- Joined
- May 22, 2012
- Messages
- 115,783
- Reaction score
- 80,790
- Location
- Uhland, Texas
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
What can (could?) be and what our congress critters can (could?) get passed are two very different things.
Here in Austria, we actually have single-payer healthcare (but decentralized), unlike the NHS in Great Britain.
Until a few years ago, every of the 9 states had its own chapter of the ÖGK (Austrian Healthcare System), managing the finances on their own. This was merged into one a few years ago to make bureaucracy more efficient.
Now, the ÖGK has just 4 branches left (based on regularly-employed, self-employed, farmers and state bureaucrats, retirees).
Anyway, some say the merger has cut costs and lowered debts, others say it was useless and didn't lead to any major improvements ...
Austria's healthcare system is generally very solvent and despite single-payer (or slightly decentralized), it has virtually no debts. Only 1 billion € in debt, with more than 9 million people insured. Sometimes, it even runs surpluses.
The ÖGK (the Austrian Universal Healthcare System) is part of the Sozialversicherung (Social Insurance), which is universal and combines Health, Unemployment, Pension and Work Accident Insurance as well as Welfare payments and Asylum Compensation. This means that 99.9% of the Austrian population is insured for health and other insurances. Only a few thousand people are not insured at any time of the year because for example newly arrived asylum seekers who get their asylum applications processed and approved and only then they are fully insured. But even for these few thousand people, doctors will usually treat them and refund the costs later with the ÖGK once they are insured.
On top of that, Austrians who are wealthier, can of course have private insurances too. These will lead to swifter appointments with specialized doctors. But the universal healthcare appointments are also with no long waiting times. The Austrian healthcare system ranks in the top 10 worldwide.
What can (could?) be and what our congress critters can (could?) get passed are two very different things.
Every country with UHC has a two-tiered system. A private system for wealth politicians and the like, and a public system for everyone else. Just like we have private schools along with shit public schools.
Weren't the congressional staffers also exempted from ObamaCare? So what you say here rings true.Politicians will not vote for a public system if they will be forced to use it.
That's way to highThe Share of Americans without Health Insurance in 2022 Matched a Record Low. In 2022, 26 million people — or 7.9 percent of the population – were uninsured, according to a report in September 2023 from the Census Bureau.Nov 9, 2023
You may have already but if not, please define in this context. What sort of plan exactly?Just a temperature check on how Americans feel about single-payer universal health care.
You may have already but if not, please define in this context. What sort of plan exactly?
Sure. In a previous post I linked to a summary of Canada's system.You may have already but if not, please define in this context. What sort of plan exactly?
I'm not surprised. A year or so ago I posted an OP asking members which policies of the "other side" they supported. By far UHC was the policy that was most frequently embraced by the right.@Allan -
Glad to see the vast majority of members who participated in your POLL chose to support the concept of a single-payer health system.
eew Canadian system? Yes please! Some systems are better than others, but Canada is a good one and well regarded.Sure. In a previous post I linked to a summary of Canada's system.
The link below outlines what's covered in my Province.
@Allan -
Glad to see the vast majority of members who participated in your POLL chose to support the concept of a single-payer health system.
In the Big Picture, we either choose to focus on the Common Welfare for the benefit of the most people or we don’t give a rat’s ass about the Common Welfare.
I have come to recognize which of the two camps many of our members belong in,
Weren't the congressional staffers also exempted from ObamaCare? So what you say here rings true.
Weren't the congressional staffers also exempted from ObamaCare? So what you say here rings true.
Most Americans do not use the health insurance exchanges, but members of Congress and their staff are specifically required to use the exchange in order to maintain their employer-sponsored health benefits.
Depends. I looked at something called the World Bank.
My condition would be to pay for the basic needed and emergency services, and have private health insurance companies still offer better plans that covered better options.Just a temperature check on how Americans feel about single-payer universal health care.
I think that's kind off what we have. The system covers "essential" healthcare needs. Essential is determined by a person's physician.My condition would be to pay for the basic needed and emergency services, and have private health insurance companies still offer better plans that covered better options.
IMHO, the biggest problem with UHC is that the wonderful cost savings, advertised by switching to UHC, are largely obtained simply by paying medical care providers less. That likely means the cost of educating (training?) medical care provider personnel must also become publicly funded, as is the case in many (if not most) UHC nations.
Most health care insurance providers also fix the cost of services at below uninsured rates which the health care provider agrees to as part of being "in network".
Do you have any comparisons between Medicare fixed rates and private insurer fixed rates?
I recently (2022) had to drop one health care provider because they would no longer accept my insurance because at the contracted private insurance fixed rates they were losing money with each patient visit.
[Not intended as a sealioning question. Really interested in an apples to apples comparison.]
WW
Do you find short lines today? We needed to find an endocrinologist, nobody was available within a 1hr drive for 6 months.I would support it IF its quality of care was better.
The problem is it’s a staple of single payer health care that for everyday stuff it’s great. If you need specialty care that increases with age the lines get long.
If I need a hip I want it yesterday. I don’t want to wait six months till they get around to me. If I need cardiac surgery I don’t want single payer’s lack of cardiac surgeons to cause me to die while I’m waiting for a table and a cutter.
This nation sucks for health care if you aren’t rich or have great insurance. If you are rich or have great insurance it’s better than nations with single payer. I have great health insurance.
I get it if you have lousy or no insurance and I wish you better. Our system is broken and needs restructuring. It’s better for me personally though than a single payer alternative with my current situation.
Not only "no" but "HELL NO!"Just a temperature check on how Americans feel about single-payer universal health care.
Looks like most posters want a single payer universal health care system. Pew Research Institute finds similar %Just a temperature check on how Americans feel about single-payer universal health care.
Not only "no" but "HELL NO!"
Because I am old and wise enough to work out the stupidity of the concept of "single payer", a system that would not work in the US, we cannot afford it, and it would simply lead to government rationing of healthcare as it has in any other nation that operates under a single payer system.Could you give us a few details on why you feel the way you do?
Just a temperature check on how Americans feel about single-payer universal health care.
Looks like most posters want a single payer universal health care system. Pew Research Institute finds similar %
Increasing share of Americans favor a single government program to provide health care coverage
63% of U.S. adults say the government has the responsibility to provide health care coverage for all, up slightly from 59% last year.www.pewresearch.org
But we don't have universal health insurance. Instead we have this outrageous mess of high insurance and medical costs, insurance corporations that won't take risks, pharmaceutical corporations that won't negotiate, companies using religion to determine coverage, 26 million uninsured, employers large and small unfairly tasked with providing insurance companies with high profits, and abysmal national health statistics.
So what happens to candidates in the time between election when they say they will represent our needs in Congress and the next session of a new Congress that causes elected Senators and Representatives to completely forget what the public wants?
Obviously you feel strongly about your position.
Could you give us a few details on why you feel the way you do?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?