DO SOMETHING ABOUT HEALTH CARE COSTS!
Our company premiums are skyrocketing again, after two straight years of HUGE increases. More competition would be nice. Seems like there are very few companies who offer insurance in Kansas. Or allow small businesses to join the pool of state employees, or create some kind of over arching network of groups to spread the risk to lower costs. Or, dare I say it, universal health care coverage like they do in the rest of the developed world!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
I believe it was last year that a group appointed by the governor to study health care came to the conclusion that a state operated healthcare system covering everybody would be the least expensive approach, but they didn't formally propose it because they knew what the ideological reaction would be.
Yeah, most of the people in the title of this thread belong to a party that opposes any type of "universaility." For some reason they have been indoctrined into thinking that its "socialism." Should we eliminate public schools, police and fire stations, or perhaps libraries since they operate on a similar method?
The Republicans are looking for something to run on in the coming years and I'll bet that they will try to separate themselves as being opposed to any health care system. They will also try to bad mouth all of the "bailout" actvity as well, too bad that most of them are in favor of it now and have already voted for it.
NOT ONE of the the people mentioned in the title supported the bailout EXCEPT Barack.
Get your facts straight before you start bashing people because of party or otherwise.
The healthcare and insurance system in Kansas is largely impacted by the officeholder of the position Kansas Insurance Commissioner. Since that person is autonomous it is very difficult to excert outside influence to bring change. That is where change needs to come and it will probably start in two years at the next election to replace our current Commissioner.
Beyond that healthcare (like public education) is not a partisan issue. It is a people issue and partisan politics should have no place in the process. It is very unfortunate that some parties will try to use this as a political football. Since they aren't the low tax party or the economic development party or the individual freedoms party or the build the wall party they need to stand for something and it will probably continue to be for spending as much as possible on education, bringing, about universal(ly bad) healthcare, and killing babies.
I don't have health care because I can't afford it so I'd like to take my chances with universal health care. Oh and supporting candidates that kill babies according to the previous blog post.
Why should health care be a privelage, it should be a right for every citizen.
It is a right for every citizen... in Russia.
That seals it. If Russia is doing then we should clearly continue to let low income people suffer from preventable and curable diseases in the USofA. It would clearly be a demonstration of societal superiority and humanitarian work.
We dare not do better than a "lesser" society.
If universal health care is so great, why do people flock from Canada to the United States for Health Care?
Socialist health care is not the answer. The treatment is on par with how much you pay.
Anonymous said...
...The treatment is on par with how much you pay.
I know, I know. Tune up that ol banjo again.
The exception to this is that there is data supporting that, with equal healthcare coverage, certain populations do not receive comparable treatment.
For example, one ethnic group is about 35% more likely to receive amputation as a treatment for certain conditions affecting extremities versus non-ethnic moinorities.
Several publications have printed such data.
NOT ONE of the the people mentioned in the title supported the bailout EXCEPT Barack.
Go back and read the post again...talk about making assumptions and straight facts....
Post a Comment