We can't afford NOT TO do single payer health care

SmarterthanYou said:
so you're going to go back to homeopathic and natural remedies instead of drugs?
Click to expand...

You're gonna be really hard pressed to find a drug produced by a pharma company that didn't first start out as an NIH grant.

We don't need pharma companies to develop drugs, that's what the NIH already does and should do itself.

The profit motive of pharma companies is why we have a fentanyl crisis today.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
and i'm guessing that when medicare for all starts running a red line budget, you'll just raise taxes to cover it?
Click to expand...

Again, if you are thinking in terms of red and black ink, then you are focused on profits, not outcomes.

I want a health care system focused on outcomes because I use that health care system.

I have yet to hear a compelling case for why there should be any profit motive in health care at all.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
no, I don't think YOU know how it works.....my doctors don't work for aetna or BCBS, but their practices are governed by them
Click to expand...

No, your provider has entered into an agreement with the insurance company to set prices and reimbursement rates in the chargemaster in order to maximize profits at the expense of your health.

That is what is happening in our current system; two forces colluding together to maximize their profits at your expense.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
medicare for all is going to run on a budget margin, not a profit margin
Click to expand...

Right, but budgets are always exceeded and you can't plan that far in advance when it comes to personal health.

So again, there's no motive to ration or deny care because the bottom line doesn't matter...OUTCOMES DO.

A worker can't pay the tax for Medicare if they're fuckin' dead, now can they?

We need to improve health outcomes because our life expectancy has dropped and we just had a mass disabling event (COVID).
 
SmarterthanYou said:
well, you're wrong on the means of profit, but as i said before, medicare for all is going to be run on a government budget, which will necessarily require cost controls, which will necessarily dictate treatment options, etc.
Click to expand...

But Medicare is funded by payroll taxes, so how can you budget that in the way you're thinking here?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
we're just trading private for government.
Click to expand...

No, we'd be trading a system focused on profit to one focused on outcomes.

When the focus is outcomes, the funding almost doesn't even matter...and wouldn't you want the maximum spent on your health care? It is your health, after all.
 
LV426 said:
Of course someone will need to administer all of this, but that is something CMS already does that would simply be expanded. And they can hire all the claims processing folks who worked at the insurance companies to administer it.

So the only people who get the shit end of the stick are executives (who cares?) and marketing/advertising people...but their skills can translate to any industry or market. So they're not really THAT impacted by this.
Click to expand...

Yes someone must administer it. You know who it should be?
 
Stringfellow Hawk said:
A larger percentage is suffering more with ACA legislation, whereas a smaller percentage before it passed
Click to expand...

This sounds like fucking bullshit so where's the proof of this?

The ACA extended health care coverage to 30 million people, so your math is completely fucked because you're a dumbass.
 
Stringfellow Hawk said:
no Obama lied when he got this pathetic legislation passed. A larger percentage is suffering more with ACA legislation, whereas a smaller percentage before it passed
Click to expand...

No one is suffering with the ACA, but Donald didn't like it, and promised to end it and give the American people something better. Donald lied, Donald failed again. It's his history, lies and failure a trademark.
You are well aware of every one of his promises that failed, everyone of his lies, yet you think he could win another election?? What a fucking joke.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
once again you're ignoring the corruption component............you're also not taking in to account the worker salary issue. those people will not work a job that is not making them money to prosper.
Click to expand...

I am not ignoring it. Are you of the opinion that people working for the government do it without compensation? As for corruption, you seem to be much more concerned with the kinds of corruption that infects government than you are with the vastly greater corruption that infects capitalism and private accommodation.
 
Yakuda said:
As of 1/31/2023 12% of the American population still has non health insurance
Click to expand...

Yeah because Conservatives won't expand Medicaid in states like Georgia and Texas. In fact, here are all the states that didn't expand Medicaid, leaving some of their population without insurance:

Texas
Georgia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Kansas
Tennessee
Mississippi
Alabama
South Carolina
North Carolina
Florida

The point made in the dumb post is that more people were worse off after the ACA than before, and neither you or that other asshole have been able to prove it.
 
Frank Apisa said:
I am not ignoring it. Are you of the opinion that people working for the government do it without compensation? As for corruption, you seem to be much more concerned with the kinds of corruption that infects government than you are with the vastly greater corruption that infects capitalism and private accommodation.
Click to expand...

When it comes to government corruption, it's usually the private sector or monied interests corrupting the politician with bribes -er um- "campaign donations".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top