Sorry about your wife
First, despite your little dig, as far as the bail-outs go, I was clear that I was against them. What made me more mad was that some firms were allowed to fail and others (with the right political ties) got bailouts - see AIG/Goldman Sachs and their relation to the Secy of Treasury.

But I do believe that if a doctor decides to dedicate 14+ years of his life, incur hellish debt and go through the hell they do to be certified instead of smoking dope and dropping out, then he should earn more. More power to him. Same for a painter that wants to paint more or a kitten that spend more hours on the street corner.

Healthcare costs are really not lower due to the higher taxes, that tend to hit things that the poor need or want (like tanning or something silly). The other problem is that there are mandates which mean that only certain insurance companies (with the right political ties) get to work in a certain state - open that up and competition would drop the prices.

I was in a similar situation as you while in Canada. As for medication, there are many private companies, like the chain Target that provide low-cost generics, often for $4 a prescription. There are ways to make it work without some bureaucrat deciding what you need.

The taxation issue on Indian country is a myth. Yes, if the income is derived on the reservation, they don't pay STATE taxes, but still must pay FEDERAL taxes. Also, of the 500+ reservations in the states about half have casinos, and about 10% have large enough population bases to make them really profitable.

The only interest politicians have (I'll except John Thune, Tom Daschle, Tim Johnson, and their ilk) most only care for Indians at election time.

I too have been without insurance for almost a year due to losing full-time employment. I have worked out payment systems for the thousands of dollars my broken coccyx has cost me the past few months. My behind, my problem.
( BrokenCoccyx doesn't mind if you grope on, Wed 24 Mar 2010, 21:43, 2 replies)

yes on the bailout stuff.
it's a joke how so many dollars were handed over to companies that then also went on to pay their execs huge bonuses to boot. it felt like a smack in the face when it happened in the UK. there seemed to be a lot going on behind closed doors, though i know that each bailout appeal was presented to committee and examined thoroughly, with some degree of independence.

unfortunately, i say no to just about everything else.

doctors can certainly earn as much as they like, but kickbacks from pharm companies and charging more for treatments are no way of going about that. i'd like to think that my doctor, as with my local politicians, do what they do for the sake of helping people. any artist paints for arts sake, and any kitten kittens for kittenings sake. the moment that the money becomes more important than the care is the moment you should stop working as a trusted and licensed medical practitioner. should a soldier switch sides if he gets offered more money?

by 'competition would drop the prices', you mean that prices may be in competition with each other, but the market value is set by the industry, which is self protecting. they do have shareholders to report to after all. hence the privatised price of care/insurance is always going to be higher than the socialised cost.

meds in canada can be cheap. one of the ones my wife takes is quite reasonable, but the generic edition of another is $50 a month, down from $80. when we lived in the UK, there was a flat rate of $10 a prescription, regardless of the drug.

state taxes are way more than federal taxes.

i genuinely hope nothing else happens to you until you get your insurance back. if not, then good luck, because you're a car/stair/kitten accident away from being in debt for the rest of your life.
( the brass moustache putting the ass moust in brache since, Wed 24 Mar 2010, 22:03, closed)

I do worry about the cats. Prostibulae!

( BrokenCoccyx doesn't mind if you grope on, Wed 24 Mar 2010, 22:13, closed)

Who Decides?
Sorry mate, I have read the thread and I would like to point out one glaring flaw in your argument. The wish not to let 'bureaucrats' decide on you health care is something I support, but at the moment the insurance companies decide, and that comes down to a cost/benefit analysis, your ability to pay being the benefit,and the treatment the cost. Get where I'm coming from?

I really hope you guys over the pond sort out the healthcare thing, because you pay twice as much out of your salary than I did as a Brit, and you get a far worse deal (as long as you take the entire population as a whole as your sample, rather than say Bill Gates) than we do.

Also, it takes two to tango. Bipartinsanship is hard thing to achieve unilaterally, and from where I sit, the GOP hasn't been a willing partner.
(micmac is happy as a pig in shite, Wed 24 Mar 2010, 23:32, closed)