- Joined
- 20 Oct 06
- Moves
- 11153
1 edit
@Zahlanzi saidIts been argued so disingenuously at the political level forever. Sarah Palin screamed that democrats wanted death panels but death panels are what existed then and what currently exists. Unfortunately Obamacare didn't fix that. Those panels meet behind closed doors and without any accountability to voters and their primary consideration is money not life or health. They decide who lives or dies.
"How can anyone, democrat or republican, make the argument that the way America does healthcare is the only best way there is?"
money
lots and lots of money
"It's so bad. You need a degree in accounting just to manage a small family in the throes of orthodontics."
freedom baby, it smells so good.
A switch to single payer would be a massive increase in government, but at least government can be forced into transparency and accountability by voters.
@wildgrass saidyou must have learned economics off a matchbook you found in a bar.
I'm ready for it. We have AverageJoe using Medicare right now but somehow thinking that this is not a government program. It is.
Single payer would cut out the middle man. Estimated cost savings fluctuate but it could make US healthcare as much as $1 trillion less expensive. That's like 20%. So 20% of healthcare goes to insurance, or lobbying, or inflated pharmaceutical ...[text shortened]... g back surgery for no reason.
It's just a better system. Capitalism doesn't work for health care.
@the-grifter saidTell me about how the mullahs in Iran will be sent "packing" again?
you must have learned economics off a matchbook you found in a bar.
- Joined
- 20 Oct 06
- Moves
- 11153
@the-grifter saidOkay uncle fester.
you must have learned economics off a matchbook you found in a bar.
@wildgrass saidWhy were you not ready for it back then?
Not sure about Democrats but I wasn't ready for it. Now I am.
There seems to be a coherent argument made by others that the public option is a gateway to single payer. Making the leap cold turkey is too hard. I don't think that but some do.
@no1marauder saidAre you saying it was one democrat's fault?
The House passed the ACA, including a public option, by a 220-215 margin on November 7, 2009 with Democrats voting for it by a 219 to 39 margin.https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2009887
They needed 60 votes in the Senate for the public option and could not get them because of opposition from independent Joe Lieberman (though he voted for the ACA without it). But a large ma ...[text shortened]... You can't seem to understand this, but sometimes in governing you have to take the best you can get.
Joe Lieberman.
@Metal-Brain saidI'm telling you what happened since you quite obviously never bothered to get the real story.
Are you saying it was one democrat's fault?
Joe Lieberman.
We already have "single-payer" for everyone over age 65, about 73 million people. It's called Medicare.
We also already have another "single-payer" system called Medicaid that covers another 71 million people.
Combined, about 42% of the country is covered by a single-payer system. And these systems work. There's a reason why even the current quasi-fascist regime doesn't have the balls to abolish them: They're wildly popular programs.
So, America, how about you put away that hoary old SOCIALIZED MEDICINE WILL KILL YOUR GRANDMA scarecrow and finish the job for the rest of us! Merge the two systems into one system to achieve greater efficiency, and then open that system's doors to everyone. We can start with a "public option" model, and then in time realize a true single-payer model when the private health insurance companies die off.
Besides, allowing the rest of us to join the existing single-payer systems that are currently disproportionately populated by the oldest and sickest would help make the systems more solvent. The more who join, the more robust the system becomes.
@wildgrass saidInteresting? Do you mean a better system for the United States, or simply a system that better reflects your preference for government control?
I'm ready for it. We have AverageJoe using Medicare right now but somehow thinking that this is not a government program. It is.
Single payer would cut out the middle man. Estimated cost savings fluctuate but it could make US healthcare as much as $1 trillion less expensive. That's like 20%. So 20% of healthcare goes to insurance, or lobbying, or inflated pharmaceutical ...[text shortened]... g back surgery for no reason.
It's just a better system. Capitalism doesn't work for health care.
And WGrass, please do not lie that “I think that Medicare is not a government process”. It is
Medicare is a specific insurance program, primarily for people 65 and older and certain younger people with qualifying disabilities. It isn't the same thing as a universal, government-financed, single-payer system.
The question isn't whether government has a role in healthcare. It already does. The question is whether government should become the dominant or exclusive payer, is it not. And, the $1 trillion savings claim isn't money magically saved. (Wherever you get that figure from)
This argument can rail on without me, as I think on a level floating a bit above the redundant patter such as the here in Post. Here is my My main query to you little fellas,,,,,
If you think single-payer is so obviously superior, why not demonstrate that it delivers better access, better outcomes, greater innovation, and lower overall costs without simply shifting the financial burden from one group of Americans to another?"
You see, you will not even grasp this paragraph.
And for the record ,Sunglass, American healthcare is not a purely capitalistic system.
Federal government sponsored 31% of healthcare spending.
State and local governments sponsored another 16%.
Households accounted for 28%.
Private businesses accounted for 18%. . I looked it up.
In other words, government already plays an enormous role in American healthcare.
Poor baby, you want MORE!??!!?
1 edit
@wildgrass saidClarify what you mean by "single payer" please.
I'm ready for it. We have AverageJoe using Medicare right now but somehow thinking that this is not a government program. It is.
Single payer would cut out the middle man. Estimated cost savings fluctuate but it could make US healthcare as much as $1 trillion less expensive. That's like 20%. So 20% of healthcare goes to insurance, or lobbying, or inflated pharmaceutical ...[text shortened]... g back surgery for no reason.
It's just a better system. Capitalism doesn't work for health care.
You want to expand Medicare into a public option for all (with some sort of premium payment, I imagine), I'll listen.
Ban private pay healthcare, as some countries do, and I'm starting an armed revolution.
4 edits
@sh76 saidBan private pay healthcare, as some countries do, and I'm starting an armed revolution.
Clarify what you mean by "single payer" please.
You want to expand Medicare into a public option for all (with some sort of premium payment, I imagine), I'll listen.
Ban private pay healthcare, as some countries do, and I'm starting an armed revolution.
You won't need to start armed revolution sh. American insurance companies are big, powerful, and have access to legions of flesh-eating lawyers (present company excluded of course) So, let us heed the wise words of a lady lawyer in the 1988 movie Shakedown: "We need to keep the money out of the hands of the widows and orphans and into the hands of the major insurance companies who know best how to manage it!"
In addition, it would be a disgrace if our insurance company executives were deprived of their 8 figure salaries, stock options, golden parachutes, lavish corporate retreats, and bevies of voluptuous secretary's and personal aids who perform all manner of "special services" which are so vital in preserving our American way of life. 🙂
@no1marauder saidOh....I got the real story. You didn't. You underestimate the corruption in politics. You just have knee jerk reaction to fall in line with your corrupt party.
I'm telling you what happened since you quite obviously never bothered to get the real story.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/stuff-you-see-movies-democrat-elect-goes-rogue-reveals-shocking-threats-party-leaders