Members banned from this thread: Dragonfly5


Page 5 of 24 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 239
Thanks Tree193Thanks

Thread: Universal Health Care For Americans Baby Ya!

  1. #41
    Master political analyst Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    10,441
    Thanks
    4768

    From
    The formerly great golden state
    The facts speak for themselves: Every modern nation with one exception has universal health care of one form or another, and they all pay less than that one nation, no exceptions. Those are the facts.

    The ideology is that for profit systems are always better and cheaper than "socialistic" systems.

    Ideology trumps facts every time.
    Thanks from MaryAnne, Madeline and EnigmaO01

  2. #42
    Member
    Joined
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,893
    Thanks
    1783

    From
    Switzerland
    Quote Originally Posted by Rorschach View Post
    And, those of us who pay taxes can look forward to the day, when we can bring, almost 35% of our pay, home......all so that WE can have LESSER health care.

    Fortunately, I won't have to worry about paying it for very long. Once Government Bureaucrats take over, they will look at my health file, and promptly decide that I need to be "allowed to die......"

    (But, maybe they give me drugs for the pain......probably not, if I am no longer working, though......)

    The only thing I would add to Communist Health Care, is a strong system of Assisted (or, maybe, some day, Government Mandated) Suicide.

    (For cases such as my file, this could be a good money saving venture for Government.....)
    We have in my country an healthcare system which is very performing, but is universal and mainly based on private insurance and costs less in percentage of the GDP than the American one...... Your concerns appear to me groundless. Bureaucracy is mainly the consequence of not controlling things in a performing way. Bureaucracy is not a fatality......
    Thanks from MaryAnne, labrea, EnigmaO01 and 1 others

  3. #43
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    1,695
    Thanks
    790

    From
    Maryland USA
    Quote Originally Posted by Jets View Post
    It's an issue of optics and reality. The perception is that the VA is an example of what could happen under a Medicare For All scenario. Whether it's a legitimate point or not is irrelevant. In addition, many people are worried that doctors are going to avoid taking on new Medicare as well as Medicaid patients. That would translate into longer waiting times and fewer options which will not do much to encourage support.

    Jmo
    Again, I must admit to a certain bias because I have spent most of my professional life in the hospital industry. I must also disclose that my following comments are based on my personal observations. I would also suggest that when discussing the ACA or Universal coverage, we are discussing the payment for healthcare and not the actual cost of providing healthcare. The cost of providing care is dependent on many other social concerns, such as education (the better educated the better use of resources), urban violence, illicit drug use, among many others. When making comparisons to other countries, population and geographic demographics are important factors. Our uninsured population is greater than the total population of many compared countries.

    I have not met any physicians that will not admit Medicare patients into their practices. However, I have met a few that will not accept additional Medicaid patients. Reimbursement or payment is the reason. Medicare payments will at least cover their cost, most times, Medicaid payments do not come close to covering their costs. Likewise, it is my experience that Medicare payments tend to cover the costs incurred. The program was specifically designed to pay only for the cost of care as defined by the Program. Medicaid payments do not cover the cost of care. The governmental payment short falls are being subsidize by commercial insurance payments. If the commercial payers are eliminated to accommodate a governmental single payer system, essentially, what it will do is transfer the uncompensated care costs from those purchasing commercial insurance to the taxpayers. My concern is that while people love to say "Medicare for All" what we will get will be "Medicaid for All" with no source of subsidization other than taxpayers.

    If Universal payment is inevitable, than I would suggest we model the Canadian system as opposed to the European. When examining single payer systems, two consistent factors become obvious. One, there will always be a two tiered system. Those with the resources will find a way for care outside the system. Two, the demands of the system will exceed its ability to be financed and must be addressed. The European response was to increase control over the services being provided. We would label it medical necessity or prognosis value, but it would be that dirty word-rationing. Accordingly, I recommend the Canadian response, the introduction of additional privatization. The Canadian system is not a strict single payer system. Private insurance is purchased for uncovered services (mostly some surgical procedures) and to use available private resources. The Canadian system also recognizes that "one size does not fit all". Accordingly, the Provinces have some flexibility in design. Much like here, the health needs of West Virginia are not same as California.
    Thanks from Jets, Babba, MaryAnne and 1 others

  4. #44
    A Blue Dog Jets Fan Jets's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    20,287
    Thanks
    7862

    From
    New York
    Quote Originally Posted by Lemonade View Post
    I just don't get the mentality of being happy about short wait times, because a lot of people can not afford to go to the doctors. The wait times in the us are a sign that the system is broken, but so many people brag about it.

    There is not ALWAYS long wait periods in Canada. Last week I made a next day appointment with my family doctor, and guess what it was completely covered by taxes.
    That's why "Attitudes are more important than facts" is a truism.
    Thanks from EnigmaO01

  5. #45
    Galactic Ruler Spookycolt's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    59,277
    Thanks
    10840

    From
    By the wall
    Quote Originally Posted by BitterPill View Post
    You must be particularly rich, so I say we go for it.
    Not at all, I just have really good insurance.

  6. #46
    Galactic Ruler Spookycolt's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    59,277
    Thanks
    10840

    From
    By the wall
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonfly5 View Post
    You are so fucking stupid you don't know that you are paying for healthcare for the poor now. They go to the emergency room and your taxes pay a portion of it. Healthcare for all will save money for all in the long run. If you weren't so goddamn ignorant you would be able to see it.
    Not how it works.

    People don't go to emergency rooms for checkups.

    Those that do are covered under my state taxes, not federal.

    We in Arizona already have a program for that which is still here but on top of that we also would have to pay for universal coverage.

    That's an additional expense, not less.

  7. #47
    Cat-tastic Babba's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    64,930
    Thanks
    45469

    From
    So. Md.
    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    Not how it works.

    People don't go to emergency rooms for checkups.

    Those that do are covered under my state taxes, not federal.

    We in Arizona already have a program for that which is still here but on top of that we also would have to pay for universal coverage.

    That's an additional expense, not less.
    You're right. The poor don't get check ups. But they go to the ER when they sick or have accidents. And all of us pay that.

  8. #48
    Veteran Member MaryAnne's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    44,077
    Thanks
    31412

    From
    Englewood,Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by TheWahoo View Post
    Again, I must admit to a certain bias because I have spent most of my professional life in the hospital industry. I must also disclose that my following comments are based on my personal observations. I would also suggest that when discussing the ACA or Universal coverage, we are discussing the payment for healthcare and not the actual cost of providing healthcare. The cost of providing care is dependent on many other social concerns, such as education (the better educated the better use of resources), urban violence, illicit drug use, among many others. When making comparisons to other countries, population and geographic demographics are important factors. Our uninsured population is greater than the total population of many compared countries.

    I have not met any physicians that will not admit Medicare patients into their practices. However, I have met a few that will not accept additional Medicaid patients. Reimbursement or payment is the reason. Medicare payments will at least cover their cost, most times, Medicaid payments do not come close to covering their costs. Likewise, it is my experience that Medicare payments tend to cover the costs incurred. The program was specifically designed to pay only for the cost of care as defined by the Program. Medicaid payments do not cover the cost of care. The governmental payment short falls are being subsidize by commercial insurance payments. If the commercial payers are eliminated to accommodate a governmental single payer system, essentially, what it will do is transfer the uncompensated care costs from those purchasing commercial insurance to the taxpayers. My concern is that while people love to say "Medicare for All" what we will get will be "Medicaid for All" with no source of subsidization other than taxpayers.

    If Universal payment is inevitable, than I would suggest we model the Canadian system as opposed to the European. When examining single payer systems, two consistent factors become obvious. One, there will always be a two tiered system. Those with the resources will find a way for care outside the system. Two, the demands of the system will exceed its ability to be financed and must be addressed. The European response was to increase control over the services being provided. We would label it medical necessity or prognosis value, but it would be that dirty word-rationing. Accordingly, I recommend the Canadian response, the introduction of additional privatization. The Canadian system is not a strict single payer system. Private insurance is purchased for uncovered services (mostly some surgical procedures) and to use available private resources. The Canadian system also recognizes that "one size does not fit all". Accordingly, the Provinces have some flexibility in design. Much like here, the health needs of West Virginia are not same as California.
    This is why I posted that Physicians need to be paid fairly.

    Our Insurance company notified us they had adjusted to the ACA very well,and would be afpdding benefits. They did last year.

    Insurance companies made it clear the turmoil created by Republicans is the reason they are pulling back now.

    They need to settle this now,and it looks like they might just work together now the naysayers have been cut off. The average Congress person dislikes the nay sayer,do nothing leaders and are now banding together to fix the problems we have.
    Thanks from labrea

  9. #49
    Galactic Ruler Spookycolt's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    59,277
    Thanks
    10840

    From
    By the wall
    Quote Originally Posted by Babba View Post
    You're right. The poor don't get check ups. But they go to the ER when they sick or have accidents. And all of us pay that.
    Not in big enough numbers that cost more than paying for universal health care for all.

    Not even close.

    Pick one nation with universal healthcare that has a lower tax rate than us.

  10. #50
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    53,875
    Thanks
    19114

    From
    america
    I remember my mother making the same argument about midicare. Well, Medicare passed, and they came through for her over, and over again.
    --I hope you are right, I really do. But, see, I can do this thing called "numbers."

    As it is now it's the poor who get the "Fuck him" treatment. It looks like the only thing that bothers you, is that you might be treated in the future like you don't mind the poor guy being treats. Now.
    --I am all for a BASE line system of health care for the poor. What I do NOT want, is a Universal system, that expects ME to pay MORE, for LESS. Which is what will happen. I, and other responsible American Citizens will pay MORE. In return, our money can go to sex changes, plastic surgery, and other treatments for the indigent.

    Even as government CUTS some of the treatments, we receive under our current policies that WE pay for.......
    Thanks from Spookycolt

Page 5 of 24 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Universal Health Care In Vermont
    By MaryAnne in forum Current Events
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 13th March 2017, 05:49 AM
  2. Universal health care unconstitutional?
    By Conservative15 in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 281
    Last Post: 23rd August 2009, 11:16 PM
  3. Universal Health Care
    By Burning Giraffe in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 455
    Last Post: 2nd May 2008, 12:20 AM
  4. We Already Have Universal Health Care
    By Burning Giraffe in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 20th October 2007, 10:21 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed