Medicare For All is fasted way to fix healthcare.

[James972]

You're not saying anything that makes sense.

I said Europe and Canada pay about 1/3 for health care what we pay. Why doesn't that make sense??????????????????

we'd switch to universal at 1/3 the price and then lobby for published prices and higher copays to save even more. Do you understand?

 

[Media_Truth]

I said Europe and Canada pay about 1/3 for health care what we pay. Why doesn't that make sense??????????????????

we'd switch to universal at 1/3 the price and then lobby for published prices and higher copays to save even more. Do you understand?

I think these people work for the Insurance industry. They don't want a more efficient, streamlined health care system that costs a fraction of our current system.

 

[Phys251]

That seems the be the latest talking point from the leftist.

"The leftist"? There's only one of them?

 

[Phys251]

Exactly. Once everyone is okay with increasing their taxes, I don't think we will have any issue with having universal health care.

 

[James972]

I think these people work for the Insurance industry. They don't want a more efficient, streamlined health care system that costs a fraction of our current system.

Sadly, among conservatives and libertarians there is a myth that current health care system is somehow capitalistic and switching to single payer would be socialistic. The reality is current system is socialist and single payer would be a far more efficient form of socialism.

 

[Greenbeard]

Um, no. Basic math shows why you're wrong. Total health care spending in the US was $3.5 Trillion in 2017; ten years ago, total U.S. Health Care spending was $2.3 Trillion. That is a 10-Year CAGR of 4.8%.

That means that if Health Care spending grew at a rate of 4.8% every year, forever, total U.S. health care spending would reach $32.1 Trillion by 2064.

This is the part where I get to the math you probably understand: From 2019 -> 2064 is not 10 years. If will be if we implemented Medicare for all.

No one has suggested that annual health spending under Medicare-for-all would be $32 trillion ten years from now.

 

[it's just me]

That seems the be the latest talking point from the leftist. They talk about it all the time. Problem is when you ask them how they are planning on paying for it they don't want to talk about that.

For as long as I have been working I have been paying a Medicare tax, and now that I am actually insured under Medicare I am still paying premiums, at least for the part B. What they are talking about doesn't sound like Medicare.

 

[it's just me]

Why rely on "price competition" when government can simply dictate? Capitalism can work well in many sectors, but it has been proven detrimental in the health sector. Why trust your health to people who's only priority is to make money? I'd rather trust people who's priority is my health...

Those people need to eat, too.

 

[James972]

No one has suggested that annual health spending under Medicare-for-all would be $32 trillion ten years from now.

what we have suggested is the extremely obvious-i.e. if Medicare for all were implemented with European discipline, prices would be reduced 70%. Then, with published prices and higher copays capitalism would reduce prices still further. Do you understand?

 

[James972]

That seems the be the latest talking point from the leftist. They talk about it all the time. Problem is when you ask them how they are planning on paying for it they don't want to talk about that.

obviously we'd pay for it with the same money we use to pay for health care now!!

 

[James972]

I'd rather trust people who's priority is my health...

totally naive!!! your health will their priority when they can make a profit!! 1+1=2

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Health care for all (Medicare for all) would be cheaper and better. It would replace the convoluted socialist system we have now with a simple more efficient socialist system. Then we could require published prices and higher copays until we had capitalistic price and quality controls.

More efficient? Utter nonsense. The government has been running Medicare for seniors since 1965 and it has not been anything remotely close to efficient. Cheaper? maybe, however the only reason for that is that they would control the costs by way of rationing available healthcare. Not good.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

TRhat's completely false. Bernie explains how it's all paid for in great detail.:shrug:

Bernie wears depends.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Sadly, among conservatives and libertarians there is a myth that current health care system is somehow capitalistic and switching to single payer would be socialistic. The reality is current system is socialist and single payer would be a far more efficient form of socialism.

Medicare already exists for seniors. It's not efficient. Never has been. It's always been in a state of financial peril. How would it suddenly go efficient under a medicare for All scenario?

 

[James972]

Medicare already exists for seniors. It's not efficient. Never has been. It's always been in a state of financial peril. How would it suddenly go efficient under a medicare for All scenario?

by adopting European socialist discipline

 

[James972]

More efficient? Utter nonsense. The government has been running Medicare for seniors since 1965 and it has not been anything remotely close to efficient. Cheaper? maybe, however the only reason for that is that they would control the costs by way of rationing available healthcare. Not good.

rationing or market disciple would to cut price 70% or $7000 per person per year is a huge win-win! then it could be easily switched to capitalism with published prices and higher copays

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

by adopting European socialist discipline

You are only wildly assuming that the European system is disciplined. I have not studied every European nation's healthcare system, however the British system is a disaster.

 

[OlNate]

totally naive!!! your health will their priority when they can make a profit!! 1+1=2

It's not totally naive, James...lots of doctors operate around the world and do a fantastic job, and they don't bring with them the crazy overhead American doctors do. I'm sorry you're so jaded, but I suppose it does explain why you never try to raise the bar.

 

[James972]

It's not totally naive, James...lots of doctors operate around the world and do a fantastic job, and they don't bring with them the crazy overhead American doctors do. I'm sorry you're so jaded, but I suppose it does explain why you never try to raise the bar.

it a simple fact that your cancer and heart disease will more likely be cured if the folks working on it have both profit and humanitarian motive. Did you notice that our doctors get paid a ton and live accordingly. Take that incentive away and good luck with your health, obviously. See why you were naive? Today is the first day of the rest of your once liberal life.

 

[James972]

You are only wildly assuming that the European system is disciplined. I have not studied every European nation's healthcare system, however the British system is a disaster.

don't be silly, Europeans live as long as we do and save about $7000 a year per person and they have no stress about dying with no insurance..

 

[iguanaman]

That seems the be the latest talking point from the leftist. They talk about it all the time. Problem is when you ask them how they are planning on paying for it they don't want to talk about that.

It will cost far less than the system we have now so the question is really "How can we afford our current HC system?" I'm waiting for your answer.

 

[iguanaman]

it a simple fact that your cancer and heart disease will more likely be cured if the folks working on it have both profit and humanitarian motive. Did you notice that our doctors get paid a ton and live accordingly. Take that incentive away and good luck with your health, obviously. See why you were naive? Today is the first day of the rest of your once liberal life.

Actually our current system does too much to encourage Doctors to only care about money and not patients. It is perverting the profession. In the rest of the developed world this is not true.

 

[James972]

Actually our current system does too much to encourage Doctors to only care about money and not patients. It is perverting the profession. In the rest of the developed world this is not true.

BS of course! most doctors care and most do a good job. We hold 70% of recent patents in medicare care so we don't want liberals even allowed to think about it

 

[iguanaman]

BS of course! most doctors care and most do a good job. We hold 70% of recent patents in medicare care so we don't want liberals even allowed to think about it

Medical diseases are becoming more complex, and people are living longer. There has never been a time where patients need to trust their doctors more. All doctors need to remember their oath and put the patient back in center focus. We all need to take a stand against those doctors who are abusing the system for their own gain. Patients need to learn that the vast majority us care about our patients and have their best interests in mind. We all need to become a team again. Patients need to regain our trust, and our profession needs to re-establish its integrity.

https://www.physiciansweekly.com/doctors-losing-publics-trust/

 

[James972]

https://www.physiciansweekly.com/doctors-losing-publics-trust/

if the liberal has any idea what his point is why not let us know???