Top Nancy Pelosi Aide Privately Tells Insurance Executives Not To Worry About Democrats Pushing MFA

[ludin]

PS - Yes I realize that I live in Canada, and that you believe that no one can do anything as well as Americans can, so the only logical conclusion is that Americans would be even better at providing universal medical care insurance to 100% of the population with even more services and at lower cost than any left-wing, socialist, commie, Marxist, communist that live in a monarch could - right?

yes you live in canada so trying to compare what you have to what we have is apples and oranges.
the average medicare supplement plan is about 240 a month or more depending on what you want.

The only logical conclusion is that our government has proven itself 100% incompetent at running healthcare on any level.
as i said i have good private insurance now. I don't need bad over priced government healthcare that is worse than what i have.

your fantasy pipe dream pie in the sky system is just that.

there are tons of articles on people waiting a year or more for a simple MRI.
took me a week to get an MRI.

some places took up to 45 weeks to see a specialist after having to get a referral.
i don't need a referral i can just go see a specialist.

 

[ludin]

Let me know when you're interested in discussing the actual facts of the matter. I have provided you with sources, evidence and links supporting my arguments, and you have done nothing but reply with gainsay and baseless diatribe assertions.

So did i.

you asked I showed you that when told the truth.
higher taxes longer waits and impacts to actual medicare
people support for the programmed dropped to 30% or so.

that is what you asked for that is what i gave you.

now you don't like that result but that is not my issue.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

we know you didn't so we can just move on.

The poll question was in the form "IF __[fill in the blank]__ will __[fill in the blank]__ THEN do you support __[fill in the blank]__?".

That is NOT the same as "Since it has been proven that __[fill in the blank]__ will __[fill in the blank]__, do you support __[fill in the blank]__?".

But I guess that that subtle distinction is too great for some people to grasp.

However, your original point was

which is why support for medicare for all drops into the 30% when you point out
that you will

1. have to pay way more in taxes
2. have to wait for medicare treatment and procedures.
3. not have access to the doctors that you want.
​

while the article you linked to said

But if they were told that a government-run system could lead to delays in getting care or higher taxes, support plunged to 26 percent and 37 percent, respectively. Support fell to 32 percent if it would threaten the current Medicare program.
(emphasis added)
​

Not only that, but the root source for the article says

For example, when those who initially say they favor a single-payer or Medicare-for-all plan are asked how they would feel if they heard that such a plan would give the government too much control over health care, about four in ten (21 percent of the public overall) say they would change their mind and would now oppose the plan, pushing total opposition up to 62 percent. Similarly, when this group is told such a plan would require many Americans to pay more in taxes or that it would eliminate or replace the Affordable Care Act, total opposition increases to 60 percent and 53 percent, respectively.
(emphasis added)https://www.kff.org/health-reform/poll-finding/data-note-modestly-strong-but-malleable-support-for-single-payer-health-care/
​

As you can see, neither your linked article nor the source for the linked article made any claim that MFA WOULD do either of those things, but only asked for opinions IF MFA would do them.

But, then again, the distinction between "reality" and "theory" IS rather esoteric, isn't it?

 

[ludin]

But, then again, the distinction between "reality" and "theory" IS rather esoteric, isn't it?

yet you seem to be having a huge time understanding it.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

yes you live in canada so trying to compare what you have to what we have is apples and oranges.
the average medicare supplement plan is about 240 a month or more depending on what you want.

Which is relevant to how the American system could be better - how?

The only logical conclusion is that our government has proven itself 100% incompetent at running healthcare on any level.

Which, since I don't advocate "government RUN healthcare" your point would be - what?

as i said i have good private insurance now. I don't need bad over priced government healthcare that is worse than what i have.

The "I'm all right Jack, screw you." position has been around for a looooooooooooooooonnnnnnnnnng time.

your fantasy pipe dream pie in the sky system is just that.

Quite right, which is why the American healthcare SYSTEM consistently rates higher than the Canadian healthcare SYSTEM.

there are tons of articles on people waiting a year or more for a simple MRI.

Sorry, your stated position was that it took a year to get to see a doctor and NOT that it took a year to get an MRI.

However, would you tell me what the average wait time for an MRI in the United States of America is for a person who DOES NOT have any medical insurance coverage (i.e. too "rich" for Medicare, too "poor" to buy their own, and without an employer who pays for medical care insurance)? Would you like to bet that it is shorter than one year?

By the way, did you happen to notice "For diagnostic procedures, the report found that this year Canadians waited about 4.1 weeks for a CT scan, 10.8 weeks for an MRI and 3.9 weeks for an ultrasound." (admittedly from Dec 7, 2017) or the fact that 50% of the patients wait less than 41 days for an MRI in BC?

Since it appears that you believe that "average = most extreme case" then you must agree that, in a country where someone simply will NOT get an MRI the "average" justhasta be "an infinitely long period of time". Right?

took me a week to get an MRI.

Good for you.

Did you know that some people in BC get them even faster than that?

some places took up to 45 weeks to see a specialist after having to get a referral.

Again, your original position was that it took a year to get to see a doctor - wasn't it?

However, would you tell me what the average wait time "to see a specialist" in the United States of America is for a person who DOES NOT have any medical insurance coverage (i.e. too "rich" for Medicare, too "poor" to buy their own, and without an employer who pays for medical care insurance)? Would you like to bet that it is shorter than 45 weeks?

i don't need a referral i can just go see a specialist.

Good for you. Not all of us are fully qualified medical practitioners who have the training and equipment needed to conduct self-diagnosis.

BTW, would that include ALL specialists? (If you say that it does, I'll ask you to let me know how long it takes for you to get to see a specialist in an area of my own choosing and I'll even believe your answer.)

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

yet you seem to be having a huge time understanding it.

Since I provided your exact words, as well as the exact words of the linked article (and the exact words of the source document for the linked article) as well as showing your your exact words DID NOT conform to either the linked article (or the source documents), your conclusion as to who is having difficulty understanding the distinction between "reality" and "theory" is questionable.