Thread: Have you thought about how you will argue with the Death Panel?

Yes - right after I give the tooth fairy a piece of my mind.

Have you thought about having an honest discussion about healthcare instead of lying about it?

If such a thing did exist, I hope it would put down stupid people.

No darling I haven't........I have a standing DNR order that's updated frequently so my family doesn't have to agonize over wondering what I'd want in the event I couldn't voice my opinion on it.

No, because I think the Republicans will get that part of the bill removed.

Actually their is no Death panel in the bill.
Common arguments forwarded by supporters of universal health care systems include:
Health care is a basic human right or entitlement.
Ensuring the health of all citizens benefits a nation economically.
About 59% of the U.S. health care system is already publicly financed with federal and state taxes, property taxes, and tax subsidies - a universal health care system would merely replace private/employer spending with taxes. Total spending would go down for individuals and employers.
A single payer system could save $286 billion a year in overhead and paperwork. Administrative costs in the U.S. health care system are substantially higher than those in other countries and than in the public sector in the US: one estimate put the total administrative costs at 24 percent of U.S. health care spending.
Several studies have shown a majority of taxpayers and citizens across the political divide would prefer a universal health care system over the current U.S. system.
Universal health care would provide for uninsured adults who may forgo treatment needed for chronic health conditions.
Wastefulness and inefficiency in the delivery of health care would be reduced.
America spends a far higher percentage of GDP on health care than any other country but has worse ratings on such criteria as quality of care, efficiency of care, access to care, safe care, equity, and wait times, according to the Commonwealth Fund.
A universal system would align incentives for investment in long term health-care productivity, preventive care, and better management of chronic conditions.
Universal health care could act as a subsidy to business, at no cost thereto. (Indeed, the Big Three of U.S. car manufacturers cite health-care provision as a reason for their ongoing financial travails. The cost of health insurance to U.S. car manufacturers adds between USD 900 and USD 1,400 to each car made in the U.S.A.)
The profit motive adversely affects the cost and quality of health care. If managed care programs and their concomitant provider networks are abolished, then doctors would no longer be guaranteed patients solely on the basis of their membership in a provider group and regardless of the quality of care they provide. Theoretically, quality of care would increase as true competition for patients is restored.
A 2008 opinion poll of 2,000 US doctors found support for a universal health care plan at 59%-32%, which is up from the 49%-40% opinion of physicians in 2002. These numbers include 83% of psychiatrists, 69% of emergency medicine specialists, 65% of pediatricians, 64% of internists, 60% of family physicians and 55% of general surgeons. The reasons given are an inability of doctors to decide patient care and patients who are unable to afford care.
According to an estimate by Dr. Marcia Angell roughly 50% of health care dollars are spent on health care, the rest go to various middlepersons and intermediaries. A streamlined, non-profit, universal system would increase the efficiency with which money is spent on health care.
In countries in Western Europe with public universal health care, private health care is also available, and one may choose to use it if desired. Most of the advantages of private health care continue to be present, see also two-tier health care.
Universal health care and public doctors would protect the right to privacy between insurance companies and patients.
Public health care system can be used as independent third party in disputes between employer and employee.
Conservatives can favor universal health care, because in countries with universal health care, the government spends less tax money per person on health care than the U.S. For example, in France, the government spends $569 less per person on health care than in the United States. This would allow the U.S. to adopt universal health care, while simultaneously cutting government spending and cutting taxes.
Now what are your arguments against it?

Hey that link was funny. He can't even back one of his claims can he?

i see someone's been convinced by sarah palin

There is no death panel. Those with common sense know that the counseling is optional and for living will or hospice information. Why should people with common sense suffer because of those who don't.

"A health care bill passed by three House committees allows Medicare to reimburse doctors for voluntary counseling sessions about end-of-life decisions. But critics have claimed the provision could lead to death panels and euthanasia for seniors."

American - A gun in the colors of the flag? No wonder people look down on us. How ridiculous!

Dont look now, but your Limbaugh is showing!




































dumb

Since "Death Panels" are a myth. It would be like arguing with Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny.

Now I know a lot of people who have to argue with their private insurance companies because the insurance won't cover a brain tumor or a bleeding ulcer.