National Single Payer

[Glowpun]

You can thank House Speaker Ryan and Trump for pushing their cruel health insurance boondoggle. This debacle has created a big opening to put Single Payer or full Medicare for all prominently front and center. Single Payer means everybody in, nobody out, with free choice of physician and hospital.

The Single Payer system that has been in place in Canada for decades comes in at half the cost per capita, compared to what the U.S. spends now. All Canadians are covered at a cost of about $4500 per capita while in the U.S. the cost is over $9000 per capita, with nearly 30 million people without coverage and many millions more underinsured.

Let's hear it folks!

 

[Harshaw]

Hear . . . what?

 

[Skeptic Bob]

I'm all four it and Bernie will surely be fighting for it. I think it is inevitable but I don't think its day has come quite yet.

 

[Harshaw]

Without a Constitutional amendment, it will never survive a challenge. There is nothing in the Constitution which empowers Congress to do any such thing.

 

[Kal'Stang]

Moderator's Warning:

Moved to a more appropriate place.

 

[EnigmaO01]

I'm all four it and Bernie will surely be fighting for it. I think it is inevitable but I don't think its day has come quite yet.

Yeah we can't even handle a woman president yet!

 

[Carjosse]

Without a Constitutional amendment, it will never survive a challenge. There is nothing in the Constitution which empowers Congress to do any such thing.

Unless it was just a framework for implementation at a state level and facilitate interstate cooperation like it should be.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

Unless it was just a framework for implementation at a state level and facilitate interstate cooperation like it should be.

I'd love to have a conversation about that with the guys who wrote it. I suspect that if you gave them a burst-feed of history covering the last 120 years, they'd want to clarify quite a few things.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Yeah we can't even handle a woman president yet!

We can handle a woman President, just not the woman who tried running under the Democratic ticket this last election. :coffeepap:

 

[Henrin]

Yeah we can't even handle a woman president yet!

I have a feeling that if a woman gets to be president it's going to be really annoying to deal with people that can't handle a woman being criticized for anything. I also have a feeling that gender relations will get a lot worse during their term. I really don't think society is ready for a woman president. Not because people are sexist, but because society isn't at a place yet where the white knight parade isn't a problem.

 

[joG]

You can thank House Speaker Ryan and Trump for pushing their cruel health insurance boondoggle. This debacle has created a big opening to put Single Payer or full Medicare for all prominently front and center. Single Payer means everybody in, nobody out, with free choice of physician and hospital.

The Single Payer system that has been in place in Canada for decades comes in at half the cost per capita, compared to what the U.S. spends now. All Canadians are covered at a cost of about $4500 per capita while in the U.S. the cost is over $9000 per capita, with nearly 30 million people without coverage and many millions more underinsured.

Let's hear it folks!

That is certainly the side of the argument I would choose to examine concerning health care.

- Why do the United States generate such a high percentage of gdp in the health care sector?
- What would the consequences be of changing the allocation of approximately 17 percent of gdp?
- How can one reallocate so large a percentage of gdp without causing too much damage?

 

[Greenbeard]

You can thank House Speaker Ryan and Trump for pushing their cruel health insurance boondoggle. This debacle has created a big opening to put Single Payer or full Medicare for all prominently front and center. Single Payer means everybody in, nobody out, with free choice of physician and hospital.

The Single Payer system that has been in place in Canada for decades comes in at half the cost per capita, compared to what the U.S. spends now. All Canadians are covered at a cost of about $4500 per capita while in the U.S. the cost is over $9000 per capita, with nearly 30 million people without coverage and many millions more underinsured.

Let's hear it folks!

You could roll everyone into Medicare and our per capita spending would still be a lot closer to $9,000 than $4,500.

 

[Harshaw]

Unless it was just a framework for implementation at a state level and facilitate interstate cooperation like it should be.

You mean, a suggestion? A symbolic resolution?

Pointless.

 

[ttwtt78640]

You could roll everyone into Medicare and our per capita spending would still be a lot closer to $9,000 than $4,500.

Yep, our single payer K-12 system is both more expensive and yields mediocre results compared to many OCED countries. The idea that putting the federal government in charge will control costs and improve performance has not proved to be the case with the VA system.

 

[countryboy]

I have a feeling that if a woman gets to be president it's going to be really annoying to deal with people that can't handle a woman being criticized for anything. I also have a feeling that gender relations will get a lot worse during their term. I really don't think society is ready for a woman president. Not because people are sexist, but because society isn't at a place yet where the white knight parade isn't a problem.

Not necessarily true. A Dem woman president will not be allowed to be criticized, a Repuplican, no problemo.

 

[Carjosse]

You mean, a suggestion? A symbolic resolution?

Pointless.

Mandate it and dissolve federal healthcare programs. All Canada has federally is conditions and terms to receive for the provinces to receive federal spending, of which one is universal coverage.

 

[Carjosse]

Yep, our single payer K-12 system is both more expensive and yields mediocre results compared to many OCED countries. The idea that putting the federal government in charge will control costs and improve performance has not proved to be the case with the VA system.

It needs to be a state responsibility, in order to be flexible and meet the state's needs.

 

[Eric7216]

According to the World Health Org Canada ranked 30th in health care and while better than the US (38th) it is not very good. Canada and Taiwan are the only two countries with single payer, according to Wikipedia. Even UK is not considered single payer for some reason. All of the top rated health systems use some private insurance. We should be able to do better than Canada.
And there is anecdotal stories about Canadians coming to the US for medical treatment. Such as the premier in Newfoundland recently.

 

[Carjosse]

According to the World Health Org Canada ranked 30th in health care and while better than the US (38th) it is not very good. Canada and Taiwan are the only two countries with single payer, according to Wikipedia. Even UK is not considered single payer for some reason. All of the top rated health systems use some private insurance. We should be able to do better than Canada.
And there is anecdotal stories about Canadians coming to the US for medical treatment. Such as the premier in Newfoundland recently.

That study is also considered deeply flawed by almost everyone. Regarding seeking medical treatment in the US, it is rather rare with no statistical evidence to support it and if it is required (which is also rare) will be covered by single-payer. It is quite possible the premier wanted a procedure not certified for use in Canada yet, but it has been kept private and he has been ruthlessly grilled because of it, also Newfoundland is very small and has abysmal healthcare compared with the country, so he would have had to revel regardless. In later studies the European hybrid systems tend to have better outcomes but they are essentially a more hardcore version of Obamacare combined with single-payer.

 

[Harshaw]

Mandate it and dissolve federal healthcare programs. All Canada has federally is conditions and terms to receive for the provinces to receive federal spending, of which one is universal coverage.

The federal government cannot mandate that the states do any such thing. Our Constitution is not the same as Canada's, where the provinces are little more than field offices for the federal government. States are sovereign.

It WOULD probably be within the general power of a state to do it. But the feds don't have that power, and they can't order states to do it.

 

[Carjosse]

The federal government cannot mandate that the states do any such thing. Our Constitution is not the same as Canada's, where the provinces are little more than field offices for the federal government. States are sovereign.

It WOULD probably be within the general power of a state to do it. But the feds don't have that power, and they can't order states to do it.

Our provinces have much more freedom from the federal government in policy making than states in a lot areas like education, healthcare, pensions, immigration, a lot of things. Provinces choose to have less power, they can freely opt out of most federal programs, they just choose not to. I don't think you understand our constitution, there is a very large and explicit separation of powers. The only major thing I can think of Canadian provinces do not have is the power of criminal law, but that should be federal anyways as it should not vary across the country.

They can, by withholding funding. Instituting single-payer was optional for provinces, it is just they would lose all healthcare funding if they did not.

 

[Harshaw]

Our provinces have much more freedom from the federal government in policy making than states in a lot areas like education or healthcare. I don't think you understand our constitution, there is a very large and explicit separation of powers. They can, by withholding funding. Instituting single-payer was optional for provinces, it is just they would lose all healthcare funding if they did not.

No, I do get your system; power comes from the top down -- from the Canadian Crown and ultimately from the British Crown, and the provinces are independent in only a few areas. In most respects, law comes from the federal Parliament, and in those areas where it doesn't, that can be changed by Parliament.

In the US system, power comes from the states and is invested in the federal government from the states. Most day-to-day law -- criminal, civil, education, etc. -- is done at the state level. Congress can't change that relationship, and can't mandate that the states carry out federal policy. Yes, it can withhold funding, but that won't work in the category of health care -- as we saw when numerous states declined to set up state Obamacare exchanges.

 

[Carjosse]

No, I do get your system; power comes from the top down -- from the Canadian Crown and ultimately from the British Crown, and the provinces are independent in only a few areas. In most respects, law comes from the federal Parliament, and in those areas where it doesn't, that can be changed by Parliament.

In the US system, power comes from the states and is invested in the federal government from the states. Congress can't change that relationship, and can't mandate that the states carry out federal policy. Yes, it can withhold funding, but that won't work in the category of health care -- as we saw when numerous states declined to set up state Obamacare exchanges.

Then it is odd the Canadian provinces would have more freedom than US states, Canadian provinces can generally opt of federal programs, most just choose not to like federal immigration or pension schemes. And in certain major areas like education, healthcare, pensions provinces have far more power. Each level of government derives power from the crown, the provinces power is not derived from the federal government but from the crown.

 

[Harshaw]

Then it is odd the Canadian provinces would have more freedom than US states

Where do you get this idea? Certainly not from anything I said.

 

[woodsman]

You can thank House Speaker Ryan and Trump for pushing their cruel health insurance boondoggle. This debacle has created a big opening to put Single Payer or full Medicare for all prominently front and center. Single Payer means everybody in, nobody out, with free choice of physician and hospital.

The Single Payer system that has been in place in Canada for decades comes in at half the cost per capita, compared to what the U.S. spends now. All Canadians are covered at a cost of about $4500 per capita while in the U.S. the cost is over $9000 per capita, with nearly 30 million people without coverage and many millions more underinsured.

Let's hear it folks!

I have always felt that the ACA was designed to fail in order to usher in a single payer system. The Canadian system is not free nor inexpensive as some suggest. The average family pays $12,000 per year for healthcare. The better off folks get hit the hardest, if you have a combined income of $280,000 in that household you will be paying $37,000 per year. In Canada they have ten brackets of contribution but all pay into the system unlike here in the US were 40% pay little or no federal taxes.

I don’t really have a solution for healthcare, but I do know that an average family paying $1000+ per month is ridiculous. What I do know is the US healthcare system needs a complete overhaul from the basement up. Expanding the Medicare system is just a bad idea all around, that program was designed for retirees/elderly or the disabled. And the expansion of Medicaid is also a bad idea as it is currently administrated since the ACA came on line. For a healthy single adult that makes 133% above the poverty line to be eligible without substantial contribution is wrong, that program is designed for the most unfortunate in our society.