A serious discussion on Nationalized healthcare

ImaginaryBloke said:
This is an article criticizing public healthcare options for being too expensive. Can you find any flaws in it? That American healthcare spending is waaaayyyy above other developed countries is one.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...alifornia-mere-2x-states-entire-annual-budget
Click to expand...

That’s because it’s still taking the cost of consumer gouging into account.
Just like we pay 100x what someone in another country pays for medication...from the same manufacturer and everything.
Same with the cost for x-rays, blood work, seeing a specialist, etc.
You have to remove the for-profit parts of the equation to make it affordable and fair for all.
While we still lean on some BS out of control, price gouging, system...prices will still rise and it will become more and more expensive.
Free market policies do not, and should not, apply to something such as healthcare...we are not cattle, we are not consumers, we are not piggy-banks, we are not even the customers of the hospitals and the rest...we are humans who will at some time will need healthcare services at some point in their lifetime...some more than others unfortunately...we should not have a system that then bankrupts a person almost as a punishment for being sick.
Number one reason for bankruptcies in the US - medical bills.
How is this any different than war profiteering?
You are making money off the sick, ill, dying, and most vulnerable...with little to no regard, certainly not caring that you are indenturing them monetarily for life (btw, the root of “mortgage” is “mort” which is Latin for “death”...in other words - you are in debt till death.).
I think it is past high time that the people of this country stand up for a public option, for universal healthcare.
Our unregulated “free market” is killing people and bankrupting them...it’s idiotic.
Everyone is so scared of “socialized medicine”...ugh, the evil “socialism” word...give people the option to choose.
Hold a national vote.
At least give them the option and then see what happens....then if you feel your public insurance is not good enough you can purchase private rider plans to give you more perks than what should already be protected - the supposed “essential benefits” that the GOP just destroyed, which included things like lifetime limits and pre-existing conditions...yeah, really fucking great plan.
Congressional dumbasses had almost a decade to craft a plan that would be better than the ACA....and then when it’s time to deliver...the bill they gave the American people actually kills more people....brilliant!
Fin.
 
Last edited:
Stu said:
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.
Click to expand...
Can you give me an idea what has led to this perception? From my own outside perspective I simply do not understand this. While I am not conservative I do align with many of the GOPs initiatives especially concerning money and how it is spent. I can garuntee you I have no concern for the wealthy other than they be treated fairly.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Can you give me an idea what has led to this perception? From my own outside perspective I simply do not understand this. While I am not conservative I do align with many of the GOPs initiatives especially concerning money and how it is spent. I can garuntee you I have no concern for the wealthy other than they be treated fairly.
Click to expand...
Just one example would be how concern for the deficit is always in back seat when it comes to tax cuts.
 
I do not fully understand this. The deficit in part is caused by overspending. Tax cuts are entertained as a way to give Americans more of their hard earned money. The more money people have, the more it gives them to spend which in turn stimulates the economy. While I agree whole heartedly the deficit should be a concern, I see no reason it needs to be front and center when talking of tax cuts.
 
Eventhorizon said:
I do not fully understand this. The deficit in part is caused by overspending. Tax cuts are entertained as a way to give Americans more of their hard earned money. The more money people have, the more it gives them to spend which in turn stimulates the economy. While I agree whole heartedly the deficit should be a concern, I see no reason it needs to be front and center when talking of tax cuts.
Click to expand...

Then they should give bigger tax cuts to the majority, instead of billionaires.
We should have zero corporate welfare.
Our minimum wage should be at $22 an hour if it had kept up with inflation...yet there is a fight to push back against a $15 minimum.
This would be far more effective than giving tax breaks to the uber wealthy at the expense of the middle class and the poor.
Raising the minimum wage would allow many people to leave the welfare system and would make millions ineligible for food stamps because they will be making enough to survive on their own.
Then we need to invest in retraining or educating those who cannot afford to do so, or take time off to do so, so they can earn a degree and hopefully find a better job.
But we will also have to address that most manufacturing jobs are never coming back...coal is never coming back...we have outsourced almost everything to other countries because they do it cheaper...including Trump’s neckties.
If all the job are overseas, and we are seeing more and more automation...we need to talk seriously about population growth and what direction we are going to take our economy.
Cutting taxes for the rich...while making healthcare more expensive...which is what the CBO has said it will do...besides cause 24 million + to lose their insurance due to it being too expensive.
What kind of retarded plan does that?
You may not like the ACA, but the AHCA is disgusting.
 
Faye said:
I completely agree with you. Yeah, they do not care about fiscal responsibility. They never have really.

The GOP can no longer claim it believes in fiscal responsibility
Click to expand...
Career politicians are, by and large, people too lazy to be productive and too lazy to develop genuine skills (starting a business, engineering, plumbing, accounting, pharmacy, computer science, medicine, being a cashier, etc). They're only in politics because they're power-hungry and lazy; these are lazy people who look down on labor and the working class. Expecting logical consistency and principles from these lazy goofs is like expecting cremated ashes to dance like a ballerina.
 
Visualizing How Americans Get Healthcare Coverage

by Tyler Durden
Aug 8, 2017 2:15 AM

With Obamacare firmly in the crosshairs of Republican lawmakers, the debate around U.S. healthcare is at a fever pitch.

While there is no shortage of opinions on the best route forward, Visual Capitalist's Jeff Desjardins points out that the timeliness of the debate also gives us an interesting chance to dive into some of the numbers around healthcare – namely how people even get coverage in the first place.

HOW AMERICANS GET HEALTHCARE
The following infographic shows a breakdown of how Americans get healthcare coverage, based on information from Census Bureau’s surveys.



Put together by Axios, it shows the proportion of Americans getting coverage from employers, Medicaid, Medicare, non-group policies, and other public sources. The graphic also includes the 9% of the population that is uninsured, as well.

The following definitions for each category above come from the Kaiser Family Foundation, a non-profit that uses the Census Bureau’s data to put together comprehensive estimates on healthcare in the country:

Employer-Based: Includes those covered by employer-sponsored coverage either through their own job or as a dependent in the same household.
Medicaid: Includes those covered by Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and those who have both Medicaid and another type of coverage, such as dual eligibles who are also covered by Medicare.
Medicare: Includes those covered by Medicare, Medicare Advantage, and those who have Medicare and another type of non-Medicaid coverage where Medicare is the primary payer. Excludes those with Medicare Part A coverage only and those covered by Medicare and Medicaid (dual eligibles).
Other Public: Includes those covered under the military or Veterans Administration.
Non-Group: Includes individuals and families that purchased or are covered as a dependent by non-group insurance.
Uninsured: Includes those without health insurance and those who have coverage under the Indian Health Service only.

HEALTHCARE MIX BY STATE
Here’s another look at how Americans get healthcare coverage on a state-by-state basis.

This time the graphic comes from Overflow Data and it simply shows the percent of buyers in each state that receive health coverage from public sources:

What-of-the-population-has-public-insurance-in-each-state.png


Oddly, the state that gets the highest proportion of public health coverage (New Mexico, 46.6%) is kitty-corner to the state with the lowest proportion of public health coverage (Utah, 21.3%).

WHY THE DEBATE IS PARAMOUNT
If you ask some people what is going on with U.S. healthcare, they will tell you that things are going “sideways” – that costs are going up, but care is not improving anywhere near the same pace.

Here’s a graphic we published last year from Max Roser that puts this sentiment in perspective:



It’s fair to say that care has been going sideways in the U.S. for some time, and the stakes couldn’t be higher.

So, what needs to be done to fix the problem?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-08-06/visualizing-how-americans-get-healthcare-coverage


Here is some really good data in plots.

US healthcare was not too bad until 1980 when Reaganomics started.
 
Eventhorizon said:
What keeps this from happening?
Click to expand...
Cheap ass Republicans who refuse to pay taxes even if it's to help save human lives.

Eventhorizon said:
Who has real and factual data as to the cost of such a system because we also know, nothing is free.
Click to expand...

There is no factual data on such a thing as it has not been truly implemented in America. You can estimate things based up on how it works in other countries, and you can see that those countries not only have cheaper health care, but overall better health care. There are some arguments that part of the reason other countries are able to get away with it is because they leech off America to a certain extent though. They're not great arguments, but it's possible there would be some truth to them.

The main problem that you have with fixing health care in a socialist/capitalist dichotomy is that what make socialism bad and what normally makes capitalism good work the opposite on health care. Socialism can lead to higher costs and shortages as people try to overuse something that's "free." Capitalism makes people naturally limit their consumption to what they need based on what they can afford, but with health care the average person doesn't know what they need. That's why they have to go to the doctor in the first place to figure that out. Forcing average people to make these choices results in death.

In my view the ACA is actually a very good solution although it is imperfect. What I would like to see is changes to put a cap on what private insurance is required to pay out and have medicare take over once an individual's health care bills exceed some predetermined amount. This would allow private coverage to continue to exist and do some of the things it does well, but also insure nobody goes bankrupt as a result of health care costs. It would make private coverage considerably more optional, and useful for more every day things like your typical doctor visits while only having the single payer system step in when things get really bad.

This would allow for some of the limiting effects of capitalism to prevent hypochondriacs from showing up every other day with a new problem, but also help insure that serious problems aren't getting ignored by those who simply don't think they can afford to go to the doctor.
 
The general lack of preventive measures and medicine is one of the largest issues that have massive repercussions throughout the medical system.

People wait until an issue is life threatening then go to the ER or urgent care. They take up a bed and resources, they are only stabilized to be fit for discharge and then on their way with medications to deal with the issues and most likely irreparable damage to their body due to waiting.

Untreated diabetes, untreated infections, heart conditions that have gone unnoticed and untreated that led to major complications are just a couple of issues that I have the fun of seeing. The mentality that urgent cares and ERs are a satisfactory solution to medical issues is laughable.
 
Kavalan said:
The general lack of preventive measures and medicine is one of the largest issues that have massive repercussions throughout the medical system.

People wait until an issue is life threatening then go to the ER or urgent care. They take up a bed and resources, they are only stabilized to be fit for discharge and then on their way with medications to deal with the issues and most likely irreparable damage to their body due to waiting.

Untreated diabetes, untreated infections, heart conditions that have gone unnoticed and untreated that led to major complications are just a couple of issues that I have the fun of seeing. The mentality that urgent cares and ERs are a satisfactory solution to medical issues is laughable.
Click to expand...

Yes, not to mention that waiting until it's critical to address an issue is far more expensive, but yet, preventative measures are rarely covered by insurance.
 
People pay tax, health care should be freely accessible to all. That's it. What else do people pay tax for? 1/4 of your income,- enough said. Not to mention that pensions will probably be obsolete by the time we all get to retirement age, they could at least help us stay alive to stay on the gravy train.

Don't even get me started on the money that's made through pharmaceuticals and bogus treatment of cancer, and other illness which is caused by the wanton irresponsibility of industry...in the full knowledge that they will also make a profit from the 'cure'. There are known effective treatments of cancer and they don't involve chemotherapy- and have been systematically repressed. I don't give to cancer charities, it's a huge racket.

Not to mention the stealth of the same pharmaceutical industry which is claiming (patenting) natural remedies, as if nature were a thing that could be owned. So that one day we may well turn around and realise that there is no recourse but to use synthetic substitutes, where herbal and holistic remedies have been made illegal. Nature should not be owned but apparently even the moon is 'capital' to some.
 
Last edited:
MrWonka said:
Cheap ass Republicans who refuse to pay taxes even if it's to help save human lives.



There is no factual data on such a thing as it has not been truly implemented in America. You can estimate things based up on how it works in other countries, and you can see that those countries not only have cheaper health care, but overall better health care. There are some arguments that part of the reason other countries are able to get away with it is because they leech off America to a certain extent though. They're not great arguments, but it's possible there would be some truth to them.

The main problem that you have with fixing health care in a socialist/capitalist dichotomy is that what make socialism bad and what normally makes capitalism good work the opposite on health care. Socialism can lead to higher costs and shortages as people try to overuse something that's "free." Capitalism makes people naturally limit their consumption to what they need based on what they can afford, but with health care the average person doesn't know what they need. That's why they have to go to the doctor in the first place to figure that out. Forcing average people to make these choices results in death.

In my view the ACA is actually a very good solution although it is imperfect. What I would like to see is changes to put a cap on what private insurance is required to pay out and have medicare take over once an individual's health care bills exceed some predetermined amount. This would allow private coverage to continue to exist and do some of the things it does well, but also insure nobody goes bankrupt as a result of health care costs. It would make private coverage considerably more optional, and useful for more every day things like your typical doctor visits while only having the single payer system step in when things get really bad.

This would allow for some of the limiting effects of capitalism to prevent hypochondriacs from showing up every other day with a new problem, but also help insure that serious problems aren't getting ignored by those who simply don't think they can afford to go to the doctor.
Click to expand...
This was a really good response for the most part. I found it well thought out and relayed. All with exception to your first statement which goes on to bring into question all the other conclusions you've come to. Republicans are not as a whole, more wealthy than any other political group. To say "cheap ass republicans" is sad and at its best, misleading.
 
I had to buy some medication recently in case I got a stomach bug traveling abroad. To get it, I had to visit the doctor first and then purchase the drug. Without insurance, the combined cost would have been around $275, not including the cost to my time.

I opted to purchase the drug abroad. I found out there that I didn't need a prescription since it was sold over the counter. It cost $9.

I mean, come on.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Republicans are not as a whole, more wealthy than any other political group. To say "cheap ass republicans" is sad and at its best, misleading.
Click to expand...

Just because you're rich doesn't mean you're cheap. There are plenty of wealthy Democrats, but they're not cheap asses. They are willing to support higher taxes in favor of providing universal affordable healthcare to everyone. It is the cheap ass Republicans who are stopping it.
 
Here AGAIN we see the GOP reaching out to Democrats in an effort to create a biapartisan health bill being turned away with Schumer saying "take the piece of crap we created known as Obamacare and make that piece of crap work so that we don't have to admit it was complete crap from the beginning." This is why democrats should go hide under a rock permantly. Compelety useless.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Here AGAIN we see the GOP reaching out to Democrats in an effort to create a biapartisan health bill being turned away with Schumer saying "take the piece of crap we created known as Obamacare and make that piece of crap work so that we don't have to admit it was complete crap from the beginning." This is why democrats should go hide under a rock permantly. Compelety useless.
Click to expand...
it's a political stunt so Trump can say he tried without actually trying because folks like you aren't looking into the issue and take everything he says as gospel.

The deal he wanted sucks. He knows Democrats aren't going to go for block grants or a repeal because ultimately, it results in less funding for healthcare. Instead, he is working on sabotaging a law that is actually pretty popular. If it wasn't popular, we would have a repeal. The Democrats have said all along they aren't open to repealing but want to fix the issues. The Republicans have had 7 years to come up with ideas. Every idea they have ends up screwing over the sick, the elderly and the poor. Republicans want to shift money away from those who need healthcare to the wealthy. Also, Trump talked a lot about regulating pharmaceutical costs remember? I remember being pretty optimistic when he was speaking against drug companies price gouging us. Now he's silent on it.

Also, as an anecdote, I'm in a red state and I'm probably going to purchase a plan off the marketplace. I found one that is actually a hell of a lot better than my current garbage plan offered through my employer. And I'm not a low income earner who qualifies for subsidies, either. The Republicans and Democrats need to work together to fix the problems.
 
acd said:
it's a political stunt so Trump can say he tried without actually trying because folks like you aren't looking into the issue and take everything he says as gospel.

The deal he wanted sucks. He knows Democrats aren't going to go for block grants or a repeal because ultimately, it results in less funding for healthcare. Instead, he is working on sabotaging a law that is actually pretty popular. If it wasn't popular, we would have a repeal. The Democrats have said all along they aren't open to repealing but want to fix the issues. The Republicans have had 7 years to come up with ideas. Every idea they have ends up screwing over the sick, the elderly and the poor. Republicans want to shift money away from those who need healthcare to the wealthy. Also, Trump talked a lot about regulating pharmaceutical costs remember? I remember being pretty optimistic when he was speaking against drug companies price gouging us. Now he's silent on it.

Also, as an anecdote, I'm in a red state and I'm probably going to purchase a plan off the marketplace. I found one that is actually a hell of a lot better than my current garbage plan offered through my employer. And I'm not a low income earner who qualifies for subsidies, either.
Click to expand...
......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top