Are we ready for single-payer yet?

[US Conservative]

Eighteen pages later and here's what I've been able to surmise about the position against universal health coverage.

1)Finland is really small, and the United States is big, which I suppose is a fine enough argument if your country is ancient Sumeria and controlling more than a few hundred square miles is a boast-worthy accomplishment.
2)We shouldn't even try because Americans are stupid at governing, and that's why we should just ignore more successful models used in other countries.
3)The regular sprinkling of libertarian, antigovernment ranting, which if removed probably could have shortened the thread to roughly four pages.

Did I miss anything?

That you appear to have a superficial grasp of the issue.

 

[Heebie Jeebie]

Funny, I was in most of these places.

Mexico has no "private" plans. Only thing you pay for is low FIXED, gov prices for drugs. Dr, hospital is all free.

New Zealand has no fees. Every jet ride to hospital is free.

just more propoganda from another AMerican idiot that has no idea of the DUMP they live in.

More BS from the guy who never offers a solutions of want to work to make things better, only complains about how bad he has it. Don't worry, we'll keep supporting you as apparently you are incapable of doing anything of value.

 

[Heebie Jeebie]

Eighteen pages later and here's what I've been able to surmise about the position against universal health coverage.

1)Finland is really small, and the United States is big, which I suppose is a fine enough argument if your country is ancient Sumeria and controlling more than a few hundred square miles is a boast-worthy accomplishment.
2)We shouldn't even try because Americans are stupid at governing, and that's why we should just ignore more successful models used in other countries.
3)The regular sprinkling of libertarian, antigovernment ranting, which if removed probably could have shortened the thread to roughly four pages.

Did I miss anything?

Damn no wonder your posts don't make sense if that is what you have gotten from the 18 pages. You need to work on actually reading what is posted instead of making your mind up what was said without bothering to read it.

 

[274ina]

More BS from the guy who never offers a solutions of want to work to make things better, only complains about how bad he has it. Don't worry, we'll keep supporting you as apparently you are incapable of doing anything of value.

Only BS is from those supporting the current HC in USA..................

Solution is easy. UHC for USA. Paid for with about 20% of current Medicaid spending. All other HC spend ing is eliminated.

 

[Heebie Jeebie]

Solution is easy. UHC for USA.

You mean paid for by someone beside you, as usual right.

 

[Cardinal]

Damn no wonder your posts don't make sense if that is what you have gotten from the 18 pages. You need to work on actually reading what is posted instead of making your mind up what was said without bothering to read it.

Interestingly enough, neither you, US Conservative nor smartmouthwoman actually bothered to contradict that these are your arguments in a nutshell. None of you have bothered to bring a rational argument to the table regarding why uhc cannot be implemented in the United States, and what you have brought is only any good in private discussions with those who already are in agreement with you.

 

[Heebie Jeebie]

Interestingly enough, neither you, US Conservative nor smartmouthwoman actually bothered to contradict that these are your arguments in a nutshell. None of you have bothered to bring a rational argument to the table regarding why uhc cannot be implemented in the United States, and what you have brought is only any good in private discussions with those who already are in agreement with you.

There have been many arguments showing why it just doesn't transfer over. It's just that you already have the answer you want to hear in your head and it doesn't matter how much you are shown it is wrong, your mind is made up.

You have not made any argument as to how a system designed for 6 million would work for 300 million, other than to say sure it can. You continue to say size doesn't matter when it is patently obvious it does in business, family, and every other endeavour. What works for 2 people doesn't always work for 200 million but keep claiming it does and say others fail to prove it doesn't when they do offer reasons.

 

[US Conservative]

Interestingly enough, neither you, US Conservative nor smartmouthwoman actually bothered to contradict that these are your arguments in a nutshell. None of you have bothered to bring a rational argument to the table regarding why uhc cannot be implemented in the United States, and what you have brought is only any good in private discussions with those who already are in agreement with you.

The argument has already been brought dozens of times. Amongst other reasons-top down, one size fits all govt control doesn't work. Anything that kills competition kills innovation and product quality. Anything that removes choice from the individual and allocates it to some distant and incompetent bureaucracy is destined to end poorly-to do it with something as important as medicine is near criminal.

You dont want to hear it-you can lead a horse to water....

 

[Deuce]

The argument has already been brought dozens of times. Amongst other reasons-top down, one size fits all govt control doesn't work. Anything that kills competition kills innovation and product quality. Anything that removes choice from the individual and allocates it to some distant and incompetent bureaucracy is destined to end poorly-to do it with something as important as medicine is near criminal.

You dont want to hear it-you can lead a horse to water....

European nations do just fine with medical innovation.

 

[Cardinal]

The argument has already been brought dozens of times. Amongst other reasons-top down, one size fits all govt control doesn't work. Anything that kills competition kills innovation and product quality. Anything that removes choice from the individual and allocates it to some distant and incompetent bureaucracy is destined to end poorly-to do it with something as important as medicine is near criminal.

You dont want to hear it-you can lead a horse to water....

Then you'll be happy to know that every uhc system I've seen is not a "one size fits all" approach. Finland, the example I used much earlier in this thread, doesn't kill competition, since people are allowed to choose private health insurers if they so choose.

 

[Heebie Jeebie]

Then you'll be happy to know that every uhc system I've seen is not a "one size fits all" approach. Finland, the example I used much earlier in this thread, doesn't kill competition, since people are allowed to choose private health insurers if they so choose.

If it is so universal and good why do private insurers even exist there?

 

[US Conservative]

European nations do just fine with medical innovation.

No they dont. Compare their pharm research, cancer research, and medical innovation. Except for a select few (germany, switzerland, france) the continent isn't really doing much. The entire EU can't match us.

They do OK at best.

 

[US Conservative]

Then you'll be happy to know that every uhc system I've seen is not a "one size fits all" approach. Finland, the example I used much earlier in this thread, doesn't kill competition, since people are allowed to choose private health insurers if they so choose.

Its silly to even attempt to compare the US to finland. You guys seem to think we are one totalitarian law away from a nordic super-country. :roll:

Look at medicare, the VA. Not known for quality and they are essentially single payer light (with the smaller population as well).

 

[DVSentinel]

Interestingly enough, neither you, US Conservative nor smartmouthwoman actually bothered to contradict that these are your arguments in a nutshell. None of you have bothered to bring a rational argument to the table regarding why uhc cannot be implemented in the United States, and what you have brought is only any good in private discussions with those who already are in agreement with you.

How about the 2nd amendment combined with a very large number who enjoy who do not support socialist handouts to those who contribute nothing and earn nothing for themselves. Is that rational enough for you?

 

[poweRob]

I think ObamaCare is about to achieve it's true objective. Getting people on-board with the idea of single-payer as the direction we need to go. I didn't like it. I still don't like it but ObamaCare isn't a solution to anything. It's causing more problems than it's fixing and since America clearly feels that Healthcare is a basic entitlement, I'm ready to concede single-payer to be the only rational choice going forward.

Has ObamaCare made you more willing to accept Single-Payer as the way we should handle basic healthcare needs?

It hasn't convinced me to be any more willing to accept it because it's always been by far my preferred choice.

I just find it interesting that a conservative is saying that they'd prefer the government running 100% of the medical coverages out there, basically doing away with private insurance altogether which Obamacare makes bigger.

It's like being out-lefted by a righty. Weird... but welcome aboard the single payer train!

 

[poweRob]

Maybe. Implementation is always tricky.

I have thought of doing it incrementally by age. Each year moving the age limit from both ends of medicare... young and old, closer together by say... 7 years or so until all are covered. Provides an implementation that is incremental instead of trying to swallow it all whole in one swift move.

 

[poweRob]

That's because you're a liberal. Every liberal I know or have known thought single-payer was a brilliant idea. What liberal doesn't like freestuff from the government? It's conservatives who were against it and I'm wondering if ObamaCare has had the desired effect of breaking them down and getting them to change their mind about resisting the advancement of the socialist agenda through single-payer.

An in-thread lesson on how to make a relevant debate irrelevant crap in an instant with super-charged generalized lies.

 

[Cardinal]

If it is so universal and good why do private insurers even exist there?

Strawman. I never said it was perfect, I said it was significantly better. So with that in mind I'm sure you can answer your own question.

 

[Henrin]

Then you'll be happy to know that every uhc system I've seen is not a "one size fits all" approach. Finland, the example I used much earlier in this thread, doesn't kill competition, since people are allowed to choose private health insurers if they so choose.

How do you compete against the government? How do you compete against someone that can just steal their resources?

 

[Cardinal]

Its silly to even attempt to compare the US to finland. You guys seem to think we are one totalitarian law away from a nordic super-country. :roll:

Why? Because they're taller and blonder? Because they have more reindeer? Because they speak Finnish? Please, tell me your arbitrary reasons for why UHC can't be implemented here as well, while not going into what those logistical roadblocks actually are.

Look at medicare, the VA. Not known for quality and they are essentially single payer light (with the smaller population as well).

Argument #3: Americans are stupid at governing, so we shouldn't even bother attempting to implement better systems used elsewhere.

 

[Henrin]

Argument #3: Americans are stupid at governing, so we shouldn't even bother attempting to implement better systems used elsewhere.

A government system is better? On what planet is using government a better alternative than using private means? Do socialists ever make sense?

 

[Henrin]

An in-thread lesson on how to make a relevant debate irrelevant crap in an instant with super-charged generalized lies.

Because you aren't asking for the government to provide you stuff for your benefit at the expense of others. :lol:

 

[Cardinal]

How about the 2nd amendment

Well, I've got to hand it to you, DVSentinel: bringing the right to keep and bear arms into a healthcare debate was so unexpected, so abstract and bizarre, that you made me doubt what I knew the 2nd amendment to be and actually went to go look it up. Seriously, kudos on that. :lol:

 

[Carjosse]

A government system is better? On what planet is using government a better alternative than using private means? Do socialists ever make sense?

Norway: Wealthier Than Everyone Else & Better At Almost Everything
They are as close to socialism you are going to get.

 

[US Conservative]

Why? Because they're taller and blonder? Because they have more reindeer? Because they speak Finnish? Please, tell me your arbitrary reasons for why UHC can't be implemented here as well, while not going into what those logistical roadblocks actually are.



Argument #3: Americans are stupid at governing, so we shouldn't even bother attempting to implement better systems used elsewhere.

Ive already stated the reasons why, time burglar, and your second line is a logically falacious straw man.