Yet another healthcare topic

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I have a question for everyone who is opposed to socialized healthcare and believes the poor should rely on charity for their healthcare:

How much do you give to medical charity funds annually?

I give to Diabetes and Breast Cancer charities annually, and the rest I don't because my taxes already cover it.

I should probably have specified, those of you who are opposed and don't live in countries that already have socialized medicine.

[Requia ☣]

choosing voluntarily to give money to those in need = bad

being forced to give money to those in need = good

Voluntarily is great and all, but you know what happens to people who try to rely on charity to get healthcare?

They fucking die.

http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/99/12/2289?maxtoshow=&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&author1=wilper&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=HWCIT

Note that this doesn't include people who have insurance but get tossed out into the street when they get sick.

[Requia ☣]

I have a question for everyone who is opposed to socialized healthcare and believes the poor should rely on charity for their healthcare:

How much do you give to medical charity funds annually?

I give to Diabetes and Breast Cancer charities annually, and the rest I don't because my taxes already cover it.

Are those treatment charities or research 'charities'.

[hooplala]

I have a question for everyone who is opposed to socialized healthcare and believes the poor should rely on charity for their healthcare:

How much do you give to medical charity funds annually?

I give to Diabetes and Breast Cancer charities annually, and the rest I don't because my taxes already cover it.

Are those treatment charities or research 'charities'.

Now that you mention it, the Diabetes one is a research charity.  Not sure why you needed the sarcastic quotation marks, though.  You don't think research charities are valid charities?

[Requia ☣]

No I don't, medical research charities are a way for pharmaceuticals to get other people to pay the R&D cost, but keep all of the profit.

[hooplala]

No I don't, medical research charities are a way for pharmaceuticals to get other people to pay the R&D cost, but keep all of the profit.

Wow.

So how do you expect any diseases to be cured?  Wishful thinking?

[Requia ☣]

Presumably it would come out of the 100 billion the people profiting from such research make in profit every year.

[Payne]

Wait, so you bitch about the charity instead of the Pharm company?

[hooplala]

Presumably it would come out of the 100 billion the people profiting from such research make in profit every year.

ooooooooooooooooook then...

[Requia ☣]

Wait, so you bitch about the charity instead of the Pharm company?

I bitch about the pharm companies too.  But the charities don't actually accomplish much besides making people feel good and helping pharma.

Exception, charities that are focused on diseases pharma has no interest in, like Malaria.  Pharma isn't going to try and cure diseases that only affect people who can't afford to pay, no matter how much money it has.

[Payne]

Wait, so you bitch about the charity instead of the Pharm company?

I bitch about the pharm companies too.  But the charities don't actually accomplish much besides making people feel good and helping pharma.

Exception, charities that are focused on diseases pharma has no interest in, like Malaria.  Pharma isn't going to try and cure diseases that only affect people who can't afford to pay, no matter how much money it has.

I still don't see what the problem is with research charities. They DO actually pay into the research (as they advertise), and they have no interest in the profit anyway (at least - no charity I would support would have an interest in the profit). If you have issues on the distribution of drugs and the ethics of Big Pharmaceuticals, then surely all the disgust should be directed solely at those companies?

[LMNO]

If the discussion is about healthcare, donating to a research charity does not necessarily translate into helping people afford their treatment, nor does it help lower the cost of the eventual drug or treatment when it becomes available.

If I gave $1M to cure cancer, none of that will go to anyone actually seeking cancer treatment.

[Payne]

If the discussion is about healthcare, donating to a research charity does not necessarily translate into helping people afford their treatment, nor does it help lower the cost of the eventual drug or treatment when it becomes available.

If I gave $1M to cure cancer, none of that will go to anyone actually seeking cancer treatment.

Ah.

Well, that's a different matter then.

I just picked up on the odd (to me) discrimination against one type of charity against another, forgetting the context of the discussion. Sorry.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Because in the end this individual will also be "stealing" from society.  The inevitability in THIS reality that Ratatosk's example of the private vs. the public citizen is impossible. 

NO one wants to make you pull out your insurance card when you are dying in a car wreck before they load you up in an ambulance.

Those services would be free for Taxed Citizens and "Free" Citizens would get a bill for the service. The EMS crew wouldn't need to check first. However, EMS crews already check for a number of things, having been a JW, I can tell ya that they check wallets for things like "No Blood Transfusions" or "Allergic to Foo" or "Free Citizen, please send your bill to 123 My St."

NO one wants to see if you've been "marked" by society for public assistance when your house is on fire, when you've been robbed, when you've lost your job, when your spouse is dying in a hospital and your kids need bread, milk and cheese.

See, with this one I disagree with. If a citizen says "I don't want to participate in the social safety net provided through taxation" then I'm fine with them dying in the street, along with their wife and kids. I think that a good society should provide options for their members, they should be able to provide food stamps, welfare, the dole, or whatever services are necessary... but equally, if a human being says "I want no part of this social system" then I think their wishes should be respected, even if that means they're homeless and starving.

Come on.  Real world.  This world.  And selfish assholes who don't like being taxed should stop walking on my roads, drinking my clean water and sending their kids to my schools.  (ok, not really, but that's where I end up going when I think of how dumb it is to think you could throw the government away like that and NOT use any of it, ever, again)

I think its incredibly stupid to believe that government should have little or no role in society. I think its terribly naive to think that we shouldn't pay taxes... but I also think that we all have the inherent RIGHT to self-determination. I think that society has a responsibility to provide options, but not to force those options on people that don't wish it. This is the biggest problem I have with the liberal viewpoint. I agree entirely with the idea of members of society helping each other, as long as they're not forced on everyone. If this idealistic situation with Free vs Taxed citizens existed, I would be a taxed citizen. I would give to charities, just as I do now. However, I would fully support the decision of other citizens that wanted nothing to do with the social system, its services or its safety net. If that means that they end up homeless with cancer, then so be it. They made the choice.

I think that society should OFFER a HAND, but if the person on the ground says "I don't need your help! Leave me alone!" then we should let them lie there.

Guns for people that want guns, no guns for people that don't want guns.
Drugs for people that want drugs, no drugs for people that don't want drugs.
Social Services for people that want social services, no social services for people that don't want social services.

Like what you like, enjoy what you enjoy and don't take crap from anyone.

The Guns and Dope party has the correct motorcycle

[Requia ☣]

I've thought about that model before, of services only provided to those that choose to pay taxes.

The problem is that the tiny number of people who have 95% of the wealth are going to be the ones who don't want to pay taxes in exchange for services.