• 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!

Kasich Steps up to the Plate

i don't have a problem with someone making a profit from health care. however, tying access to the system to specific employment is a major inefficiency. we'd be a lot better off if all basic care was covered through Medicare. then that entity would have a lot more power to negotiate prices. we also need to make it a lot less expensive to become a doctor.

profit is good if:

1. mechanisms are in place to prevent price gouging
2. there is fair and honest competition
3, there is a real option to either go without or use a alternative
 
You concession was noted those times as well.
As you never address the argument. You simply repeat the same thing as if it was correct.



Just like now you can't actually address the argument.
There is a reason you do it. You can't refute it.

the reason i refer you to earlier discussions is because this is what happens in every health care discussion thread :

1. you post your basic position.

2. i respond with multiple charts and links which refute your argument over the course of ten or twelve pages and acres of quote farming.

3. you dismiss the data and links and slink off to fight with someone else who you feel that you have a better chance against.

4. you show up in the next health care thread a month or so later, arguing your initial position while pretending that it wasn't refuted by the charts and links that i posted in the previous forty discussions.

this is a dishonest debating strategy, and it's a waste of my time.
 
The biggest cost to doctors is preventive medicine and administration costs. Those account for about 60-70 cents spent on healthcare.

Are you out of your mind? You think we spend $1.9-$2.2 trillion on preventive medicine and admin costs?
 
the reason i refer you to earlier discussions is because this is what happens in every health care discussion thread :

1. you post your basic position.

2. i respond with multiple charts and links which refute your argument over the course of ten or twelve pages and acres of quote farming.
Which are refuted by my own articles and links. Interesting that you can't be honest in that regard.

3. you dismiss the data and links and slink off to fight with someone else who you feel that you have a better chance against.
Not at all. I deafeated your argument and I saw no point in responding to you again since you just repeat yourself even though the previous argument you posted was addressed and thwarted.
You never actually address anything. You just repeat yourself over and over again even though your previous point was already addressed and dealt with. The reason is you can't continue because you have no argument after that.

4. you show up in the next health care thread a month or so later, arguing your initial position while pretending that it wasn't refuted by the charts and links that i posted in the previous forty discussions.

this is a dishonest debating strategy, and it's a waste of my time.

Yes we know what you do is dishonest that is why you never address the argument and just repeat yourself over and over again.
You haven't refuted anything. Lol.

Facts are facts and you simply only look at facts that agree with you.

Just like now.
You can't refute what I said.

Why because it is documented fact. It can't be refuted.
Article after article has been written on it and you simply ignore it and repeat the same thing over again
As if it makes it more accurate the next time.
 
Are you out of your mind? You think we spend $1.9-$2.2 trillion on preventive medicine and admin costs?

You don't read very well.

U.S. health care admin costs are double the global average - Jan. 11, 2017

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3195420/
Awards for medical malpractice claimants are subject to lengthy delays: on average, it takes around four years to resolve a malpractice claim (Cohen and Hughes, 2007). Moreover, for every dollar spent on compensation, 54 cents went to litigation expenses and other transaction costs (Studdert et al., 2006)

All of this is ties into the cost of medical.
As malpractice goes up doctors have to charge more to cover.

Etc ...
 

...so you link to an article pointing out admin is 8% of our spending?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3195420/
Awards for medical malpractice claimants are subject to lengthy delays: on average, it takes around four years to resolve a malpractice claim (Cohen and Hughes, 2007). Moreover, for every dollar spent on compensation, 54 cents went to litigation expenses and other transaction costs (Studdert et al., 2006)

That's 54% of malpractice award amounts, not of health spending.
 
It's odd that democrats and RINOs criticize that method when pretty much everything the democrats did to get Obamacare passed was one sided. Therir message was "Our way or the highway".

I think that might be how the media you consumed presented it for you but that simply is not true in reality.
 
...so you link to an article pointing out admin is 8% of our spending?



That's 54% of malpractice award amounts, not of health spending.

Philip K. Howard - Medical Tort Reform Could Save Billions

Actually it does. The insurance company or malpractice company will pay out if ordered the malpractice insurance rate then goes up and doctors have to foot higher bills. That leads to higher costs as well.

They then order more s tests that are un-needed.

It is all connected. Doctors have to pay the lawyers. They then have to make up the differences.
If you don't think you are paying for your doctors lawyer then you don't know how the system works.

You pay the doctors everything from malpractice to legal advice.
 
Which are refuted by my own articles and links. Interesting that you can't be honest in that regard.


Not at all. I deafeated your argument and I saw no point in responding to you again since you just repeat yourself even though the previous argument you posted was addressed and thwarted.
You never actually address anything. You just repeat yourself over and over again even though your previous point was already addressed and dealt with. The reason is you can't continue because you have no argument after that.



Yes we know what you do is dishonest that is why you never address the argument and just repeat yourself over and over again.
You haven't refuted anything. Lol.

Facts are facts and you simply only look at facts that agree with you.

Just like now.
You can't refute what I said.

Why because it is documented fact. It can't be refuted.
Article after article has been written on it and you simply ignore it and repeat the same thing over again
As if it makes it more accurate the next time.

you don't refute the charts and data. you simply return to your initial position in each health care thread as if that position wasn't previously refuted. counter-accusing me of what you do yourself is not a valid argument, and it is also dishonest. my guess is that you don't just do this in health care threads, either, but i bet you that i'm the first one to call you on that "strategy."

either way, starting our debate from square one in every health care thread is pointless. have a good one.
 
you don't refute the charts and data. you simply return to your initial position in each health care thread as if that position wasn't previously refuted. counter-accusing me of what you do yourself is not a valid argument, and it is also dishonest. my guess is that you don't just do this in health care threads, either, but i bet you that i'm the first one to call you on that "strategy."

either way, starting our debate from square one in every health care thread is pointless. have a good one.
Now you are being dishonest yet again. I have refuted them numerous times.
You failed to address them and just repeated yourself.

I don't have to counter accuse it is fact what you do otherwise you would actually address the rebuttals instead of just repeating yourself.

You haven't called me on anything.

Fact

America has a doctor shortage.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ool-association-warns/?utm_term=.181c491b07bb

Fact countries that have single pay pay massive taxes.
France it is about 20% not including income tax and vat. Total tax is about 40-50% plus vat.
In Spain it is the same way. A person making 55k a year would pay a total tax of about 40-50%.
That doesn't include their 20% vat tax.

In England someone making 60k will get hit with about a 40% tax and on top of it another 11%.

These are facts.

Next even European healthcare systems do not cover everything. So you need supplemental insurance to fill in the gaps.
The typical Medicare supplement plan is about 220 dollars a month.

I see no reason that the price would change.

Again facts.

Next doctors in those systems work for the government they are paid a wage unlike doctors here.
Good luck on getting doctors here to cut their pay. That is one reason already that more doctors are dropping Medicaid and Medicare or not taking new Medicare patients.

So how do you plan on forcing doctors to take your single payer you can't.
Nor can you force hospitals to take it either.

Again fact.
 
other first world nations are achieving the same or better outcomes for a fraction of the cost. we can do the same.

The figures that suggest that other first world nations are achieving better outcomes at a fraction of the cost are misleading. They do not take into account the sedentary lifestyle of so many Americans, levels of drug abuse, etc that effect outcomes. Healthcare does cost more here, however in the long run, single payer will only make it more costly. To be blunt......while America has the costliest healthcare system, it also has the best healthcare available anywhere on the planet. And single payer would blow that up.
 
the main problem is the design of the system. it is enormously inefficient and overpriced compared to other first world countries.

Do you think Medicare is efficient? That's what single payer would be....Medicare for all.
 
Kinda hard to do any healing when the people of the other party keep threatening to assinate you.
Itnseems the leaders of the Democratic Party should do something to help stop it yet they are silent on the matter.

Right, right, the Democrats are always threatening to assassinate the Republican candidates. Happens all the time in Righwingastan.
 
A for-profit system where the consumer's limited choices are seek expensive medical attention or die is never going to find checks and balances withing the free market alone. So, drugs costs thousands of dollars per week, hospital stays cost thousands of dollars a day and millions of people are one illness away from bankruptcy.

If you want limited choices, single payer would be limited choices on steroids. Take away the profit motive and you will see very limited healthcare. Government bean counters would decide how many doctors, nurses, hospitals, high tech diagnostic equipment is supplied, etc. And then...say hello to waiting lists.
 
:lamo

Dude, the guy couldn't even win his home state or for that matter any other state in the primary.

That says a lot about the Republican base, doesn't it?

The party chose a reality TV star over sober and competent leadership. Linsey Graham was right, "My party has gone bat**** crazy."
 
Right, right, the Democrats are always threatening to assassinate the Republican candidates. Happens all the time in Righwingastan.

why can't you address what I have said? or are your just purposely ignoring all of the calls to assassinate trump?
which is it?
 
why can't you address what I have said? or are your just purposely ignoring all of the calls to assassinate trump?
which is it?

You said:
Kinda hard to do any healing when the people of the other party keep threatening to assinate you.

My bad. I read Assassinate, and not assinate. Not sure even what that word means.
 
i don't have a problem with someone making a profit from health care. however, tying access to the system to specific employment is a major inefficiency. we'd be a lot better off if all basic care was covered through Medicare. then that entity would have a lot more power to negotiate prices. we also need to make it a lot less expensive to become a doctor.

If it were up to me, employer provided healthcare would go back to being 100% voluntary. That was never a gift from the government. It used to be that employers offered coverage as a fringe benefit. That was intend to recruit a skilled work force. However Medicare for all would do little more then blow up Medicare.
 
That says a lot about the Republican base, doesn't it?

The party chose a reality TV star over sober and competent leadership. Linsey Graham was right, "My party has gone bat**** crazy."

The fact that he couldn't even win his own state should tell you something. Did you ever consider that he just isn't well liked?
 
The fact that he couldn't even win his own state should tell you something. Did you ever consider that he just isn't well liked?

It does tell me something, but it's more about the party loyalists than anything else.
 
I think that might be how the media you consumed presented it for you but that simply is not true in reality.

You want reality? The democrats lost control of the House and the majority of state legislatures in 2010, the Senate in 2014, and the White House in 2016, largely due to Obamacare. The democrats had control of government when they proposed Obamacare and were not about to let the Republicans stop them. Considering that the ACA was unpopular as hell from the very beginning, they did attempt to sway a few RINOs from the republican party to vote for it for the sake of political cover, however even the RINOs did not fall for that. If you don't think the bill is one sided, tell me which republican voted for it. It has been the 1200 lb gorilla on the back of the democrat party since 2010. The democrat party owns it. And now that it's collapsing, they cannot escape the blame. They should have seriously negotiated with the republicans to begin with. They could have come up with a bipartisan bill that he democrats would have gotten most of the credit for. And that would have been reforming the healthcare system rather then taking it over.
 
Back
Top Bottom