Quit talking about free health care, and socialized medicine.

"Free" health care in Canada, UK, etc., isn't free. Citizens pay for it with their taxes.

"Socialized medicine"--well, unfortunately many Americans are so brainwashed that the word "socialized" affects them the way a red flag does a bull. S

Same with "free" health care; some people are SO afraid that somebody, somewhere, might get something free--something THEY had to pay for.

I suggest using the phrases, "single payer plan" or "national health plan."

If we don't explicitly use the terms "Free" (really free at point of service) or socialized, Most American politicians take that to mean we still want insurance companies. I don't know anyone who still wants insurance companies as they exist now.

Single Payer works somewhat, but that could still mean one giant Aetna.

...motivational words. So given that medical attention is free at the point of care, why say anything different?

NGU.

It has preserved the health and well being of millions of seniors AND their families who used to have to help their elderly parents get their health care.

I know people in the 50s who grumble that they don't have Medicare and wish they did. They get laid off or get sick and can't work and lose their health care plans. It's a real problem.

We all know that we must pay for Medicare, so we know it is not "free." But we accept that as a good trade off. So "Medicare for everyone" goes down easier than any other catchphrase.

The RW says "socialized" medicine because they know the word "socialized" will scare up a lot of their base.

Universal Health Care is also the best because we're probably not going to get a single-payer plan out of the box, anyhow.

The word "healthcare" is rather amorphous to me. I know where it came from. Since we've had PPOs and HMOs (Thanks Nixon!) medical staff have been referred to as "health care providers."

... Having said that, it costs "us" much less to provide everyone health management, or pay for preventative measures than it does to treat those failed services, waiting until it becomes ACUTE, or EMERGENT CARE.

No, nothing is free, even knowledge costs anyone the time to learn and practice.

to sell so far.

Most people readily understand that phrase. And, importantly, it's not open to manipulation by the the other guys.

I'm actively involved with the effort to promote & explain HR 676 - and the monikers are the thing we have the MOST trouble with. People really have been brainwashed thoroughly, even those I work with inside the medical field, to associate this with socialism and waiting lines. Its truly sickening to see how dumb even smart people can be.

I've tried to reframe it several ways, but I've never tried "same plan that Congress has". I'm going to adopt that and see if it helps. Thanks !

Excellent discussion, BTW.

denied care, or especially not denied care they paid premiums for, simply to fatten CEOs salaries.

People like to be with a winner. And they don't like to be told that what you are proposing automatically makes their idea wrong.

How about "all-inclusive medical and dental care."

And people may have a problem with the boo-word "socialized," but increasingly not so much with comparisons to Canada or Germany as models of what works better. People are involved in the system here and they know it sucks!

Something our "Big Three" Democratic candidates for the White House don't seem to like discussing.

I don't mean to be dense, but why is it just health care that everyone now wants to have free of charge? Why not all the other expenses of life, e.g., mortgage, food, clothes, etc. When you add it up, I spend a lot more on food and mortgage than on health care. So how did health care come to be the one thing we all demand for free. I don't see anyone advocating that we should be able to go to the grocery store and simply pack up the food we want and take it free of charge.

A little history lesson would be nice.

has become a prime cause of individual bankruptcies in the last few years. People get a serious illness, say cancer, can't afford the treatment (but of course have it anyway -- as they should), but can't afford it, then go under financially. What about insurance? Well, go ahead and try the claims denied circus. (See SiCKO for more info on denied claims)

And don't forget the uninsured (47 million). Some of us are unemployed, some of us work for small businesses that can't afford to provide a healthcare benefits package. Some of us have used up our lifetime benefits on an illness that the company said they will no longer pay claims on. Guess what? We pay an extra premium at the Doctor's, even if we can afford it, because we don't belong in a huge insurance pool that can bargain for better rates.

It's not just individuals. Huge corporations are buckling under the strain of financing healthcare both for present workers and retirees. (See GM and WalMart.) Until recently WalMart employees in some counties were the biggest consumers of county-provided health services. So guess what? They were already getting socialized medicine.

The best way to bring down costs for everyone is for all of us to be in the same pool, rich, poor, sick, well. That way the risk gets spread out over a much bigger group.

Then it seems the answer is a safety net for the big-ticket catastrophes which can ruin you financially. I am all for that. But I guess I'm having a hard time justifying why it should be free to get a flu shot, or an exam for a stomach ache, or a quick throat exam and culture to diagnose strep. You know - the basic run-of-the-mill doctor visit we all occasionally have. I'd rather get insurance out of the way altogether and have a pay-as-you-go system for the basic stuff which really doesn't cost that much (or shouldn't cost that much). From the doctors I know, it's all the insurance forms and compliance junk that drives the cost up, including hiring staff to do nothing but coding and insurance forms.

say 5 or 10 dollars for routine office visits,

And flu shots already are free for certain segments of the population, those that need them the most, esp the elderly.

But all diagnostic tests, hospitalizations, xrays, supplies for chronic conditions, surgeries, should be free at the time of service. The money to be exchanged should only be between the provider and the gov't agency set up for Single Payer.

There are some people--I have 2 relatives like this--who go to the Doctor for a broken fingernail. (OK, a slight exaggeration.) But some people are like that. I guess they do it for attention.

There might be an exemption from the copay for those who are really too poor to pay it.

I'm in my 50's now. I pay $200/month for an individual policy, high deductible, and it's basically a catastrophic policy.

Dental and vision expenses are so damned expensive. Even just a regular eye exam costs mucho bucks. Not to mention field vision tests. And my glasses are expensive too.

I have to take a prescription med that's about $100 a month.

And I consider myself lucky, at my age, that my medical expenses are relatively low.

If I were to develop diabetes, I'd just be screwn.

"why is it just health care that everyone now wants to have free of charge? "

"Free" health care is NOT free. That is my point. It is paid for with people's taxes. I don't know about you, but I'd rather my taxes go for Medicare for everyone than go for imperial wars.

If you haven't heard any stories about people you know, or friends of friends, of even reading stories about US citizens, nice, working people, being financially ruined by medical expenses, then you haven't been paying much attention.

41 years old, married father of two. And each month, I spend $1300 on my mortgage, probably $400 on food, a couple hundred on utilities, $500 on car payments, another couple hundred on gas, and untold dollars on miscellaneous clothes and other necessities for the kids. All told, this is probably $3000 or more each month, or about $36,000 per year on the necessities of life. This is far and away more than we spend on doctor's visits.

How come no one is saying homes should be free, or gas, or utilities, or food? Why is it just medical care?

asking why we are not demanding free homes, free food, free gas, etc etc?

I'm just using the word "free" to mean free at the time of service, which appears to be what most people are advocating (with the exception of maybe a minor co-pay). I know it's not free in the larger sense of the word because taxes pay for it.

But my larger question remains open -- how did healthcare, which is just ONE of the necessities of life, become the one thing that people are demanding be free at the time of service? Why shouldn't heating oil be paid for out of the general tax revenue? Or food? Or clothing? Or mortgage payments?

If your medical expenses have so far been modest, good for you. (By the way, do you have group medical insurance?) But one never knows, a family member could develop an illness costing mucho bucks, such that even if the family paid out everything they had, they might not be able to pay the expenses.