The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > We may be healthier, but the public purse is sicker > Comments

We may be healthier, but the public purse is sicker : Comments

By Gary Johns, published 3/11/2016

In contrast, the prevention of fatal diseases leads to an increase in healthcare spending. This is because the extra years of life generated inevitably result in an increased need for treatment.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All
The very people who fling money at people with terminal diseases, are the same people who complain about the cost of people hanging around longer.
Posted by ttbn, Thursday, 3 November 2016 9:07:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes Mr Johns. Particularly in America where medicine is arguably the most expensive in the world?

Why!? Because bean counting fools armed to the back teeth with stacks of statistics, believe that privatized health care is cheaper!

Moreover, big pharma relies on aged care, an oxymoron if ever there was one, for the sale of its most profitable product? Namely, statins, which as demonstrated in a recent double blind study, showed all those not on the placebo suffered some cognitive impairment?

And in too many cases, cognitive impairment, is all you need to ensure you're placed in "care"!

Look, a recent study by an American Professor, showed that caring for oldies in their own homes, cost around half that of nursing home care, one of our most profitable industries!

If the public purse is sicker, its because of all the bloodsucking leaches draining the life blood out of it!? And only possible due to the ideological imperatives of blinkered conservatives?

Who have successfully replaced the care core component of health care, with health consumerism, as if all that was on the table, was consumer choice! God give me patience!
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Thursday, 3 November 2016 10:49:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Me I said in other subject on OLO. That everyone who gets older then 70 should be put to sleep without any pain, except people who are valuble to the societey like Doctors, nurses, pilots, builders, politican, soldiers, policeman, and other important people to everyone else. Me I am 81 and I come from Albania and I work hard every single day since I was young. Me I should be put to sleep if I stop working or cost to much money because I am very sick as well, as I am now 81 years of age.
Posted by misanthrope, Thursday, 3 November 2016 12:33:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
40%of male smokers, and 28% of female smokers will die prematurely.
Which means 60% of males, and 72% of female smokers will not die from smoking related illnesses. (American research).
Government policy which discourages smoking (sin tax, as referred here), would not appear to be as benificial towards lengthening the life of most smokers, but by forcing people towards abstinence of smoking by increasing tobacco tax, sure is benificial towards the taxpayer.
A smoker has a higher privilege then, to actually smoke, because of that factor, by paying a higher proportion of tax towards health care than non smokers!

Obesity appears to be incurable. Against the smoker, fat people get off Scott free!
What is urgently called for, (to save the tax payer), is a tax on obesity: effectively a tax on sugar, and alcohol, another cause of obesity!
As a comparison, smokers are at an advantage to save tax payments by abstaining from smoking, whereas, fat people cannot get skinny; a very convenient captive audience for a tax grab, which could be directed towards health care budgets!
Posted by diver dan, Thursday, 3 November 2016 4:25:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Me I said in other subject on OLO. That everyone who gets older then 70 should be put to sleep without any pain, except people who are valuble to the societey like Doctors, nurses, pilots, builders, politician, soldiers, policeman, and other important people to everyone else.

Thats exactly how the depopulation agenda will work when vaccines become sufficiently advanced. A small number of vaccines will be reserved for the 'terminally ill' These will undoubtedly be engineered to do their thing over the course of a few months so that no body will put 2 and 2 together or, it will be impossible to prove.

From what I understand this kind of thing is already happening in the US but in a slightly different.

Hospices now have an expanded role in the us. When a person is sent to a hospice the staff are not permitted to help patients to eat or drink. If the patient spills their drink or meal, too bad
Posted by Referundemdrivensocienty, Thursday, 3 November 2016 8:28:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This was a really good article pointing out a serious issue in our politics and health planning. If we want to raise money through punishing smokers with high taxes then we need to be honest in justifying it. The justification that they cost the tax payer more money than non-smokers is simply a lie. If we are punishing them for their own good then we need to be honest about it.
And we also need to acknowledge the implications of encouraging an ever more healthier society. That is an older population which uses up much more health resources as well as other resources including aged pensions, nursing home care and home support services. Unfortunately the extra years of life gained occur at the end of the life cycle when people are no longer earning or contributing to the nations economic output.
Posted by Rhys Jones, Friday, 4 November 2016 1:19:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy