A serious discussion on Nationalized healthcare

If:
Effective Rate The effective rate corresponding to a stated rate of interest r compounded m times per year is rE = a1 + r mb m − 1.
Then: what is the mathematical equation for reducing payments 10% per year?

As in, property taxes after the age of 65. Would allow more money to pay for healthcare that Medicaid will not cover, nor Obamacare., for the individual to have access to. Would help people from having to sell their homes. Some states depend up to 75% for property taxes to cover their budgets. Most are much less. Why? How can a state make money to cover their expenses without more taxation? I have many questions that should be addressed before tackling healthcare, and it is all tied together. Why do insurance companies survive? Investing? What can .gov learn? Who would listen? Maybe we are in need for another "The Day The Earth Stood Still".
One cannot fix this
8d35c6c4e418afdc9d08c65d7d3e1fc8.jpg


Without fixing this:
cc1c46b51b12be96da79ecb3761424a4.jpg
 
James said:
I agree with what you say, to me it shows the barbaric nature of 'unregulated' capitalism at it's worst. How anyone can attempt to justify the non-treatment of life threatening conditions, even for children, is insanity. I think though it will need a bi-partisan effort to get things changed. To push through and side line, the obstacles and barriers you describe.

Something I have learned the hard way, to get things done, sometimes you have to talk to and deal with people you disagree with. To find and focus on the few things you do agree on, and build from there.

How you describe the treatment given to you, seems outrageous. I can't get my head around how varied and complex the American system is. It seems bizarre. I would think even a 'state by state' basic care plan could save money. my guess would be as an employer, anything that lowered stress for my staff, gave me less headaches for regulation, and improved their health to attend work and perform i would be in favor of.
Click to expand...

It is a barbaric system...I have worked as a Paramedic and in ERs and Surgery...I can tell you first hand that we have serious problems with our healthcare system overall.
Yes...me may have some fancy innovative things that companies come up with, or new drugs that no one can afford...but this comes back to the Trump administration’s claim, and Paul Ryan’s claim...that we will have greater “access”...they keep saying this word over and over again.
We have all the access we need now...anyone can go to any medical center they so choose....their insurance may not cover that place, but your access is not restricted - YOU are restricted by money...if you can afford to pay for an awesome insurance plan then you have very few limitations to access.
Whereas if you are middle class on down, you get what insurance your employer hopefully gives you (which you still pay a portion), or you buy what you can afford on the open market, which for most people is more and more unaffordable.
This “healthcare” plan they just tried to pass would have been devastating to the most vulnerable individuals while giving tax breaks to the rich.
It was a BS phony plan.
 
Professor Snep said:
Get rid of diseases by building a huge wall.

But seriously: my guess is that it all depends on your world view. For example, I don't believe people want a fantasy, but that they rather want a practical solution for their everyday problems. Especially when they have nothing, and the status quo is undesirable. It doesn't have to be perfect, it just needs to deal with their biggest issues. You need something to build on, and that thing shouldn't be quicksand.
Click to expand...
No one wants a fantasy clearly. But if the government say hey we have it figured out. For $2000 in taxes a year you get 2 check ups and an emergency room visit if you need one. After that you are on your own... no one is going to but it. At some point some has to provide a cost to benefit detail. And... we are talking about our government. The folks running the postal service and the VA .
 
As a note, attacking the GOP for trying to help (considering) Obamacare is going to implode just like every thinking person knew it was going to seems counter productive. If you want to turn this into a political bashfest based on facts please do. The left side will lose like always. The GOP comes to the rescue with a plan that can work to solve a plan thay didn't and all you can do is get out your cryfest? This is why we can't have nice things.
 
First, let me say I really enjoy your posts. I find your thoughts refreshing. However, I'm not convinced by the points you've made so far.

Eventhorizon said:
As a note, attacking the GOP for trying to help (considering) Obamacare is going to implode just like every thinking person knew it was going to seems counter productive. If you want to turn this into a political bashfest based on facts please do.
Click to expand...
They've already had 8 years to come up with a new plan. Fact is, they didn't, even though they supposedly knew Obamacare was going to implode eventually. What they actually did was passing bills which would have repealed Obamacare, without any replacement, but with the certainty Obama was immediately going to veto the bill. They only attacked the Dems, offering no alternatives. That's not what I call a nice thing.

Eventhorizon said:
The GOP comes to the rescue with a plan that can work to solve a plan thay didn't and all you can do is get out your cryfest? This is why we can't have nice things.
Click to expand...
Again, so they've had 8 years to come up with something. Even during the Obama administration they could've implemented something acceptable to Obama, and claim the spoils of war. Show they're very Grand and magnanimous indeed, by overcoming extremes in both parties and go for a bipartisan solution.

In that case, they would have saved the country. They'd have been visionaries. Because they'd have been better than the Dem crybabies you so despise. Instead, they showed they're not so different after all. Ideally, they could've shown the whole nation Washington isn't a swamp which needs draining, but that they (the GOP) can actually get things going contrary to their Dem counterparts. And if Obama had vetoed that, they could've taken credit anyway. (In that case there'd have been a Jeb Bush administration right now.)

Fact is, they just didn't want to. Instead, they chose to put their own party's interest above the welfare of the nation. Which is a very vile thing to do indeed.
Anyhow, the GOP is in power now. And right now they're not in the position to play the "patriotism card", because now there's the imperative to fix it.

Why, you ask?
Because they need to govern. When in power, you're expected to get things done. Governing isn't sitting back and watch a health care system imploding.
They were voted in to take up the reins of power. So if the system fails under their administration, that would count as incompetency and mismanagement. In fact, some conservative thinkers would argue that's a crime against the people.

Worst case scenario, the GOP will get the blame for Obama's failure.
 
Eventhorizon said:
No one wants a fantasy clearly. But if the government say hey we have it figured out. For $2000 in taxes a year you get 2 check ups and an emergency room visit if you need one. After that you are on your own... no one is going to but it. At some point some has to provide a cost to benefit detail. And... we are talking about our government. The folks running the postal service and the VA .
Click to expand...

I would say here in the UK, the govt fund the national health service, but it's the doctors who effectively run it. Every time the govt tries to get involved and "reorganize" things they make a mess, left and right.

If it's possible to run one professionally in a non politicized way, I think that's the best option. Here if either the conservatives or labour try to interfere too much the public react negatively. Everyone wants good medical care, and I think the majority trust the doctors and medical staff ahead of politicians.
 
Professor Snep said:
First, let me say I really enjoy your posts. I find your thoughts refreshing. However, I'm not convinced by the points you've made so far.


They've already had 8 years to come up with a new plan. Fact is, they didn't, even though they supposedly knew Obamacare was going to implode eventually. What they actually did was passing bills which would have repealed Obamacare, without any replacement, but with the certainty Obama was immediately going to veto the bill. They only attacked the Dems, offering no alternatives. That's not what I call a nice thing.

Again, so they've had 8 years to come up with something. Even during the Obama administration they could've implemented something acceptable to Obama, and claim the spoils of war. Show they're very Grand and magnanimous indeed, by overcoming extremes in both parties and go for a bipartisan solution.

In that case, they would have saved the country. They'd have been visionaries. Because they'd have been better than the Dem crybabies you so despise. Instead, they showed they're not so different after all. Ideally, they could've shown the whole nation Washington isn't a swamp which needs draining, but that they (the GOP) can actually get things going contrary to their Dem counterparts. And if Obama had vetoed that, they could've taken credit anyway. (In that case there'd have been a Jeb Bush administration right now.)

Fact is, they just didn't want to. Instead, they chose to put their own party's interest above the welfare of the nation. Which is a very vile thing to do indeed.
Anyhow, the GOP is in power now. And right now they're not in the position to play the "patriotism card", because now there's the imperative to fix it.

Why, you ask?
Because they need to govern. When in power, you're expected to get things done. Governing isn't sitting back and watch a health care system imploding.
They were voted in to take up the reins of power. So if the system fails under their administration, that would count as incompetency and mismanagement. In fact, some conservative thinkers would argue that's a crime against the people.

Worst case scenario, the GOP will get the blame for Obama's failure.
Click to expand...
Good points.
My foundational point is that Democrats walk around trying to claim moral superiority. That is a laugh.
I suspect no one has come up with a workable healthcare plan either because it's not possible (intellect of those trying doesn't meet the task, or it's not possible in thd real world meaning cost to benefit doesn't pan out) or the cost to figure out a good plan is astronomical...getting people involved and working on it is not something they can get funds for easily.
Guesses yes... but probably not bad ones.
Either way Democrats are not doing this to help people, they are doing it to get points "see what we did we got you healthcare" yes but crap healthcare I have to pay for even if I dont want it....
None of this is being done to actually help anyone.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Good points.
My foundational point is that Democrats walk around trying to claim moral superiority. That is a laugh.
I suspect no one has come up with a workable healthcare plan either because it's not possible (intellect of those trying doesn't meet the task, or it's not possible in thd real world meaning cost to benefit doesn't pan out) or the cost to figure out a good plan is astronomical...getting people involved and working on it is not something they can get funds for easily.
Guesses yes... but probably not bad ones.
Either way Democrats are not doing this to help people, they are doing it to get points "see what we did we got you healthcare" yes but crap healthcare I have to pay for even if I dont want it....
None of this is being done to actually help anyone.
Click to expand...

How can you say that when there are many, many, many countries around the world who have quality universal healthcare and make it work, and work for way less than we pay here?
We are ranked 37th in terms of quality and outcome of the patient, yet we pay the most in the entire world.
There are LOTS of plans (that work and work well) that we can emulate...to say or infer otherwise is BS.
Once again...you have no proof, no links, no facts, just an echoed opinion on why you think it won’t work followed by Democrat and liberal bashing.
It’s clear you have no idea (just like Trump) how complex our healthcare system is.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Good points.
My foundational point is that Democrats walk around trying to claim moral superiority. That is a laugh.
I suspect no one has come up with a workable healthcare plan either because it's not possible (intellect of those trying doesn't meet the task, or it's not possible in thd real world meaning cost to benefit doesn't pan out) or the cost to figure out a good plan is astronomical...getting people involved and working on it is not something they can get funds for easily.
Guesses yes... but probably not bad ones.
Either way Democrats are not doing this to help people, they are doing it to get points "see what we did we got you healthcare" yes but crap healthcare I have to pay for even if I dont want it....
None of this is being done to actually help anyone.
Click to expand...


Da4njPE.png
 
It is easy to see by the fact that every other developed nation in the world manages healthcare access better than the US that this is not about the cost, it's about the very individualistic attitudes involved.

American culture has a very specific and selfish idea of freedom that is all about the individual having what they want. They talk this way about all their "freedoms", there is no room for compromise. American politicians talk about how universal healthcare interferes with freedom because it forces people to choose something that is government regulated, when there are so many people who can't afford the luxury of choice this is sheer lunacy. Other countries understand that freedom is a complex and complicated thing that can never be perfect and that requires compromise and a great deal of organisation and regulation, but in the USA it's all "ME, ME, ME!"

Americans have this idea that they don't owe anything to anyone else in society. It's as though they believe that they grew up in a sort of vacuum where everything that made up their life was provided and controlled by their family unit. They will fanatically deny that they owe anything back to their society for providing the structures and institutions and safety within which they have grown up and continue to exist. This is what they are like with healthcare. "Why should I have to pay for anyone else's healthcare! I don't owe anything to anyone!"

I see a lot of resistance in Americans, including on this forum, to paying for the healthcare of someone whose health needs you don't agree with, say for example, women who are high users of abortion services, or people who are undergoing trans therapies. If you want to have universal healthcare, you will need to accept the fact that you won't always agree with the health needs of others. That is what paying tax and coexisting peacefully in a society is all about. You may not always agree with others choices and their lives and what they need to continue living their lives in a healthy way, that doesn't mean that you shouldn't support their capacity to make their own choices and live their own lives. This is called being a human being and getting along with your fellow human.

Please excuse these general remarks, for anyone on forum who differs from the general American culture in what they believe about healthcare and coexisting with others, I am just talking about the dominant culture.

I don't like paying taxes but I understand very well that I need to pitch in for the greater good. I doubt very much that decent healthcare will happen in the US until attitudes change.
 
Eventhorizon said:
I did not want this to be part of the op for fear of putting people off from the discussion. I want to say though that here in America, best intentions aside our lawmakers have shown they are not up to this task. Projected costs of Obamacare weren't even close. So much so even the detractors couldn't guess how bad it would be.
Click to expand...
The issue here is not that lawmakers are not up to the task, the issue is that the GOP has a vested interest in not making any socialized system working at all. The fact that the party lines in the GOP is that the ACA is failing, that the original projected costs weren't even close, that the individual markets are imploding and just about anything coming out to Paul Ryan's mouth on this topic...are simply obfuscations. The people being squeezed by Obamacare are those with good earnings who work for themselves. They would best be served by a single payer system, as would all of us.
Capture.webp
http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2015/dec/cbo-crystal-ball-forecast-aca
this discussion is futility itself. as long as the gop holds sway over vast swaths of the us electorate we working stiffs will continue to be shafted.
 
Stu said:
The issue here is not that lawmakers are not up to the task, the issue is that the GOP has a vested interest in not making any socialized system working at all. The fact that the party lines in the GOP is that the ACA is failing, that the original projected costs weren't even close, that the individual markets are imploding and just about anything coming out to Paul Ryan's mouth on this topic...are simply obfuscations. The people being squeezed by Obamacare are those with good earnings who work for themselves. They would best be served by a single payer system, as would all of us.
View attachment 35429
http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2015/dec/cbo-crystal-ball-forecast-aca
this discussion is futility itself. as long as the gop holds sway over vast swaths of the us electorate we working stiffs will continue to be shafted.
Click to expand...
What do you see as the vested interest the GOP has for no socialized healthcare? I'll admit I personally don't think it's possible to give everyone healthcare. We simply cannot afford it.
 
Eventhorizon said:
What do you see as the vested interest the GOP has for no socialized healthcare? I'll admit I personally don't think it's possible to give everyone healthcare. We simply cannot afford it.
Click to expand...
that's the kool-aid talking
kool-aid.jpg
In my opinion the GOP is devoted almost solely by its mission to reduce the higher tax burden placed on wealthy citizens and corporations . It is also motivated by corporate interests to reduce any regulations that cut into profitability.
 
  • Like
Reactions: acd
That may be so, but with the Kaiser Family Foundation reporting that U.S. employers and employees are paying an average of $18,142 for family health care coverage ($12,865 for employers and $5,277 for workers) compared to just $6,435 in Canada ($5,306 for employers and $1,129 for workers), it’s a battle this president — or the next one — may have to take on eventually.

http://www.salon.com/2017/05/28/ame...dian-health-care-but-u-s-corporations-love-it


Here is an international comparison of cost, between the US and Canada, that I can find.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top