Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues

Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Hasn't healthcare been "unionized" for decades (sm)

Posted By: Marmann on 2009-06-24
In Reply to: That will be an "obama" requirement to getting - healthcare in the first place! nm

now?  It's been used as a bargaining chip by unions when negotiating a new contract.  Just imagine how discontinuing healthcare from employers would help everyone!  Vendors could sell their products for less.  The insurance obligation would be placed somewhere else, maybe someplace it belongs, and the employees wouldn't have to pay a "co-pay" to their insurers.

Like Obama, I believe that if you like the healthcare you have, then you can keep it.

I've been very ill for 3-1/2 years now, and not only do I NOT qualify for regular health insurance, I also don't qualify for Mediaid.  When my social security disability claim comes through, I believe I'm not eligible for Medicare for something like 2-1/2 years after being approved.  So that's 2-1/2 YEARS to deny someone who was approved based on ILLNESS!  Isn't that kind of crazy?

If the option of an insurance plan that I can afford is "on the table," then I'd snatch it up as quickly as I could, while being perfectly agreeable with you keeping your own policies.

Some of us are falling through the cracks.

Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Other related messages found in our database

This has been going on for decades. sm
Why make it political?  Dems and Republicans both have failed to do anything.  We all need to get behind this. 
Unemployment is the lowest in decades. SM
Bad correlation.
Los Angeles Files Recount Decades of Priests' Abuse...sm
see link.
Exactly, hasn't shown us one way to pay for any
At least she hasn't EVER put down her country
SO far he hasn't proven anything
Yes, why hasn't anything been mentioned about that?
She had the meeting yesterday with them. I didn't hear a thing about it.
What makes you think he hasn't?
He hasn't been officially charged

so it's all just hearsay at this point.  This is all a witch hunt pure and simple, however, everytime dems open up Pandora's box they are the ones who really get burned by it.

I'm not saying people who do something illegal and are found guilty shouldn't be punished Dem. or Rep. alike, but when people start opening up other people's closets they better be darn sure their's are squeaky clean....

How do you know the recruiter hasn't been to Iraq?
How do you know where he has been?  As punishment, he should be sent to war.  In other words, off with his head!  My, the mask is off now, isn't it. You know the mask.  The one where you pretend to hate the war but support the troops. 
Democrat hasn't won the presidency yet.
Mostly because I can't wait to see what you all have to say when the country is still in shambles with a Democrat behind the wheel. I can't believe you all actually think a Dem in office will help. Entire Congress is Dem right now. What has it done lately?
Hasn't McCain only been in Congress also?
What executive experience does he have? From your answer, Palin seems more qualified than McCain even.
blaming someone you know nothing about for something that hasn't happened
Good question...why hasn't he? However,
adopted by a Kenyan man which makes him a Kenyan by law and because this man was Muslim, he was also Muslim, even though we already knew that because his mother brought him up Muslim. ANyway, he cannot be a citizen of this country after being adopted by this man from Kenya. He then has to go through immigration dept and their entire process to apply for US citizenship, which he has no papers to prove that either.

It has been nasty, hasn't it? On both sides...
McCain certainly would not have been my first choice either, but I voted for the candidate that I thought was the better of the two--I actually prefer a more conservative candidate than McCain. I do think that it is a shame that everyone has become so mean. I have tried not to be that way to anyone, although I guess some people see me as "rabid." What can you do? I at least know that I am not a name-caller or a racist, regardless of what others might think. Perhaps it will cool down. At any rate, have a good night!
I agree. It is a disgrace that he hasn't done it before now! nm
Yeah, or he just hasn't got a clue!
How come it hasn't worked for the last 8 years?
Messiah of MT Stars - tells us oh revered and feared of the freak forum!
The big "O" aleady the worst and he hasn't been....
there a year yet. The next would be Jimmy Carter. Read up on the economy under HIM. Obama doesn't give two hoots about what "we" want. He is pushing through his personal agenda at lightning speed and the worst of it is he really believes this will work...kinda like Caesar fiddling while Rome burned around him. Well, they say ignorance is bliss and he must be one deliriously happy camper right about now.
Oh, please. She hasn't been drawn and quartered.
Including smart Republicans who absolutely do NOT want to see her as president.
Of course in your book it's old news; he still hasn't
Joe Biden hasn't had invasive melanoma...

McCain has.  And you think McCain's mind is still sharp?  If it is, it hasn't been coming across that way lately, especially last week.  He better come across as sharp this week and at the debates.  Speaking of McCain's health, I'm going to post something up at the top about that. 

Respectable? Hah! He hasn't even earned trust yet!

Give it a few months for the media orgy/love fest to end then the scandals will begin (quite a few already).The dems are already at each other throats....this is gonna be good!

Because so far I'm still allowed to express my honest opinion. He hasn't taken that away from us

Those are his words, and what is scary is that I think he believes it. It's bad enough we've got enemies who believe they're in a religious war. With each passing day, I'm starting to think HE believes he's in one, too. If that's the case, we're in more trouble than anyone could have thought.

My post was about HIM, not about you. But it isn't the first time a Bush groupie has PERSONALLY attacked a poster for expressing their opinion about BUSH. Now, how do you think that makes YOU look? Maybe it's YOU who should grow up or at least WAKE up and see what he's doing, not just to us but to the entire WORLD.

As long as we all still have freedom of expression, I'll continue to express my views, whether you like them or not.

And I hope you keep posting. Nobody can prove my point for me like a Bush groupie, and I do appreciate the help!!

my 401K from a previous employer hasn't lost much
but it's in low risk investments, a lot of bonds, and so when things get better, it probably won't rise as quickly as other 401k's. I'm a chicken.
thanks, Marmann, I miss JTBB, hasn't post since yesterday evening, you o.k?..nm
He would also have (and likely already has) best healthcare in USA.
I don't consider this a concern. Major factor in cancer is awareness and monitoring, and I'm quite sure he's getting the best monitoring and follow-up care available.
Healthcare is already rationed in the US: If you can't afford insurance, you can't get it. If you're sick, you can't get insurance. If your employer enticed you with promises of insurance, but then didn't pay you enough to cover premiums, you can't get it. If you can't afford a procedure, then your long wait just became a lot longer.

Incidentally, what Obama is offering is *not* anything like what those countries you mention have. He's not nationalizing the healthcare system (like the UK) *or* nationalizing the insurance system (like Canada). Read his plan; it's a mixture of public and private plans, with more strict requirements on the insurance companies to cover everyone affordably, rather than gaming the system and cutting out sick people.

Personally, I'd love a nationalized system. Insurance companies are unnecessary middlemen driving up costs. That said, they're not the entire problem with healthcare costs--you can look to pharmaceutical companies for a big part of *that* problem.

What happens to healthcare...(sm)
Yes, more people probably will go to the doctor.  That means there will be a lot of health maintenance involved, and as we both know only too well, health maintenance is a key issue in preventing major medical issues, hence less surgeries, etc.  Check out France's healthcare system.  I think main issue we will have is going to be dealing with the drug companies to get costs under control.  At this point a lot of people don't go to the doc because they can't afford it, like you said; however, even more don't go because they can't afford the drugs.
What happens to healthcare...(sm)

Yes, more people probably will go to the doctor.  That means there will be a lot of health maintenance involved, and as we both know only too well, health maintenance is a key issue in preventing major medical issues, hence less surgeries, etc.  Check out France's healthcare system.  I think main issue we will have is going to be dealing with the drug companies to get costs under control.  At this point a lot of people don't go to the doc because they can't afford it, like you said; however, even more don't go because they can't afford the drugs.

BTW, regardless of Fox's ratings, they are undeniably a right-wing station.  That is a fact that is widely known and recognized.  Just because you agree with what they say doesn't mean they don't lean to the right.  And yes, the same holds true for MSNBC (to the left), but at least they admit it.  You also might want to look into exactly how ratings for cable news come about.  You might be surprised and what you could learn.


I'm not sure this is a good idea either.  Ireland has gov't run medical and those women were waiting years, yes years to get their Pap smears read.  They had to be shipped to the US because of a lab closure.  Can you imagine wondering if you have cervical cancer for years?  No thanks.


universal healthcare
Where are you getting that information about Obama and universal healthcare? The last time I heard him speak about it he wanted universal healthcare for people who couldn't get healthcare but leave the option open to people who could get their own healthcare (as they are doing now) to do so. He also spoke about companies being held more responsible to providing affordable healthcare for employees. I don't remember him ever saying to knock out the entire healthcare system and make everyone have universal healthcare.

As for McCain... I guess you like the economy and the war. He's not going to change anything if he's elected.
European healthcare
Its not all cracked up as it sounds. I use healthcare right now in Sweden and its horrendously bad. I had to fly home to the US to get my breasts examined for lumps that were found because they have the "if it isn't broken, bleeding or obviously damaged, then go home and take an aspirin" mentality. They found the lumps and we were still waiting for a mammogram over a month later because they don't want to do testing and because they have a don't care attitude when it comes to everything here. Don't rush them. its amazing. Its at least 6 months waiting list (if your lucky) to see the dentist unless you are under a certain age as a youth. You can get private healthcare here but the cost of labor is such that its hugely expensive. I don't know about other places because I have only lived here and in the US. We have great healthcare in the US and we have never chosen jobs where we weren't going to have some kind of coverage, but I would never give up my doctors and my insurance in the US for this garbage social junk.
McCain's healthcare tax.

I posted this further down but there are apparently a lot of people who are still confused about how McCain's tax on health insurance works. 

So, here you go:

Say you pay 14% income tax based on your income.

And you receive $10,000 worth of health insurance from your employer.

The $10,000 is taxed separately at the 14% (your tax bracket). That comes out to $1,400.

McCain gives you a $5,000 tax credit.

$5,000 less the $1,400 -

YOU'RE AHEAD $3,600.


Alternatively, you can take the $5,000 tax credit and purchase your own insurance (like I do). I pay $250 a month.

$250 x 12 = $3,000.

$5,000 - $3,000 - $2,000.



On the healthcare front........sm

Nearly half the respondents in a survey of U.S. primary care physicians said that they would seriously consider getting out of the medical business within the next three years if they had an alternative.


This comes from top healthcare facilities
I'm pretty sure you don't get your healthcare from
I found something interesting about US healthcare.

Because I am infinitely quizzical about most things and the rising cost of healthcare was on my mind, I did a little browsing and came across this document:


Now keep in mind this is information compiled is from a think tank funded by some of the biggest corporations, including insurance corps for the betterment and furtherance of the regressive conservative ideal, so I was rather surprised to see these numbers so beautifully printed in black and white. 

It shows exactly how much we are paying for healthcare in the United States and it is rather astounding.  Far more of our GDP, about 15.5% (the highest in the world) goes to healthcare.  Almost double that other industrialized nations that have socialized healthcare. 

I think this is a pretty good argument against a free market healthcare system being the most efficient and the best, it is just the most expensive and at the rate it has been exploding, it is going to increase the number of uninsured. 

Why is it so expensive?  Because the insurance companies are pacing the market.  Some things should just NOT be included in the free market enterprise, and healthcare is one of them.  We get sicker and the insurance companies get fatter.

personally i have used the healthcare in Europe

and in France and England (several times in France) and I have to say that national healthcare over there works wonderfully well.....costs are minimal (though taxes are high) and all rxs in England cost the same and I was treated fabulously (married French) at American Hospital in Paris and Gap Hospital in France in 1980.....I did England in 71-72 and again, got treated well and for less than $40.  I believe national healthcare can work but the govt and medical professions here in the states don't want it - because they, the MDS, will make less.  But know this, that I saw the life of a doctor in France and his family in Michael Moore's movie SiCKO and they are living like kings, well not kings, but living VERY VERY WELL.

So, based on my own experiences in Europe - and the experiences to date of my in-laws over in France - I have to say the healthcare over there is FAR better and FAR LESS EXPENSIVE than over here but again, their taxes are somewhat higher.

Hillary screwed it up once before, I don't want to give her a second chance regarding healthcare.

healthcare a problem prior to THIS war and they did
It can end with affordable healthcare for kids.

I would like to see more affordable healthcare for all Americans, but really if kids got free or very affordable healthcare I would be happy.  We spend outrageous amounts of money on the space program, the war, gourmet food for Congress, etc.  I don't agree with the hoards of money going to those things, but I would think we could ALL AGREE on money being redirected to provide healthcare to all American children, because that is obviously a good and just cause.

France is getting universal healthcare right...

Great post piglet.  I so agree with what you all had to say in support of changing our current system.  Canada probably has the worst universal healthcare system, and yet the average Canadian lives 3 years longer than the average American.  People always point to the flaws in their system and just assume that we will make all the same mistakes.  Of course their system has flaws, just as our system has many fatal flaws.  England and France actually have great universal healthcare systems.  Here is an article I found about France's successful program:

"France's model healthcare system
By Paul V. Dutton | August 11, 2007

MANY advocates of a universal healthcare system in the United States look to Canada for their model. While the Canadian healthcare system has much to recommend it, there's another model that has been too long neglected. That is the healthcare system in France.

Although the French system faces many challenges, the World Health Organization rated it the best in the world in 2001 because of its universal coverage, responsive healthcare providers, patient and provider freedoms, and the health and longevity of the country's population. The United States ranked 37.

The French system is also not inexpensive. At $3,500 per capita it is one of the most costly in Europe, yet that is still far less than the $6,100 per person in the United States.

An understanding of how France came to its healthcare system would be instructive in any renewed debate in the United States.

That's because the French share Americans' distaste for restrictions on patient choice and they insist on autonomous private practitioners rather than a British-style national health service, which the French dismiss as "socialized medicine." Virtually all physicians in France participate in the nation's public health insurance, SÚcuritÚ Sociale.

Their freedoms of diagnosis and therapy are protected in ways that would make their managed-care-controlled US counterparts envious. However, the average American physician earns more than five times the average US wage while the average French physician makes only about two times the average earnings of his or her compatriots. But the lower income of French physicians is allayed by two factors. Practice liability is greatly diminished by a tort-averse legal system, and medical schools, although extremely competitive to enter, are tuition-free. Thus, French physicians enter their careers with little if any debt and pay much lower malpractice insurance premiums.

Nor do France's doctors face the high nonmedical personnel payroll expenses that burden American physicians. SÚcuritÚ Sociale has created a standardized and speedy system for physician billing and patient reimbursement using electronic funds.

It's not uncommon to visit a French medical office and see no nonmedical personnel. What a concept. No back office army of billing specialists who do daily battle with insurers' arcane and constantly changing rules of payment.

Moreover, in contrast to Canada and Britain, there are no waiting lists for elective procedures and patients need not seek pre-authorizations. In other words, like in the United States, "rationing" is not a word that leaves the lips of hopeful politicians. How might the French case inform the US debate over healthcare reform?

National health insurance in France stands upon two grand historical bargains -- the first with doctors and a second with insurers.

Doctors only agreed to participate in compulsory health insurance if the law protected a patient's choice of practitioner and guaranteed physicians' control over medical decision-making. Given their current frustrations, America's doctors might finally be convinced to throw their support behind universal health insurance if it protected their professional judgment and created a sane system of billing and reimbursement.

French legislators also overcame insurance industry resistance by permitting the nation's already existing insurers to administer its new healthcare funds. Private health insurers are also central to the system as supplemental insurers who cover patient expenses that are not paid for by SÚcuritÚ Sociale. Indeed, nearly 90 percent of the French population possesses such coverage, making France home to a booming private health insurance market.

The French system strongly discourages the kind of experience rating that occurs in the United States, making it more difficult for insurers to deny coverage for preexisting conditions or to those who are not in good health. In fact, in France, the sicker you are, the more coverage, care, and treatment you get. Would American insurance companies cut a comparable deal?

Like all healthcare systems, the French confront ongoing problems. Today French reformers' number one priority is to move health insurance financing away from payroll and wage levies because they hamper employers' willingness to hire. Instead, France is turning toward broad taxes on earned and unearned income alike to pay for healthcare.

American advocates of mandates on employers to provide health insurance should take note. The link between employment and health security is a historical artifact whose disadvantages now far outweigh its advantages. Economists estimate that between 25 and 45 percent of the US labor force is now job-locked. That is, employees make career decisions based on their need to maintain affordable health coverage or avoid exclusion based on a preexisting condition.

Perhaps it's time for us to take a closer look at French ideas about healthcare reform. They could become an import far less "foreign" and "unfriendly" than many here might initially imagine."


I have used the British and French healthcare

I have visited and used both the British and French national healthcare system and I must say I was treated very_well in both countries.....and I think it is a great idea for THIS country now, having had first-hand experiences in Europe.. 

JMHO, of course.

Universal healthcare NOT the answer!!

  1. There isn't a single government agency or division that runs efficiently; do we really want an organization that developed the U.S. Tax Code handling something as complex as health care?
  2. "Free" health care isn't really free since we must pay for it with taxes; expenses for health care would have to be paid for with higher taxes or spending cuts in other areas such as defense, education, etc.
  3. Profit motives, competition, and individual ingenuity have always led to greater cost control and effectiveness.
  4. Government-controlled health care would lead to a decrease in patient flexibility.
  5. Patients aren't likely to curb their drug costs and doctor visits if health care is free; thus, total costs will be several times what they are now.
  6. Just because Americans are uninsured doesn't mean they can't receive health care; nonprofits and government-run hospitals provide services to those who don't have insurance, and it is illegal to refuse emergency medical service because of a lack of insurance.
  7. Government-mandated procedures will likely reduce doctor flexibility and lead to poor patient care.
  8. Healthy people who take care of themselves will have to pay for the burden of those who smoke, are obese, etc.
  9. A long, painful transition will have to take place involving lost insurance industry jobs, business closures, and new patient record creation.
  10. Loss of private practice options and possible reduced pay may dissuade many would-be doctors from pursuing the profession.
  11. Malpractice lawsuit costs, which are already sky-high, could further explode since universal care may expose the government to legal liability, and the possibility to sue someone with deep pockets usually invites more lawsuits.
  12. Government is more likely to pass additional restrictions or increase taxes on smoking, fast food, etc., leading to a further loss of personal freedoms.
  13. Like social security, any government benefit eventually is taken as a "right" by the public, meaning that it's politically near impossible to remove or curtail it later on when costs get out of control.

NOT VOTING FOR OBAMA!  His plans will fail and they will up the cost of everything.  Stop the government spending!  Don't vote for someone wanting to add more programs that will INCREASE government spending.  That is why our economy is in deep crap right now.

Members of Congress get the best healthcare that...sm
money can buy by the U.S. government and Obama wants us to have it too.
Here's a breakdown of McCain's healthcare tax.
Say you pay 14% income tax based on your income.

And you receive $10,000 worth of health insurance from your employer.

The $10,000 is taxed separately at the 14% (your tax bracket). That comes out to $1,400.

McCain gives you a $5,000 tax credit.

$5,000 less the $1,400 -

YOU'RE AHEAD $3,600.


Alternatively, you can take the $5,000 tax credit and purchase your own insurance (like I do). I pay $250 a month.

$250 x 12 = $3,000.

$5,000 - $3,000 - $2,000.


From what I understand Canada's healthcare...sm
is not run by private insurance companies as is Obama's plan, but rather by the government itself. His aim is for all people to have availablity to health insurance with a premium based on what they can afford, the ability to keep your insurance when you change jobs, keep your own doctor, and have your doctor ultimately decide what treatment is best for you not the insurance company.
When did socialism and universal healthcare
Obama's universal healthcare will be SO much
A ? for those in favor of national healthcare
What is your rationale for wanting government in charge of your healthcare? You have to know that if this happens, healthcare in this country IS going to be rationed, the same as it's been rationed in Great Britain, Sweden, and Canada. There will be long waits for procedures that we now take for granted being done in a very short time. I know Obama promised the same healthcare as he now has in the senate...do you believe him?
You need to talk with a few liberal healthcare