- Joined
- Jun 3, 2020
- Messages
- 31,897
- Reaction score
- 10,840
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
They are single payer. Which is what the thread is about.
They are single payer. Which is what the thread is about.Medicare and Medicaid are very different programs and neither is universal.
Lawyers! The amount doctors and hospitals have to pay insurance companies is obscene.Yes if you can get rid of all the money grubbing middle men like insurance companies. The middle men are why health care is so expensive in the US.
It is all of the above. It’s perfectly constitutional. It’s orders of magnitude more efficient and economical. Single payer systems provide better care at a fraction of the cost of the US for profit system.I know we do - doesn't make it right, or constitutional - or even efficient and economical.
Canada counts mortality the same as the US.Sorry, I was unclear.
The reason this isn't apples to apples is that the U.S. counts premie deaths (which make up a majority of such cases) and other nations do not.
So, for example, if 1 out of 10,000 U.S births were a premie child who was lost, we would report an infant mortality death rate of .01%. In comparison, should, say, Germany lose 2 premies out of 10,000, they will report an infant death rate of 0% despite losing twice as many actual children.
I've done TriCare and the VA. Both do indeed work as designed - badly.
Maybe another example is more attractive.Hong Kongs' is attractive, but, I'm not sure Americans are down for being made responsible for family members.
Are you assuming that most Americans would be against taking health insurance out of corporate hands?The problem with applying those systems is that we have an American government, and populace.
Getting closer to medicare anyway. Without a doubt.Just a temperature check on how Americans feel about single-payer universal health care.
I'm saying that when health care is expensive it's sometimes not an option, or it's opted against.
Do you think the cost of health care isn't a factor in average longevity?
100% agree. The real reason the GOP won't ever consider it is because health insurers, hospitals, pharma all buy their votes through lobbying. Disallow health industry donations and single payer will pass.It is all of the above. It’s perfectly constitutional. It’s orders of magnitude more efficient and economical. Single payer systems provide better care at a fraction of the cost of the US for profit system.
No. For example if an American needs medical care in Canada they have to pay for it
What's your guess?No I do not think it is a material reason.
Based on the norm in other countries, no it wouldn't cover non-Americans and travellers should carry insurance. In the country I am in working right now I can pay my UHC 'taxes' plus but incredibly comprehensive insurance with almost zero deductibles for less than the cost of buying inferior insurance in the US. One of the often misunderstood points is that UHC drives down the cost of even private health care in that country.
Why?So single payer in America would be a killer for middle class Americans.
So you're saying that if healthcare were much more affordable more people would not participate? That is the opposite of the truth.No I do not think it is a material reason.
You would still be able to buy supplemental insurance which is true in UHC countries around the world too.So single payer in America would be a killer for middle class Americans. That is why so many buy supplemental insurance when they have Medicare.
What's your guess?
America is the richest country in the world, right? Why do so many poorer countries live longer?
The great mistake was allowing insurance companies into Medicare.So single payer in America would be a killer for middle class Americans. That is why so many buy supplemental insurance when they have Medicare.
That is what I originally asked. Someone I thought said no.You would still be able to buy supplemental insurance which is true in UHC countries around the world too.
So you're saying that if healthcare were much more affordable more people would not participate? That is the opposite of the truth.
An opinion I don't share.It is all of the above. It’s perfectly constitutional. It’s orders of magnitude more efficient and economical. Single payer systems provide better care at a fraction of the cost of the US for profit system.
If you get physicals at the VA then you already have government subsidized healthcare. Can you be any more of a hypocrite than getting VA care but opposing single payer healthcare for those of us who do not?I don't have an opinion one way or the other. I've rarely had need of medical assistance, mostly (IMO) because I don't have a lot of "vices" that lead to poor health.
1. I don't smoke. (Nothing, so don't ask if that includes "preferred drugs").
2. I don't drink alcohol of any kind. To be honest it all tastes terrible, and if it tastes bad I figured it's not that good for you.
3. I avoid foods that are full of processed sugars (no candy, no confections, and no soft drinks).
4. I don't do any "recreational drugs."
I have annual physicals at the V.A. and pass them all with flying colors. That is literally the only "medical visits" I've had in decades.
I am not sure I support massive government programs of most kinds, but especially those that give people a false sense of security allowing them to think they can "party on," and someone will come take care of them.
It is not about single payer. It is about the layers of parasites between the patient and the actual health care provider.An opinion I don't share.
I don't have an opinion one way or the other. I've rarely had need of medical assistance, mostly (IMO) because I don't have a lot of "vices" that lead to poor health.
1. I don't smoke. (Nothing, so don't ask if that includes "preferred drugs").
2. I don't drink alcohol of any kind. To be honest it all tastes terrible, and if it tastes bad I figured it's not that good for you.
3. I avoid foods that are full of processed sugars (no candy, no confections, and no soft drinks).
4. I don't do any "recreational drugs."
I have annual physicals at the V.A. and pass them all with flying colors. That is literally the only "medical visits" I've had in decades.
I am not sure I support massive government programs of most kinds, but especially those that give people a false sense of security allowing them to think they can "party on," and someone will come take care of them.
No. For example if an American needs medical care in Canada they have to pay for it
Contributers, no doubt, but other violent countries rank higher. Brasil, for example.My guess. Guns, gangs, drugs, lifestyle (obesity) are bigger killers than the cost.
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?