• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Americans - would you support single-payer?

Would you support a single payer system in the US?

  • Total voters
    108
craig said:
You have it wrong. Who do you think lobbies the government to allow all those layers of parasites. We need a system where the patient pays the healthcare provider directly and the government only subsidizes the patient based on need.
Click to expand...
Who do you think set things up enabling private healthcare monopolies in the first place???

And do you really want some government bureaucrat responsible for determining your "need" of their subsidies? How do you define "need" anyway? Frankly, that's half the problem we're confronted with now where some actuary working for a healthcare company determines "need" based on their company's economics.
 
cpwill said:
Of those I am familiar with, it is perhaps the most. I have been given to understand Switzerland has a not-terribly blended system

🤷‍♂️, but, none of those nations are the U.S., with the U.S. government, or the U.S. population. A system that works very well for a small, homogenous population that generally eats healthy and exercises, has a relatively efficient and non-bloated/corrupt government, and doesn't get millions of people from mostly poorer nations flooding in both legally and illegally every year..... may work very poorly here.



Even among Bernie Sanders supporters, a majority are unwilling to pay additional taxes in order to have single-payer healthcare.
Click to expand...
Well, then I guess you've run aground on the status quo. At least you have no shortage of factors to blame.
A truism comes to mind- just because you can't do something doesn't mean it can't be done.
 
Grand Mal said:
Contributers, no doubt, but other violent countries rank higher. Brasil, for example.
Obesity is an odd one. Is that due to inactivity?
Click to expand...

Yup. And diet.

Now, let me register a complaint: I think the BMI charts are off, because they assume the same nutrition was available to children of the 1930s as children of the 2000's, but, to compare:

1703727871078.webp


U.S. Life expectancy has also been dropping in recent years - driven heavily, for example, by opioid usage:

...COVID-19, drug overdoses, and accidental injury accounted for about two-thirds of the decline in life expectancy, according to the 2022 report. Other reasons included heart and liver disease and suicides.

The drop in life expectancy would have been even greater if not for a bit of good news: decreases in deaths from chronic lung disease, pneumonia, influenza, and Alzheimer's disease....​

So, our life expectancy in the realm of things that can be controlled by our medical system is largely increasing.... and our life expectancy in the realm of things that are not is decreasing, and the latter overshadows the former.
 
EdwinWillers said:
You might be right - but this isn't Canada, and never will be. The people, the culture, the history, and so much more pretty much guarantee the same system won't work similarly here.
Click to expand...
Our cultures are very similar.
EdwinWillers said:
Moreover, ratings of healthcare systems are altogether too subjective to be of any concrete value - plus it depends on the system ranking them and what factors they consider for a "good" healthcare system - and both Canada and the US generally fall somewhere in the middle to upper middle of all countries so it's virtually impossible to say this system is "better" than that one and have everyone agree.
Click to expand...
In terms of rankings no developed country with UHC falls below the US.
 
Grand Mal said:
Well, then I guess you've run aground on the status quo. At least you have no shortage of factors to blame.
A truism comes to mind- just because you can't do something doesn't mean it can't be done.
Click to expand...

Oh, I've definitely got ideas on how we can go about addressing the deep structural flaws in our medical system. It's just they are largely built on the American experience.
 
Allan said:
In terms of rankings no developed country with UHC falls below the US.
Click to expand...

It depends on what you measure. Are you sick with cancer, but want to survive? You probably want the U.S. system. Do you want to ensure that people die at more equal rates across the income spectrum? You want a U.K. or like system.
 
Allan said:
Our cultures are very similar.

In terms of rankings no developed country with UHC falls below the US.
Click to expand...
Not in this context they're not. I agree, similarities do exist, but there are some distinct differences too.

And as far as rankings go - again, they're all so subjective as to be practically worthless.
 
EdwinWillers said:
Who do you think set things up enabling private healthcare monopolies in the first place???

And do you really want some government bureaucrat responsible for determining your "need" of their subsidies? How do you define "need" anyway? Frankly, that's half the problem we're confronted with now where some actuary working for a healthcare company determines "need" based on their company's economics.
Click to expand...
Means testing like we do for rent and food subsides.
 
Grand Mal said:
To your edit- It's not rocket science and you don't have to reinvent the wheel. There's umpteen government health insurance schemes around the world and many work very well. Just pick one that does what you want it to and copy it.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone can claim that the Canadian system, for example, works "very well" considering the very long wait times:

Specialist physicians surveyed report a median waiting time of 27.4 weeks between referral from a general practitioner and receipt of treatment—longer than the wait of 25.6 weeks reported in 2021. This year’s wait time is the longest wait time recorded in this survey’s history and is 195% longer than in 1993, when it was just 9.3 weeks.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that socialist institutions get worse over time, not better, as each player figures out how to work the system to his maximum advantage. From almost 20 years ago, here is the Supreme Court of Canada:

The evidence shows that, in the case of certain surgical procedures, the delays that are the necessary result of waiting lists increase the patient’s risk of mortality or the risk that his or her injuries will become irreparable. The evidence also shows that many patients on non‑urgent waiting lists are in pain and cannot fully enjoy any real quality of life.
Click to expand...

and

The evidence in this case shows that delays in the public health care system are widespread, and that, in some serious cases, patients die as a result of waiting lists for public health care.
Click to expand...

That is the opposite of "works very well".
 
aociswundumho said:
I don't think anyone can claim that the Canadian system, for example, works "very well" considering the very long wait times:



Keep in mind that socialist institutions get worse over time, not better, as each player figures out how to work the system to his maximum advantage. From almost 20 years ago, here is the Supreme Court of Canada:



and



That is the opposite of "works very well".
Click to expand...

I guess we'd have to look at the numbers and compare. Can you tell me how many Canadians die every year because of wait times? Because i can tell you how many Americans die because they can't afford healthcare...

More than 26 000 Americans die each year because of lack of health insurance - PMC

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
 
cpwill said:
It depends on what you measure. Are you sick with cancer, but want to survive? You probably want the U.S. system. Do you want to ensure that people die at more equal rates across the income spectrum? You want a U.K. or like system.
Click to expand...
Do you want a system where 90% of lifetime money spent is to prolong last two years of your life?
 
aociswundumho said:
I don't think anyone can claim that the Canadian system, for example, works "very well" considering the very long wait times:
Click to expand...
Works well according to organizations that rank systems. I'm happy with it.
aociswundumho said:
Keep in mind that socialist institutions
Click to expand...
Our system is single payer, not socialized.
aociswundumho said:
get worse over time, not better, as each player figures out how to work the system to his maximum advantage. From almost 20 years ago, here is the Supreme Court of Canada:



and



That is the opposite of "works very well".
Click to expand...
The SC ruling resulted in best practice improvements to speed up delivery.
 
craig said:
Do you want a system where 90% of lifetime money spent is to prolong last two years of your life?
Click to expand...
My mother survived not one, but two separate cancers last year. She has many years left to watch grandkids grow up.

I will absolutely take her survival :)
 
Allan said:
Doesn't have to be that way. The feds in Canada only fund the system, they don't control care.
Click to expand...

There are private providers, too. It's not like it's Pyongyang Medical Center.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom