Private vs. public healthcare

[television]

Split by moderator from thread on Lisbon Treaty.

Points 1-4 make a strong argument against a public health system.

I dont think so.

or a least show that massive reform is required.

Perhaps but not with a for profit agenda.

1. An inability of european governments to pay for the hugh costs associated with modern health care.

Good quality and equitable health care costs. In a private system the middle classes will end up spending a large part of their disposable income on it. While the poor will be severly disadvantaged due to their inability to pay.

if you dont believe in the principle of equity of access regardless of income then this will not be important. Call me a marxist but i believe your ability/lack of to pay should not decide the quality of the health care you recieve. And all the evidence from private systems world wide suggests that it leads to an devide of access between those who can afford to pay and those who cant.

​

 

[ubiquitous]

Re: The Lisbon vote

One of the biggest areas of litigation in America is Health related issues.

Its naive to single out America in this regard. The same applies in this country, and probably all developed countries.

 

[GeneralZod]

Re: The Lisbon vote

According to this the US spends more public funds per capita on health than Ireland does. That doesn't seem to fit in with the picture we get of the situation there.

 

[television]

Re: The Lisbon vote

According to this the US spends more public funds per capita on health than Ireland does. That doesn't seem to fit in with the picture we get of the situation there.

According to these figures America also spends far more on private health care than any other country.

 

[television]

Re: The Lisbon vote

Its naive to single out America in this regard. The same applies in this country, and probably all developed countries.

Even if that is true. My point was refering to the fact that another poster was complaining about incompetence of the public system. I was making a point that in a country like america that has a very large private system there is still incompetence as can be seen in the amount of litigation.

Your comment would be outrageous and libellous if directed at a single individual. It is ridiculous when directed at a third to a half or more of our electorate. The notion that one sector in society are morally superior to another on the basis of their opinion on a particular political issue is absurd.

Very well said.

 

[Purple]

Re: The Lisbon vote

I voted yes for a number of reasons

Firslty, I detest with a passion the majority of those campaigning for a no vote. If they are not the purveyors of a defunct political idealogy(Marxism), then they are incapable of saying anything other then No(Patricia McKenna) or have the blood of thousands on their hands

But I did actually try to get over my prejudicies and try to look objectively at the Treaty. My conclusions???

I actually have no problem with us loosing a commissioner for a few years. Reality is that there are more countries then commissioners and it is only fair that others have their turn.

I found I have no problem with some privitisation of public services. I am fed up with incompetent civil servants who cannot be sacked getting away with incompetence. Mrs Sox gave birth last year and suffered for 30 minutes because a mid wife did not understand how an epidural machine worked properly. Behaviour like that doesn't happen in the private sector because that mid wife would have been sacked. Imagine how many bureaucrats would be sacked in the HSE if it was run along commercial lines

I have no problem with Ireland giving up some of it's neutraility. The concept of neutrality is often put forward as if it is some sort of "holy, sacred" belief. The reality is that there is a time and a place to be neutral and a time and a place when it is the right thing to stand up and fight. It is to this nations undying shame that we stayed neutral in WW2, that we did not stand up and fight the evil that was Nazism and concentration camps and stood by and watched 6 million jewish people die and instead commisserated with the Germans when Hitler died, because we were neutral. And who knows, maybe a time will come when we need someone to stand up for us, would anyone rush to our aid if we aren't prepare to rush to their

Lastly, Europe has been good for us, very good for us and this country would be well and truely f..ked if it weren't for it. So there might be a cost for us if we vote yes, so what?

There are 2 kinds of people in this world, those who are prepared to get up and give something back to their community and those who sit behind closed doors, never giving anything back and just take take take. Lisbon is asking us to give a little back, it's the right, proper and decent thing to do. I'm proud I voted Yes

Superb post (but havu=ing read Ubi's comment I can see where he's coming from)

 

[GeneralZod]

Re: The Lisbon vote

According to these figures America also spends far more on private health care than any other country.

That fact was is so well known I didn't think it was necessary to point it out. Combined the amount of health spending per capita is twice Ireland's figure.
I'm not advocating the American system BTW before you make that assumption.

 

[television]

Re: The Lisbon vote

That fact was is so well known I didn't think it was necessary to point it out.

It is the balance between the two that is important. it shows that the American system has a greater relience on private. Health care costs in America are porportionally far higher than in Europe which means America has to spend more proportionally to achieve the same outcomes.

And i am talking about inequity within a private system. Sometimes statistics do not truly show up real inequity.

 

[Purple]

Re: The Lisbon vote

which means America has to spend more proportionally to achieve the same outcomes.

How do you know that the outcomes in America are the same? From my experience if you have the insurance their health system is much better than ours.
By the way I also agree that healthcare should be available free at the point of consumption for all citizens. I do not agree that these services should necessarily be provided by a public health system. Basically whomever can provide services (to the required level of quality), in the most efficient way, should do so.

 

[room305]

Re: The Lisbon vote

The french heatlh care system is free at the point of access for all and where people do pay there is various rebate systems.

Like many of your friends on the left you seem to have great difficulty distinguishing between a public healthcare system that is privately provided and an entirely private health care system.

75% of the more than 4,000 hospitals in France are owned by and managed by private companies on a for-profit basis. The fact that the cost of treatment in these hospitals is heavily subsidised is a function of the French national healthcare and social security programme.

There is plenty of evident for the fact that there is a great difference between the type and quality of health care in America between those who can afford to pay and those who cannot.

The US healthcare system has many problems but there is a lot of exaggeration in this area too. By and large, in an emergency I'd take my chances with the American public health system ahead of ours.

One swallow does not make a summer and one private hospital does not make the swedish health system privatised.

I tell you that the largest hospital in a country with one of the best public health care systems in the entire world is run by its shareholders on a for-profit basis and you dismiss this in favour of anecdotal stories about US hospitals?

As we have seen with your Lisbon Treaty propaganda, you are never one to let the facts get in the way of your beliefs.

 

[television]

Re: The Lisbon vote

How do you know that the outcomes in America are the same? From my experience if you have the insurance their health system is much better than ours.

If you have insurance. What about the millions who dont?

By the way I also agree that healthcare should be available free at the point of consumption for all citizens. I do not agree that these services should necessarily be provided by a public health system. Basically whomever can provide services (to the required level of quality), in the most efficient way, should do so.

Thats fine in theory. The only problem is when the profit motive is used in Health there is tendency to place a greater emphesis on saving money and excluding those who cannot afford to pay. If i beleived, that in a fully privatised system, all regardless of income would have equal treatment and access then I would be happy to say yes to a private system.

 

[television]

Re: The Lisbon vote

Like many of your friends on the left you seem to have great difficulty distinguishing between a public healthcare system that is privately provided and an entirely private health care system

Two thinks, being on the "left" is not a term of derision for me. If being on the left means i believe every person regardless of income desreves equality of access and treatment in a health system than yes i am on the left.

2. I aggree with you about the french system.

As we have seen with your Lisbon Treaty propaganda, you are never one to let the facts get in the way of your beliefs.

Thats just funny

 

[Purple]

Re: The Lisbon vote

If you have insurance. What about the millions who dont?

Most of them have Medicare. The problem is that some earn too much for Medicare but too little to buy insurance. Both presidential candidates in the USA have said they will address this.

Thats fine in theory. The only problem is when the profit motive is used in Health there is tendency to place a greater emphesis on saving money and excluding those who cannot afford to pay. If i beleived, that in a fully privatised system, all regardless of income would have equal treatment and access then I would be happy to say yes to a private system.

There is no country in the developed world where the government is not the biggest purchaser of healthcare services. Their function should be to regulate and police the system and buy services from those providers who can meet the standards for the best price.
It's hardly news that our public system is dirty, inefficient and very badly policed. All while our per capita spend, adjusted for inflation, has more than doubled since 1996. This is hardly the sort of universal service that we should strive for.

 

[television]

Re: The Lisbon vote

Their function should be to regulate and police the system and buy services from those providers who can meet the standards for the best price.

Give me a little time to think about that. But in theory I have no problem with that idea as long as all regardless of income have equal access to treatment. But America private spending on health ccare in america out weights public spending. And look what that has achieved for things like equity.

 

[Purple]

Re: The Lisbon vote

But America private spending on health ccare in america out weights public spending. And look what that has achieved for things like equity.

What it has given is a public system that is, on balance, better than ours, and a private system that is much better than ours.
By the way, no ER in America can turn a person away without treating them, regardless of whether or not they have health insurance. They may only stabilise them and ship them off to a public hospital but they can't turn them away.

 

[csirl]

Re: The Lisbon vote

Two thinks, being on the "left" is not a term of derision for me. If being on the left means i believe every person regardless of income desreves equality of access and treatment in a health system than yes i am on the left.

You mean that your from the strata of society that believes it should get a free ride on the backs of everyone elses hard work. Why should everyone else pick up the tab for you? Health insurance is not expensive in Ireland - most working people can afford it. Why not get a job and pay for it?

Dont give me the what about old, kids, handicapped etc? Providing free health care to those who are unfortunate enough to be able to support themselves is an entirely different argument to providing free health care to those who are too lazy to get a job.

 

[television]

Re: The Lisbon vote

You mean that your from the strata of society that believes it should get a free ride on the backs of everyone elses hard work. Why should everyone else pick up the tab for you? Health insurance is not expensive in Ireland - most working people can afford it. Why not get a job and pay for it?.

Health insureance for me and my family is around 2 grand (not a big family!). you think this is affordable for some one with 3 or 4 kids on an average industrial wage where its probalbly doubled?

Dont give me the what about old, kids, handicapped etc? Providing free health care to those who are unfortunate enough to be able to support themselves is an entirely different argument to providing free health care to those who are too lazy to get a job.

Tell that to the families of workers of companies in ireland who have gone bust in the last few months and who are unemployed through no fautl of their own.

And yes I believe in values such as community spirit, helping those who need it. giving people a helping hand if they are poor. and free health care to those in need who cant afford to pay. Those are values that are important to me and I hope remain important for the majority Irish people as I really think they still are.

 

[television]

Re: The Lisbon vote

Why should everyone else pick up the tab for you?

I have no problem picking up my share of the tab for universal free health. Its essentially about community and about looking after each other.

 

[Purple]

Re: The Lisbon vote

Tell that to the families of workers of companies in ireland who have gone bust in the last few months and who are unemployed through no fautl of their own.

Ironically due in no small way to the wage inflation driven by benchmarking and the other massive pay increases that those in the health sector have received over the last few years.

 

[television]

Re: The Lisbon vote

Ironically due in no small way to the wage inflation driven by benchmarking and the other massive pay increases that those in the health sector have received over the last few years.

Funny. But more due to weakness of the Amerian economy, Global Oil prices, etc to be fair. What ever the reason, calling these people lazy is pretty crude.