Talk:National health insurance

message: User:kevlar67 asked for evidence that the term National Health Insurance is used as a generic international term for Single Payer insurance. 
The following countries all refer to National Health Insurance as nationally implemented health insurance programs.... (Most are of course translations into English)
Japan		http://www.kokuho.or.jp/english/index.htm
USA 		http://www.pnhp.org/  http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=1623	
Taiwan		http://www.nhi.gov.tw/English/index.asp#	
Bulgaria	http://www.nhif.bg/eng/default.phtml
Korea		http://www.nhic.or.kr/english/
Israel		http://www.btl.gov.il/english/health.htm
as the term for a national implemented system of health insurance. The vogue at the moment in the US is Single payer but it is in effect a national health insurance porgram and even PNHP who are the main medical backers of Single payer in the US refer to it as National Health Insurance. You will not find other countries refering to their National Health Insurance Systsems as Single Payer. Google if you like, but I doubt you find any.
In Britain National Insurance was originally known as National Health Stamp because the payment to the fund could be made by buying insurance stamps at the Post Office for placement on a contributions card. Most Brits would know what is meant by National Health Insurance but would be bemused by the term Single Payer.  
These references above came from just the first few pages of a Google search for National Health Insurance and they all refer to existing progams (the US excepted if course). I'm sure you can find more if you look. --Tom (talk) 21:11, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  2008 

message: How about, in the name of being "unbiased", you put a more recent poll of american doctors in this article. The numbers today are around 60 percent OPPOSED to the president's plan. And on top of that, more than 50% of Americans oppose a national insurance plan, so u should add something like that since in america the opinion of the citizens is what writes law, not the opinion of a select few. I have no problem with these plans elsewhere in the world, but when a majority of people in a country are opposed to a law i dont think it should be shoved down our throat and i dont think people from other countries should try and persuade us  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.160.191.18 (talk) 19:58, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Here's the problem with that 

message: I support the merger of social health insurance into this article. That article is a five-sentence stub that appears to have had very little editing attention or expansion since its creation almost three years ago (how many articles do you see that have only a one-page edit history over three years???) The reference list may be valuable, but I don't have access to the references in order to evaluate them. The term should redirect here with any details and references added here that aren't already in the content here. --Sfmammamia (talk) 19:16, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I support the merger also.  The article on "Social health insurance" seems to me poorly formed - it mixes the concepts of National health insurance and Social Insurance in a confusing way, so that it's not really clear which one the article is intended to address.  The one thing that it seems to bring to the table is a list of references. EastTN (talk) 18:37, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal 

message: Editors may wish to be aware that I have today placed a blocking request on User:LincolnStfor perisitently vilolating the spirit of editorial co-operation, for demonstrating bias in his edits, for depleting the usefulness of WP articles on health care to its readers and for making changes so rapidly that they seem to be planned aforethought and dumped on the editing community. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Blocking_request__User:LincolnSt for examples and to express your thoughts if you have any.--Hauskalainen (talk) 08:49, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hauskalainen, you have not argued anything in the talk page. An editor associated with you, , has already received last warning from administrators.LincolnSt (talk) 11:56, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blocking request for [[User:LincolnSt]] 

message: QUOTE: In the United States, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act includes a "health insurance mandate" that produces a similar effect as NHI or SHI, though relies more heavily on the private market than their public sector (Medicare, Medicaid, and S-CHIP) than most countries.
That does not make a lot of sense ("similar as"; two "than"s). Might this cover it? – 
In the United States, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act includes a "health insurance mandate" that is similar in its effect to that of most other countries' NHI or SHI schemes, though it relies more heavily on the private market than do such public-sector programs as Medicare, Medicaid, and S-CHIP.
-- Picapica (talk) 06:46, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the unsourced, dubious, and contentious sentence that did not make a lot of sense. See preceding topic. Apatens (talk) 22:54, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarity needed 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on National health insurance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100105142032/http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/ to http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:40, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018)