Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Jorroh
climber
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 11:10am PT
|
"My knee jerk reaction is to not favor single payer health care because I think the costs will become way more than we anticipate"
Instead of jerking your knee, why not find out what costs are like in other countries with single payer systems?
There's no shortage of information, in fact its been studied ad nauseam.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 12:18pm PT
|
There's no shortage of information, in fact its been studied ad nauseam.
It doesn't work well in Canada. Comparing the teeny little nation-states of Europe to the USA is ridiculous. Both in population and geography, most of these little socialist nations are comparable to many of our individual states. What sort of "works" for 5 million people does not AT ALL work for 1/3 of a billion people.
Furthermore, the homogeneity of these nation-states is not comparable to the vast array of peoples/cultures in the USA. This fact has sweeping effects that are typically not contemplated in the "studies" that purport to tells us "costs."
Even as messed up as is our present system, I wouldn't want to trade it for Canada's!
|
|
John M
climber
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 12:44pm PT
|
what do you base your opinion about Canada's health care system on? I haven't heard one Canadian on this forum complain about it.
It may not be perfect, but then what is..
We are the only first world country without some form of single payer.
10 to 30 percent of our cost goes towards profit for insurance companies
Another 10 to 30 percent goes towards management fees. Plus we don't know how much it cost doctors offices in extra personnel to manage all the paperwork and knowledge involved in dealing with many different health insurances. whats covered by who.. whats not.
Imagine streamlining the system. What costs could be reduced.
And before you automatically assume that private industry does it better. My point of view is that there is corruption in private industry as much as their is corruption in politics. There is a history in many areas of collusion among large corporations to keep prices up. They laugh all the way to the bank.
medicare has a proven history of management costs of 3 percent. NO private insurance company comes close.
|
|
Craig Fry
Trad climber
So Cal.
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 01:02pm PT
|
Why point out Canada's system?
It's not a single payer system, it's a Government run health care system
Which is Completely different
So Very disingenuous and misleading
Is that all you got?
No I'm sure you have some more complete BS to mislead yourself in thinking it's bad for some reason.
You don't want to pay less to use YOUR SAME DOCOTRS and hospitals?
Then you're an idiot, as Ecobaria would say
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 01:10pm PT
|
You don't want to pay less to use YOUR SAME DOCOTRS [sic] and hospitals?
That assumes facts not in evidence. While it is possible in theory, the evidence in practice isn't so clear, unless you're talking about price controls. In that case, P.J. O'Rourke summarized it nicely in about 1993:
(Paraphrase, but using quotes to make it clear that I'm using his work, not mine): "If you set the price too high, you end up with a glut like OPEC discovered with oil. If you set the price too low, you end up with a shortage, like the Soviet Union discovered with everything. The government will set the price too low, and we're all gonna die."
John
|
|
John M
climber
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 01:23pm PT
|
we spend close to 4 trillion dollars a year on health care as a nation. How much fraud is there in private industry?
|
|
Craig Fry
Trad climber
So Cal.
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 01:36pm PT
|
WRONG
First, It's not like OIL, or any product
That is the most ridiculous comparison yet. It's life or death and people do not have the money on hand to pay for the bills to stay alive, that's why we have insurance.
Do you expect to work the same days you are in the hospital for cancer treatments so you can pay your bills?
And There is plenty of evidence
Exhibit 1: Medicare
Exhibit 2: every other 1st World Country
Is that not enough evidence for you John?
But you are correct about it not being complete proof, since we have Republicans at the helm, they will surely screw it up and make it cost more than it needs to.
That's why people vote for them, to screw up our country and make things more expensive
Good ol Republicans, the enemy of the people that stupid people vote for just because they are willing dupes for wedge issues
And just because there's fraud we should not even try?
How about putting the fraudsters in jail?, like any other crime
First to go would be the Private Health Insurance Companies and Rick Scott, the Governor of Florida.
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 01:57pm PT
|
"Comparing the teeny little nation-states of Europe to the USA is ridiculous. Both in population and geography, most of these little socialist nations are comparable to many of our individual states. What sort of "works" for 5 million people does not AT ALL work for 1/3 of a billion people."
I am not sure which European countries you talk about but there are 24 countries with a population of more than 5 millions and 9 countries with a population of more than 38 millions.
I am not really sure that there are any socialist countries in Europe anymore but I guess that is a question about definitions and world views.
|
|
Curt
climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 02:03pm PT
|
Why point out Canada's system?
It's not a single payer system, it's a Government run health care system
Actually, it is a single-payer system in Canada.
Curt
|
|
Curt
climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 02:07pm PT
|
It doesn't work well in Canada.
Yes, it does.
Comparing the teeny little nation-states of Europe to the USA is ridiculous. Both in population and geography, most of these little socialist nations are comparable to many of our individual states.
Germany's single-payer system works quite well. They have over 80 million people.
Curt
|
|
Craig Fry
Trad climber
So Cal.
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 02:19pm PT
|
Single payer and Government run health care are 2 completely different things
Single payer just pays the bills of Private medical care
you go to the same Doctors as you would now.
It's just like what we have now, but cheaper because we don't have to pay the private health insurance companies huge profits.
In government run health care, the doctors work for the Government
The medical facilities are Government facilities
The Gov. efficiencies make Gov. run health care cheaper, and more prone to long waits and poor service
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 02:42pm PT
|
Germany's single-payer system works quite well.
Germany's system is not really "single payer" in anything like the sense we're talking about, nor in the sense of many other European nations (like the UK).
Most posting here have little credibility on this subject for one fundamental reason: You wanted Obamacare, and you decried those who saw endless problems with it.
Now the shortcomings of Obamacare are becoming (it's a slow work in progress, as the problems emerge over time) clear, and your "response" is: Well, yeah, it's got problems, but single-payer will fix the problems.
Oh, and the other "response" is: Better something than nothing, which is all the Republicans had to offer. This, of course, is the "Let's make it law so that we can find out what's in it" approach.
Bottom line is that MANY of us decried Obamacare because we knew it was handing us as a nation TO the insurance companies, while actually REFORMING very, very little. This was a plan lobbied for BY the insurance companies, as they were then guaranteed a market and minimum-threshold profit margin!
No fundamental corruptions were reformed, either in the insurance side or the provider side. It's outrageous that a particular pill can cost $100 (or more). It's outrageous that a plastic syringe can cost $100 and then be thrown away. It's outrageous that the same pill sold in Canada (or Mexico) costs a tiny fraction of what it costs in the USA. The COSTS are insane, and nothing is done to address these costs. The insurance companies are not motivated to address these costs; they instead limit PROCEDURES, and they pass costs on to the (now guaranteed market of) customers.
Single-payer is no more a REFORM than was Obamacare. And the USA was never supposed to be just another European socialist-democracy.
Let the feds start enforcing anti-trust against drug manufacturers, health-care-supply manufacturers, and insurance companies, and suddenly health care WILL BE affordable without forcing people to buy a "product" that they may not wish to prioritize.
Oh, and responding to the "not one Canadian posting here...." line, it's ironic that you are good with that sort of anecdotal "evidence," but you'd call me on using anecdotal "evidence" if I said what is true: "I know dozens and dozens of Canadians, including many at universities that are our customers, and I have yet to find ONE that has a good thing to say about Canadian health care. ALL of them that can afford to come across the border to the USA to get served."
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
Shetville , North of Los Angeles
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 02:51pm PT
|
Bolter...In your opinion...Which system is better for America...? The old system or the Mitt Romney ( Obamacare ) system...? Simple question...
|
|
Jorroh
climber
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 03:00pm PT
|
"You wanted Obamacare"
We did?, better than nothing...sure. What we wanted...hardly.
PS: you don't seem to know much about Europe.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 03:17pm PT
|
Simple question...
No it's not, and you know it.
For example....
By "system," do you mean with or without the feds doing their ACTUAL job?
And if you give me a choice between 95% bad by one set of metrics and 95% bad by another set of metrics, I'm not going to say I prefer one or the other.
Nobody's arguing that healthcare in this country is broken in many ways and on many levels. I'm certainly not arguing that the Republicans didn't have anything of value to offer; they didn't! However, what you DON'T do is band-aid "fixes" that are not, because "something" is often NOT better than "nothing".
To FIX the REAL underlying problems, the feds need to do their ACTUAL job, which, Moose, is not a violation of "free market" philosophy. This nation wasn't supposed to be laissez faire "free market." The feds were supposed to play an active role in ensuring fairness, honesty, and consumer protections. If they would do THAT, I mean really and aggressively, then you would not have the SAME medication costing 1/10 or 1/100 in Canada what it does here.
The cost of healthcare is the fundamental problem, and that CAN be directly addressed without violating the basic principles of the "free" market.
Internet access/speed is another example of the feds dropping the ball in similar fashion. How a Comcast-Time merger even gets PROPOSED is literally laughable in its fundamental sickness! Already the feds have HANDED these pricks their "regional monopolies," with the predictable and attendant consumer-raping.
Now we're HANDED to the insurance companies, with NO regulation of the actual costs that drive rates.
So, no, NOT a "simple question."
|
|
Craig Fry
Trad climber
So Cal.
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 03:20pm PT
|
Single Payer healthcare is exactly like I described.
I guess you can't read your own link
Single-payer healthcare
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Single-payer healthcare is a system in which the state, rather than private insurers, pays for all healthcare costs.[1] Single-payer systems may contract for healthcare services from private organizations (as is the case in Canada) or may own and employ healthcare resources and personnel (as is the case in the United Kingdom).
The term "single-payer" thus only describes the funding mechanism —referring to healthcare financed by a single public body from a single fund— and does not specify the type of delivery, or for whom doctors work. In this sense, however, the UK Health Care system is technically not "single payer", as in reality it consists of a number of financially and legally autonomous Trusts, for example the Kent Community NHS Trust, which provides services in Kent, East Sussex and parts of London.[2]
The actual funding of a "single payer" system comes from all or a portion of the covered population. Although the fund holder is usually the state, some forms of single-payer use a mixed public-private system.
Healthcare in Canada is delivered through a publicly funded healthcare system,
please point out what the difference is
|
|
Norton
Social climber
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 03:25pm PT
|
Craig, your posting delivery needs an update
please consider sounding more arrogant and certain of yourself
that way you can post endlessly, feel great about yourself, and have less credibility..
|
|
Craig Fry
Trad climber
So Cal.
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2016 - 03:27pm PT
|
Norton
Maybe a Wall of Text will help
Canada's system is a single payer yes, because you pay a single entity, but that is the only similarity,
No one in America is advocating for Government Run HealthCare
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!