Not everything but a significant portion including higher costs of Drug R&D, Malpractice insurance, govt. regulations preventing competition or insurance companies crossing state lines but let's not overlook personal behavior and why we reward bad behavior with more money thrown at the problem. Obamacare is the first step to single payer and single payer in a country of 312 million people with diverse population, different state cost of living, different state personal behavior doesn't solve the problem at all, just hides it in another govt. entitlement program that gives politicians more power. Medicare and SS are single payer and are trillions in unfunded liabilities. Creating a single payer system doesn't do anything but give the politicians more money to spend
Instead of answering my question, you just regurgitated GOP catchphrases. "Unfunded liability" is my favorite. Giant red flag that the person in question has no idea what they're talking about.
No, I provided you with the costs of healthcare and I have in the past provided you the proof from the Treasury Dept of the unfunded liabilities of SS and Medicare, both single payer systems and both supposedly self funded. I wonder what it is about "undisclosed" that creates this kind of loyalty to a massive central govt. and more entitlement spending? Single payer always sounds good to someone who doesn't understand history or the reality of the govt. we have. More money just funds more entitlement programs and creates more dependence. Is that what you really want and how does that benefit you?
UHC systems work better and cheaper in every single country that adopts them. Maybe you think America is uniquely incompetent, but I don't.
1.Obama is a progressive, and 2.an extreme ideologue, and 3.a liar, which is worse.
You were asked a direct question, and this is textbook deflection, and obfuscation. Now answer the question.
UHC systems work better and cheaper in every single country that adopts them. Maybe you think America is uniquely incompetent, but I don't.
Nah he just hates the US Government and the opportunities available here.
J, I've answered every question directly. So, I think you're just following him and not really reading the entire thread.
You have never answered the question so here it is again
Tell me why exactly we need Obamacare and how adding 14-30 million new insurance covered people is going to lower costs, improve access, and quality?
This has been answered a dozen times before. More insured by definition means more access. One is the other. We've also covered using other health professionals than just doctors. I've told you this and give you links many times. I've also shown how the law encourages more doctors. The AMA which currently holds the number back, will loosen to meet the need.
So you have been answered yet again.
That is a lie
How does access improve quality and service? Do you understand how incentive works? Where is the incentive to become a doctor where your income is controlled by the Federal Govt? Why are hospitals and doctors dropping out of Medicare. You live in a dream world that doesn't exist.
No, it isn't. It's just easier for you to lie on the Internet. But anyone reading these threads if honest knows I have. I have many times.
Typical baiting and lack of reality.
You think our opportunities come from the Govt?
Again, I've answered this before as well. A person getting no care and gets adequate care has improved care and has improved service. And as everyone is still making money, and based on volume as it always has been, there is still the same incentives as always. You truly don't understand how this works.
And yes some are dropping out. Some will always prefer to work for the wealthy. This is true in all professions. But there are still doctors who take Medicare, and will likely be more in the future.
I'm not sure how many times you guys want me repeating things, but I do have a limit. I expect you to remember this.
It is all you ever talk about.
I think government plays a very important role from infrastructure to the health of the nation to protecting fair business practices and more..
No, it isn't a lie, history shows it isn't a lie, what makes people like you so gullible and always believing in theory while ignoring reality. There is nothing in this program that improves quality and service, not one thing. You live in a dream world. Transformation of this country into a European economic system will create the new normal of high debt, high unemployment, low economic growth, and massive dependence on the govt. where govt. spending is the largest component of GDP
What role did the Federal Govt. play in the creation of your business other than providing you the freedom to start your own business?
And older people which is part of our current population changes has less access because there are more people in the system creating greater stress on the current doctors in the system. Older people need more medical care and it isn't going to be available. Yours is theory and denies reality. I gave you the costs of Healthcare but here it is again.
http://www.awhp-online.com/issues/AWHP_RisingHealthCareCosts_7-26-04.pdf
Your argument is all about access but doesn't address costs and service.
...actually the general welfare clause is pretty board. This notion that the only function of the US government is only to provide for the common defence is amusing.
-MadisonSome, who have not denied the necessity of the power of taxation, have grounded a very fierce attack against the Constitution, on the language in which it is defined. It has been urged and echoed, that the power "to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States," amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given of the distress under which these writers labor for objections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction.
Had no other enumeration or definition of the powers of the Congress been found in the Constitution, than the general expressions just cited, the authors of the objection might have had some color for it; though it would have been difficult to find a reason for so awkward a form of describing an authority to legislate in all possible cases. A power to destroy the freedom of the press, the trial by jury, or even to regulate the course of descents, or the forms of conveyances, must be very singularly expressed by the terms "to raise money for the general welfare."
But what color can the objection have, when a specification of the objects alluded to by these general terms immediately follows, and is not even separated by a longer pause than a semicolon?
I hope so. We're the only industrial country in the world that doesn't guarantee a minimum of health care to its citizens. It's shameful, inefficient, and cruel. It means that if you have enough money, you get to live. If you don't, you die. No civilized country would do that to its citizens. Even Mexico provides health care, and it doesn't seem to care much for its citizens, but apparently recognizes that people need treatment. It also saves money in the long run, since a healthier citizenry costs less, and they also are freer to focus on work and education.
You want the law to provide quality? You don't know anything about quality.
But I have explained exactly how it works. And if you examine their debt, other things are the main driver of that debt. Much like here, predatory lending practices led to the collapse. But be that as it may, they spend less, and with a two tiered system of UHC, we could lower costs and improve access, which does improve over all quality.
You really should read the things you post:
What Can Legislators Do to Help Control Rising Health Care Costs?
Together we can make a difference...
• Assure full funding of state government programs
• Carefully evaluate requests for additional health care mandates
• Advocate for regulatory simplification efforts
• Evaluate the cumulative effect of additional regulation prior to implementation
• Support reasonable limits on non-economic damages in medical malpractice lawsuits
So, they are arguing that what is needed is more government. And what thy advocate for would be handled by going to a single payer UHC system. So, you're a funny fellow. :lamo
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?