- Joined
- Dec 1, 2010
- Messages
- 61,736
- Reaction score
- 32,385
- Location
- El Paso Strong
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
“Had that bill (Obamacare) failed, with all of its flaws, it would have taken another decade or longer to get single payer up and going. We view the health care reform bill as a platform on which we are now able to move forward.”
Recently, Rep. Conyers admitted that Obamacare was a platform to a single payer system (despite claims to the contrary during the debate).
Conyers Proclaims Love for Obamacare « Single Payer Action
In a search on the net, there are definitely people who advocate and support it in the US.
Would you like to see single payer health care in the US?
Recently, Rep. Conyers admitted that Obamacare was a platform to a single payer system (despite claims to the contrary during the debate).
Conyers Proclaims Love for Obamacare « Single Payer Action
In a search on the net, there are definitely people who advocate and support it in the US.
Would you like to see single payer health care in the US?
You'd be replacing a lightly competitive middle man insurance market with a monopoly middle man.
Couldn't think of anything worse than our government, who can't even balance it's own budget, managing my medical care.
Not entirely a fair comment. The government also runs the most advanced, effective military in the world. The government has also led us to being the worlds foremost power militarily, politically and socially and continues to keep us there. Cynicism is easy, but it's as inaccurate as unbridled optimism.
Yea but come on, the amount of wasteful spending in the military alone is just the icing on the cake of stupidity involved with these people.
Jet's and bases the DOD doesn't want but has to take because of the nut jobs in congress, it can only be worse with UHC.
In a search on the net, there are definitely people who advocate and support it in the US.
No, of course not. Mayor Snorkum is an American. He pays his own way for himself and owes nothing to others, who should also be paying their own way.
There are also people who support man-boy "love", but that's just as wrong.
Are you saying large corporations are waste free? Any large undertaking has waste, fraud and abuse.
Are you saying large corporations are waste free? Any large undertaking has waste, fraud and abuse. Pointing to that as a reason we cannot do it us patently false. I am willing to bet that most to all insurance companies have an equivalent percentage of waste.
To me the real question is not can we do it. I think given the desire, we can do most anything successfully, which is why we are the greatest country on earth currently. I never think betting against the US is a good bet. The question to my mind is should we go to single payer, and that is a much tougher question, and I think Obama got it exactly right when he said that in the absence of another system, single payer would be the way to go, but since that is not the case, and we do have a system in place for health care, we should just work to improve that system, not replace it.
Privately owned companies have people called "owners" who have an interest in cutting waste, fraud, and abuse. Government is not euqally motivated.
Privately owned companies that cannot control their losses can be underpriced by competitors and they either improve or vanish. Governments raise taxes.
There are also people who make irrelevant comparisons and appeals to emotion, but that's even more wrong.
The military is made up of particularly motivated citizens who help defend against waste, fraud and abuse(the forms are very easy to get and do get responses for example). Further, the military has a limited budget, which makes the leaders very conscious of how to best spend that budget.
This is an advantage of capitalism, but not so much healthcare, where cutting costs is most easily done by cutting benefits. Further, private companies can do this thing called price fixing which is bad(and this does happen).
All your objections so far are simplistic and jingoistic.
So you don't drive on public roads, expect police and fire support, and so on?
Not entirely a fair comment. The government also runs the most advanced, effective military in the world. The government has also led us to being the worlds foremost power militarily, politically and socially and continues to keep us there. Cynicism is easy, but it's as inaccurate as unbridled optimism.
So you think health care is the commons? Mayor Snorkum's use of the roads is paid for by his taxes. Everyone uses the roads and payes their proportionate share of the expense, which on a per capita basis is minimal.
Health care serves not commerce functions, it's a private matter. No individual should be required to pay for someone else's hysterectomy or dialysis when his own prostate is working fine, just like his kidneys. Note the use of the word "required" in the preceding sentence.
The rest of us understand that police are an essential function of government, and don't pretend otherwise.
And, we're also aware that the free market is perfectly capable of providing fire control services if monopolistic government intrusion didn't destroy the market for same.
One of the two main purposes of every government is running the military. Force is what governments do. They do nothing else.
Governments do not run businesses well. The successful fascist state with free people has never existed. It's a contradiction in terms. Health care is a business, and the evidence is in. Surprise! Governments around the world do not run healthcare well.
Are you saying large corporations are waste free? Any large undertaking has waste, fraud and abuse. Pointing to that as a reason we cannot do it us patently false. I am willing to bet that most to all insurance companies have an equivalent percentage of waste.
To me the real question is not can we do it. I think given the desire, we can do most anything successfully, which is why we are the greatest country on earth currently. I never think betting against the US is a good bet. The question to my mind is should we go to single payer, and that is a much tougher question, and I think Obama got it exactly right when he said that in the absence of another system, single payer would be the way to go, but since that is not the case, and we do have a system in place for health care, we should just work to improve that system, not replace it.
According to most studies I have seen, from a value-add perspective, most company processes are somewhere in he range of 90 to 95% wasteful. This is a result I have seen over and over with a lean analysis. Its not just government that is wasteful.
We spend twice as much, per capita, as people in european countries with single payer systems.
Per Capita Health Expenditures by Country, 2007 — Infoplease.com
And yet, our life expectancy is less:
List of countries by life expectancy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And, our infant mortality rates are worse:
List of countries by infant mortality rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So, we're paying twice as much to get half as much. In what world is that a good deal?
Perhaps if we stopped subsidizing insurance companies, and the dollars went directly to healthcare providers, we'd be in a better place (aka the place that the rest of the civilized west has already located).
If you've been to an ER in the last 12 months (and I have been, twice, i have two teenagers), you would understand already that our current system is broken and unsustainable. I know that change is terrifying. But, exactly how much worse do you think it can get?
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?