lol. I dunno about Canada. Never mingled with them. Funny how the border is packed with our retirees who go there for their medications.

Now, about comparison. A real (as opposed to made up) tale of (2) surgeries.

Patient 1 and Patient 2. Patient 1 lives in Houston. Blew out a knee doing "young people stuff". Patient 2 lives in the UK. (2) years age difference. Did same thing. Exactly same injury.

Healthcare costs: Patient 2 was paying 15% tax for the public system. Patient 1 was paying $460/month which was 20% of plan costs with employer ponying up another $1840 per month. For the policy. Patient 1 made a lot of money that year. The cost of employee/employer equaled 14.8% of patient 1's salary. Had patient 1 been making average median income for that year the cost of health coverage would have been a whopping 55%.

Patient 1 was covered by a good policy with UHC. Patient 2 was covered under the public healthcare system in the UK.

(1) Appointment. Patient 1's brother is an orthopedic surgeon in Tn. With help patient 1 identified an orthopedic doctor who was on his plan. Said doctor was president of the Texas orthopedic association and thus considered excellent. Appointment was made for (4) days later. MRI scan was done next day. Patient 2 contacted his public administrator. Appointment was made 6 days later and MRI done next day.

(2) Surgery. Both patients scheduled for surgery. Patient (1) was done 5 days later. Patient (2) was done (1) week later. Both patients were in physical therapy and walking (3) days after surgery.

Here's the fun part:

Patient (2)'s experience was complete. Patient (1) paid the doctor his (plan discounted) 20%. Ditto for the MRI and the anestheologist. Then: Patient 1 discovered that though the doctor was part of his insurance plan, the outpatient facility (with the same name) was not. Hit with a $600 deductible then 30%. Next discovery: Neither was the anestheologist. Another 30% but the deductible at least was paid. Patient 1 paid an additional $3000 on top of health insurance costs. Patient 2 payed nothing on top of the 15% he was already paying.

WHO HAD THE BETTER HEALTHCARE SYSTEM?

Both patients are currently under another public health plan in another country. There is no out of pocket charge for anything.

You think patient 1, who was already paying 15% of his salary ANYWAY, cares if it gets reduced to 12% and coverted to a tax if that caps the cost? You think patient 1 and every single American who is lucky enough to get healthcare is not ALREADY paying for those who need and get critical care and pay nothing now?

In the UK if you need a hip replacement you might wait, but you get it. In America if you need a hip replacement AND YOU DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO INSURANCE they do not get the hip replacement at all. Nor do they get treatment for things like heart conditions (until they end up in the emergency room then if you think the paying patients aren't covering that too I will re-comment that you are numb). Ditto for a host of other chronic health problems that build into major issues and cost us anyway. THAT's why healthcare reform is needed.

I will brief you on some other things as well. The world is a big place. Healthcare is big business. Are you fooled like Coadie in that patients from other countries who need major treatment go to the US to get it? When is the last time you saw an actual AMERICAN specialist? LOL Healthcare (cancer treatment, spine surgery, heart surgery, etc) like the rest of your jobs has moved overseas and the cost is a fraction of what is paid in the US. Capitalism at work my friend. Research this and get back to me. If you need them I will provide you charts of the cost of major medical procedures in other countries vs the US.

I made a backhand remark about "white insured" as a joke. That seems to be the loudest demographic against reform. I guess I should be included in that as well. The conclusions that I see drawn are only true from that standpoint or viewpoint. It would have been nice for that demographic to have recognized this and addressed this problem when they were in charge. Especially when they inherited a relatively robust economy and an annual budget surplus. Instead, they steered us into wars, record deficits, and re-instituited the greed culture (aka the culture of something for nothing invention of paper value with no building of real business value) while ignoring issues that truly threaten us as a country. As more and more lose access to healthcare and the public system that is in place becomes overwhelmed the necessity to do something has become acute. I do not think the right is capable of this. The chance to do it has come and passed. Meanwhile, the US is slipping further and further behind.