Conservative transgender

[japple]

Obamacare is not socialism. It's mandatory health care (like mandatory car insurance) through private companies with regulations on how those companies spend their money and who they treat.

The stories about "long lines to see a doctor" are not true. There are long waits to see specialists but that happens in America too. What else happens in America? Not being able to see a doctor at all. People are denied access to medical care because insurance is required and people are profiteering.

America has had long waits on HRT too or not had it paid for by insurance at all. A lot of Americans are ordering drugs from these countries you think are worse off because they're cheaper with better access. Obama has consistently voted in favor of GLBT rights and if he stays on is track, could federally allow trans treatments.

It's easy to make stuff sound good, but always look at the opposing viewpoint. I own a business, make a good living, and pay a ton in taxes. I will never vote Republican because that party is now entirely about morality and profiteering.

The opposition to Obamacare is simple. Insurance companies not being allowed to only grant healthy people coverage means they have a higher loss percentage and can't profit as much. That's it. Business over medical care.

[Jamie D]

One need only read the stories from our Canadian and British cousins to realize the failures of socialized medicine.

You need to be careful about sweeping generalizations.

[peky]

One need only read the stories from our Canadian and British cousins to realize the failures of socialized medicine.

You need to be careful about sweeping generalizations.

Of course every Canadian or UK Transsexual citizen sooner or later can get a SRS if she or he so desires.

For USA Transsexuals you better work for a company who offers SRS as part of your health benefits, or better be rich so you can fork the monies to pay for it. But if you are a poor then all you are in the proverbial "up to the creek without a paddle"

[peky]

Of course every Canadian or UK Transsexual citizen sooner or later can get a SRS if she or he so desires.

For USA Transsexuals you better work for a company who offers SRS as part of your health benefits, or better be rich so you can fork the monies to pay for it. But if you are a poor then all you are in the proverbial "up to the creek without a paddle"

And just think that there is not probably more than 5,000 MTF transsexuals in the USA. Even if all wanted and could get an SRS, that would be about $ 50,000.000 (50 million), that is assuming $10,000 per surgery.

Wow, you said 50 millions!!!!. But before you get so shock, think that the number of knee replacements in the USA in 2010 were 600,000, at $15,000 each comes to a whopping $9,000,000,000.00 (9 thousand millions).

Oh but "people really need a "knee replacement" while SRS...well is just that a "life style."

Ponder the fact that suicides due to "knee" problems are unheard of, while GID is ones of the leading causes of suicides.

[Brooke777]

At least the entire transition, including hrt and srs is paid for by basic health insurance thanks to government interference in my country, while many, many transgenders in the USA cannot afford their transition causing them to get stuck between genders.

Or doing questionable things to earn money.

[Stephe]

One need only read the stories from our Canadian and British cousins to realize the failures of socialized medicine.

You need to be careful about sweeping generalizations.

And the above isn't a sweeping generalization? There are plenty of stories in the USA about failures our system has now. I am one of them. I can't get reasonably priced health insurance because I have this pre-existing condition of being transgendered. I'm not talking about wanting my gender stuff paid for, I just want to be able to access general health care.

Until recently, thanks to Bush, it was perfectly legal for a doctor to deny care based on religious or moral reasons. So I could get into a car accident, show up in the ER and the doctor could legally say "I'm not working on this freak." Thanks to Obama, that is not longer the case. Oh yeah, that's right "they haven't done anything to help LGBT people in this administration" *rolls eyes*

[LilyoftheValley]

stephe what act was it exactly that bush passed to cause that?

[justmeinoz]

I was talking with my girlfriend and suggested in jest that we should start a "Rainbow Nationals" locally, GLBTIQ branch of the National Party just to watch the reaction.

It looks like there is no local state branch of the Nats, so it could actually be feasible.  They claim to be a Conservative party, but they also favour Gov't support for farmers and improved social welfare policies in rural areas, which makes sense as they were originally known as the Country Party. 

Maybe after I finish Uni?   And Tekla could see if it is possible to register and launch a "Rainbow Republicans".  I could forsee many Trans-Pacific official visits! 

Karen.

[Stephe]

read more here:

http://www.bjconline.org/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=4238

I have no problem letting a doctor decide if they want to perform abortions but what bush did was make the rule so broad it can be applied to anything.

[Jamie D]

And just think that there is not probably more than 5,000 MTF transsexuals in the USA. Even if all wanted and could get an SRS, that would be about $ 50,000.000 (50 million), that is assuming $10,000 per surgery.

Wow, you said 50 millions!!!!. But before you get so shock, think that the number of knee replacements in the USA in 2010 were 600,000, at $15,000 each comes to a whopping $9,000,000,000.00 (9 thousand millions).

Oh but "people really need a "knee replacement" while SRS...well is just that a "life style."

Ponder the fact that suicides due to "knee" problems are unheard of, while GID is ones of the leading causes of suicides.

Let's review your math, Peky.

We know that 3.5% of the population in the United States identified as "transgendered." (According to a report issued by the Williams Institute at UCLA)  Of that, 0.3% identify as "transgender."

Let's assume that just 1/3 of all trangendered persons are MtF.  In the United States there are approximately 310,000,000 people.  That means there would be about 310,000 MtFs.

Conway estimates that there are 30,000 to 40,000 post-op Mtfs in the US.

So your estimate seems to be off by one to two orders of magnitude.

Perhaps more problematical, is your idea that somehow the taxpayers owe you an operation.

[Jamie D]

And the above isn't a sweeping generalization? There are plenty of stories in the USA about failures our system has now. I am one of them. I can't get reasonably priced health insurance because I have this pre-existing condition of being transgendered. I'm not talking about wanting my gender stuff paid for, I just want to be able to access general health care.

Until recently, thanks to Bush, it was perfectly legal for a doctor to deny care based on religious or moral reasons. So I could get into a car accident, show up in the ER and the doctor could legally say "I'm not working on this freak." Thanks to Obama, that is not longer the case. Oh yeah, that's right "they haven't done anything to help LGBT people in this administration" *rolls eyes*

Saying that some of our Canadian and British cousins have had problems with their socialized medicine has problems, is a generalization?  No.  That is a fact.  A generalization would have been, "socialized medicine provides inferior care."  That may be a fact too!

[UCBerkeleyPostop]

I think political allegiances in America usually are the same in trans and non trans people. Typically your older people are more conservative and the younger people are more liberal voting. What's that old saying, something like "if you are a democrat and under 30 you are an idealist, if you are a democrat >60 you are stupid" lol? Something like that. Younger people tend to be more supportive of democrats in my experience, but I don't know, maybe it's different in the middle of the country. On the coasts it seems to be that way. I'm independent, I don't listen to The Man, The Man can't hold me down! I'm breaking freeeeee!

Please show some evidence that people switch voting from liberal to conservative when they get older. I would love to see that.

[Stephe]

Saying that some of our Canadian and British cousins have had problems with their socialized medicine has problems, is a generalization?

What you said was "One need only read the stories from our Canadian and British cousins to realize the failures of socialized medicine."

If reading some horror stories about what sometimes happens there = it will be a failure, the same hold true even more so for what we have now in this country. There are plenty of horror stories about people being denied coverage here.

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/News/News-Releases/2010/Jun/US-Ranks-Last-Among-Seven-Countries.aspx

We are at the bottom of the list of multiple countries who do have socialized medicine.

[japple]

One need only read the stories from our Canadian and British cousins to realize the failures of socialized medicine.

You need to be careful about sweeping generalizations.

? That's called confirmation bias. American medicine is not "socialized." It's federally mandated for people to have insurance, just like they do on their cars. The US system was broken, now it's better. Obama is doing a lot for GLBT people.

[dalebert]

What we have now seems worse than socialized medicine. There are lots of regulations and a litigious society contributes to exorbitant costs of healthcare. Obamacare feels more like corporate welfare than a step toward socialized medicine. Mandating insurance sounds great for the insurance companies which practically wholesale supported it. That should have been a red flag for a lot of people. Meanwhile, I was uninsured before OC and I remain uninsured after OC. The main difference is that now I might get fined by the government for not getting health insurance that has been made dramatically more expensive largely due to government policy.

[peky]

Let's review your math, Peky.

We know that 3.5% of the population in the United States identified as "transgendered." (According to a report issued by the Williams Institute at UCLA)  Of that, 0.3% identify as "transgender."

Let's assume that just 1/3 of all trangendered persons are MtF.  In the United States there are approximately 310,000,000 people.  That means there would be about 310,000 MtFs.

Conway estimates that there are 30,000 to 40,000 post-op Mtfs in the US.

So your estimate seems to be off by one to two orders of magnitude.

Perhaps more problematical, is your idea that somehow the taxpayers owe you an operation.

Dear JamieD,

I am terribly sorry but for the time being I am unable to comment in this therad or respond to the specifics of your post. Suffice to say that I diasgree.

BTW It was never my intention to "upset you"

[Jamie D]

? That's called confirmation bias. American medicine is not "socialized." It's federally mandated for people to have insurance, just like they do on their cars. The US system was broken, now it's better. Obama is doing a lot for GLBT people.

Aspects of American medicine have been socialized for decades.  The V.A., for instance.

The system previously was not "broken."  You could get any service you wanted and could afford.  That's called the "free market."  Any degradation of the free market with government controls is a movement toward socialization.

[japple]

Aspects of American medicine have been socialized for decades.  The V.A., for instance.

The system previously was not "broken."  You could get any service you wanted and could afford.  That's called the "free market."  Any degradation of the free market with government controls is a movement toward socialization.

I own a business. I create jobs. I make a bunch of dough. I understand business. Every move against a plutocratic
corporatocracy does not mean "socialism." Government should regulate commerce, if they didn't we'd still have slavery.

That's a fear tactic. If you say "someone is moving away from Christianity" the average Christian would freak out and assume they're becoming an Atheist. They may be becoming Jewish or Hindu or something new.

Democracy is an experiment. We did not nationalize healthcare. I would fight against that.

Several aspects of a free market do not work for health insurance, which is what Obamacare changed. 1. People are not taking personal responsibility for health care leaving those who do to bail them out. ER visits and non-preventative care ends up making health costs rise. The uninsured hurt everyone, if you get hit by an uninsured driver, you're paying for your own car out of your own insurance. 2. Insurance companies denied sick people. The free market is great as long as it's not used for human exploitation. (Not giving people cancer treatments because of a loophole if criminal to me, people first....see slavery or company stores..which makes A LOT of sense in a free market but are now illegal because they are too exploitive.)
3. Insurance was mostly tied to and had benefit around a person's work. This is not the free market. People could not leave their jobs to start their own business because there were no alternative to group health care, especially if you were ever sick.

Obamacare is awesome. It fixed a broken system, makes everyone pay their fair share, and is going to be very good for trans people.

[Stephe]

  You could get any service you wanted and could afford.  That's called the "free market." 

So you are OK with.. Lets say you get cancer and between surgery and chemo it's gonna run $200,000. So only people who can afford this should get treatment and the rest just die? O.o

[Snowpaw]

heck if that is what is socialism is, I embrace it.