Health Care

[GrobbeeTrull2.0]

You're a fucking tool.

When their respective countries are finally back to normal, whenever that is, their Constitution provides for UHC. Their framework allows for it. And that framework was mostly written by this countries Republican administration from 2005.

Yet here, that same group of people is exploding with rage trying to stop it from happening here: why?

[Itzena]

Originally Posted by AladainAF

No I'm not surprised by that. We're people not just arguing on how Iraq and Afghanistan get universal health care paid for by US tax dollars, yet we don't? It sounds to me that.. well, they don't, or if they do, its pretty fucking horrible. I'm just looking for some numbers on what the tax payers do pay for for that, and the like. I can't find any sources that really give info other than LOLZ WE PAY FOR THEIR UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE.

Mark Dorlester: Guaranteed Health Care In Iraq - But Not For You

You'd better sit down, folks.

Article 31 of the Iraqi Constitution, drafted by your right-wing Bushies in 2005 and ratified by the Iraqi people, includes state-guaranteed (single payer) healthcare for life for every Iraqi citizen.

Article 31 reads:

"First: Every citizen has the right to health care. The State shall maintain public health and provide the means of prevention and treatment by building different types of hospitals and health institutions.

Second: Individuals and entities have the right to build hospitals, clinics,or private health care centers under the supervision of the State, and this shall be regulated by law."

There are other health care guarantees, including special provisions for children, the elderly, and the handicapped elsewhere in the 43-page document.

Under force of arms, President Bush imposed his particular idea of democracy on a people not asking for it - perhaps a noble undertaking in one context and a criminal violation of international law in another. Bush's followers are proud of the Iraqi Constitution, a model for the world, they told us.

So, according to the American political right-wing, government-guaranteed health care is good for Iraqis, but not good for us. Not good for you. They decry even a limited public option for you, but gleefully imposed upon the Iraqis what they label here as "socialism," with much Democratic Party member support.

Indeed, reading the Iraqi Constitution so near to the 8th anniversary of September 11, 2001 is instructive. It is the very definition of American right-wing hypocrisy.

We have (thus far) sacrificed more blood to wrest Iraq from tyranny than we lost on 9/11. In addition, according to the Congressional Research Service, as of May 15, 2009 (Report 7-5700/RL33110) we have spent and/or authorized $864 Billion in military operations on Operation Enduring Freedom, which includes Iraq and Afghanistan. The overwhelming majority of those funds have been for the war in Iraq. Additional secret funding has been authorized for intelligence and special operations.

The total is more than (or, in the worst case, equal to) the funding required to guarantee minimally decent health care here.

In other words, the most senior members of the Republican establishment - and some Democrats like Max Baucus (D-MT) - have gladly spent more taxpayer funds to ensure health care as a Constitutional right in Iraq than they are willing to spend to give you any level of guaranteed coverage.

The source document I used is from the official United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq. If you'd like to download and review the full Iraqi Constitution, click HERE

This news is an example of the benefit of our online viral information age. The situation was first called to my attention late yesterday (September 8) by a long-term blogger, Korkie Moore-Bruno, on a think tank list of Obama supporters. Korkie posted an alert from her Facebook friend Jubal Harshaw. Give them credit for the heads-up; all I've done was verify the rumor with the United Nations.

It would seem that U. S. citizens might find out if their Representative and/or Senators have supported or voted to fund the war in Iraq. If so, do they support health care as a civil right for you?

If the answers to those questions are "yes" and "no," respectively, you might consider less hypocritical representation.

[tjac]

Originally Posted by Itzena

Mark Dorlester: Guaranteed Health Care In Iraq - But Not For You

There's a lot more to be jealous of in that Constitution than just healthcare...
http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/files...itution_en.pdf

Article 28, for example: "Low wage earners shall be exempted from taxes in a manner that ensures the upholding of the minimum wage required for survival. This will be organized by law."

Article 34: "Free education is a right for all Iraqis in all its stages."

Christ. So it takes an invasion to make a country modern, eh? Can someone start bombing the United States yesterday?

Also, the Iraqi Constitution has been finalized for like 5 years now. Why has it taken so long for anyone to notice some of its more awesome provisions?

[Phoenix]

So youre saying after we give everyone free healthcare we should move onto giving everyone a free college education and stop taxing "poor" people?

[Arative]

Health care proposal mandates coverage, drops public option

Bill unveiled by Baccus today. $856 billion over 10 years. It drops the public option in favor of non-profit co-ops. Prevent insurance companies from dropping people with long illness and adds protection for pre-existing conditions. Provide tax credits for low income and create health insurance exchange.

Here is the full proposal

[SalaciousTunare]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

So youre saying after we give everyone free healthcare we should move onto giving everyone a free college education and stop taxing "poor" people?

Considering college use to be optional, and only required for people going into law and medicine, yeah.

Hell at one point in time high school wasn't even mandatory to get a good job. My grandfather was a chemist for 30 years, he didn't even graduate high school thanks to WWII.

So this idea that college is no longer optional in the workforce, yes it should be free in order to have an equal playing field for poor people that can't afford 30 grand a year.

Of course, France already offers free college for all citizens, free health care too, but we are indoctrinated to hate them after all they didn't send troops into Iraq for us /eyeroll

[Haus]

Originally Posted by Arative

Health care proposal mandates coverage, drops public option

Bill unveiled by Baccus today. $856 billion over 10 years. It drops the public option in favor of non-profit co-ops. Prevent insurance companies from dropping people with long illness and adds protection for pre-existing conditions. Provide tax credits for low income and create health insurance exchange.

Here is the full proposal

I like a lot of the stuff in his proposal, what I fear is that both parties have politicized the issue to the point that no proposal would get support of the Republicans no matter what or now it handled things. That leaves the Democrats to "go it alone" and that would lead to a proposal on their extreme end of things which wouldn't be as good.

Having done some recent research on the matter one thing I've realized is that possibly the best cost cutting strategy would be to take away managed care systems all together and force people to actually price shop for their medical care, but I know I'm crazy.

[Araysar]

Originally Posted by SalaciousTunare

Considering college use to be optional, and only required for people going into law and medicine, yeah.

Hell at one point in time high school wasn't even mandatory to get a good job. My grandfather was a chemist for 30 years, he didn't even graduate high school thanks to WWII.

So this idea that college is no longer optional in the workforce, yes it should be free in order to have an equal playing field for poor people that can't afford 30 grand a year.

Of course, France already offers free college for all citizens, free health care too, but we are indoctrinated to hate them after all they didn't send troops into Iraq for us /eyeroll

Also, they are supposedly hairy and don't bathe. Thus making them that much more inferior

[MrGraham]

Originally Posted by Haus

I like a lot of the stuff in his proposal, what I fear is that both parties have politicized the issue to the point that no proposal would get support of the Republicans no matter what or now it handled things. That leaves the Democrats to "go it alone" and that would lead to a proposal on their extreme end of things which wouldn't be as good.

Having done some recent research on the matter one thing I've realized is that possibly the best cost cutting strategy would be to take away managed care systems all together and force people to actually price shop for their medical care, but I know I'm crazy.

"Sir, we're going to need to amputate your child's leg before the infection spreads."
"Yeah, about that... how much will that run me?"
"Sir we need to move quickly, the nurse will run the numbers as soon as possible but I need your permission to continue."
"Do you guys do price matching? The clinic downtown is having a special on amputations next week, I might just wait for that."

[Arative]

Originally Posted by Haus

I like a lot of the stuff in his proposal, what I fear is that both parties have politicized the issue to the point that no proposal would get support of the Republicans no matter what or now it handled things. That leaves the Democrats to "go it alone" and that would lead to a proposal on their extreme end of things which wouldn't be as good.

Having done some recent research on the matter one thing I've realized is that possibly the best cost cutting strategy would be to take away managed care systems all together and force people to actually price shop for their medical care, but I know I'm crazy.

Baccus has been working with the Republicans on the finance committee, so I think this bill is as close to bipartisan as we're going to get right now. They really just need to get the blue dog Democrats on board with it.

I like the $856 billion price tag but I'll wait until the CBO comes out with its estimates before making a final judgement.

[I'm Rich Bitch]

Originally Posted by Arative

Baccus has been working with the Republicans on the finance committee, so I think this bill is as close to bipartisan as we're going to get right now. They really just need to get the blue dog Democrats on board with it.

I like the $856 billion price tag but I'll wait until the CBO comes out with its estimates before making a final judgement.

According to Obama even $856 billion will not fly with him. He said absolutely no deficit increase. Quite the predicament. Hard to believe that $856 billion can easily be sucked into a balanced budget.

[Araysar]

Baucus is another piece of shit that needs to be dragged out into the streets and shot along with Dodd.

Max Baucus: Campaign Finance/Money - Industries - Senator 2010 | OpenSecrets

[Arative]

Originally Posted by I'm Rich Bitch

According to Obama even $856 billion will not fly with him. He said absolutely no deficit increase. Quite the predicament. Hard to believe that $856 billion can easily be sucked into a balanced budget.

Cut $80 billion from the Defense spending and it can be done.

But I have a hard time believing Obama will veto the health care bill if it does increase the deficit, since health care reform is his baby.

[Haus]

Damn windfury procced on my post... can someone delete this one?

[Haus]

Originally Posted by I'm Rich Bitch

According to Obama even $856 billion will not fly with him. He said absolutely no deficit increase. Quite the predicament. Hard to believe that $856 billion can easily be sucked into a balanced budget.

An $865 billion price tag doesn't mean adding $865 to the deficit. It means the costs of expenditures in the bill would be that, it is then up to them to find cost savings or reductions elsewhere to make the bill "budget neutral". As long as you find places to get your $865 billion from without adding new taxes, or borrowing from other money pools in order to "deficit spend" for it you can avoid impacting the deficit.

@MrGraham - I am not talking about bargaining when you're in the emergency room here. A standard procedure like a colonoscopy can literally range from $450 to $10,000 with no difference whatsoever in the procedure being performed, but rather who is paying for it being the primary variable of how much is charged. The shift from insurance where people paid a percentage of the cost to the managed health care style of HMO's have caused people to not think about what things cost at all, which allows for massive variations in cost. For example, do you know how much your last yearly physical actually costs? If you're on an HMO chances are you don't know other than you had some fixed copay for it. Go back to insurance where people pay a percentage (and maybe a yearly deductible or something) and suddenly because it's affecting peoples actual pocket books they will ask new physicians up front things like what their cost schedule for services is. This will foster actual price competition, which is the very essence of the market controlling costs.

You can see this if you look at a medical procedure which isn't covered by most insurance, and therefore something people pay for themselves. That being Lasik corrective eye surgery (and it's variations). Because people pay for it themselves not only do they look for the best doctor, they also pay attention to the price and doctors compete on both quality and price levels. Because of this the cost of the procedure has a downward pressure from competition.