Is single payer healthcare really what you want?

Oneuli said:
The data told me that. Among wealthy nations, countries that have single-payer systems tend to have significantly lower per capita healthcare costs than the US, as well as superior public health outcomes. Also, within the US, those with the most socialized medical care (e.g., Medicare and the military system), tend to guard it fiercely against attempts to make it more privatized.
Click to expand...

It's all propagandized bullshit. The notion that Government can manage anything more effectively and cheaply than the private market requires the willful suspension of common sense and ignorance of historic realities. They aren't more efficient and they are not cheaper. No matter how many times you lie and beat a dead horse.
 
Truth Detector said:
Believing that the quality of life is better in Hong Kong or Puerto Rico is indicative of a lack of education or pure dishonesty. Might be both with you.
Click to expand...

Booya!

Thousands of elderly Hong Kongers live in coffin homes in the city with the highest priced real estate in the world.

hong-kong-coffin-homes-10-0829-1.jpg


Cheung Chi-fong, 80, sleeps in his tiny, Hong Kong “coffin home,” where he cannot stretch out his legs. (Kin Cheung/AP Photo)


https://www.insidehook.com/article/architecture-real-estate/coffin-homes-hong-kong
 
Legion said:
So it's unverified.
Click to expand...

It's verified in the sense that there's ample evidence to convince any honest and intelligent person. But, in terms of its ability to convince you, it will always be unverified, since for you the only test for the validity of evidence is whether it lines up with your received prejudices.
 
Legion said:
So you say.
Click to expand...

And the win goes to Oneuli again! I challenge myself to push you into your dweeby "so you say" babbling as quickly as I can. It's not as much fun as a real debate, but it's the closest thing to a challenge I can hope for with you, given how little you bring to the table.
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
Now that Trump is making America great again, it's sure to catch up with Hong Kong! Or at least Puerto Rico ...


Life Expectancy by Country 2017


1 Hong Kong 84.462 years
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
40 Puerto Rico 80.106 years
.
.
.
.
.
45 United States 79.501 years


http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/life-expectancy-by-country/
Click to expand...

One thing I find interesting is how little media attention was paid to the fact that the US ranking in national life expectancy, globally, went from long-term decline in the pre-Obamacare era (down to 49th, according to our own CIA's ranking), to an actual increase since Obamacare passed (passing Denmark and Portugal, among others, and cutting 2/3 of the EU's lead over us). It's a pretty impressive reversal, and it's gone almost entirely unremarked in the media. Possibly that's because our number is still so embarrassing -- ranking behind so many nations that are poorer than us and spend half what we do on healthcare. It's a bit like a college sports team celebrating that they went from ranking 49th to ranking 42nd -- it's still a lousy ranking, so what's to celebrate? But if you'd been falling ever lower in the rankings for decades, and then suddenly started rising, after implementing a new training regimen for the team, it would make sense to look at that success and think about how to expand on it, even if there was a long way to go.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
So having highly-paid doctors is better for you than all of your fellow citizens having coverage?

I hate to admit that Havana is right, but he is. Many countries with a national insurance plan also have private companies offering supplemental insurance. Most of us on Medicare buy it as well. Letting corporations off the hook for the huge expense of providing employee insurance is a winner for them, and for us as well. They could be taxed slightly higher to offset the cost to federal premiums, and still be able to make a profit. They can offer supplemental insurance as a hiring incentive.
Click to expand...

Without compensating doctors, there will be no healthcare. It won't matter how much "coverage" you may, or may not have. I'm not sure why this is so difficult for libs to understand. Severe rationing happens in every single country with "single payer". Is that what you want for us too? Is the government going to somehow force people to provide healthcare? Is the government going to force people to go into medicine, when there's no financial incentive?
 
All I know is people come from all over the world for healthcare in the US.
We are second to none.

So lets not rock that boat, or act stupid and try to deny the fact we are #1.

Is it too expensive, yes.
And the reason is obvious. Free loaders force doctors and hospitals to get the money from wherever they can. And that is we the people who are paying for private insurance.

Obamacare just made it worse, invited more freeloading. We may never recover back to where we were never mind improving.

Single payer is socialism. Quality of care will be sacrificed.
Trump, like he does with everything he touches, has the idea that competition drives down cost. It's baked into business 101.
You allow us to shop for the best rates, across state lines, coupled with providers posting a menu of costs. it's certainly a better idea than anything that has come from prior administrations.
And congress couldn't care less, they will politicize it regardless.
 
Hello Stretch,

Stretch said:
Sally C. Pipes is president and chief executive officer of the Pacific Research Institute, a San Francisco-based think tank, and the Thomas W. Smith Fellow in Health Care Policy at PRI. She previously served as the assistant director of the Fraser Institute in Canada. She is the author of The Cure for Obamacare (Encounter, 2013), The Truth about Obamacare (Regnery 2010), The Pipes Plan: The Top 10 Ways to Dismantle and Replace Obamacare (Regnery 2012). She writes a biweekly health care column for Forbes.

Sally Pipes really shined a light on this topic tonight. She spoke on what's going on in Canada and the U.K. and shares a lot of knowledge on how it would impact the U.S.

Click to expand...

The goal is wrong.

The goal should not be to undo Obamacare per se.

The goal should be to provide universal health care at the lowest cost to the nation.

That would make America greater.
 
countryboy said:
Without compensating doctors, there will be no healthcare. It won't matter how much "coverage" you may, or may not have. I'm not sure why this is so difficult for libs to understand. Severe rationing happens in every single country with "single payer". Is that what you want for us too? Is the government going to somehow force people to provide healthcare? Is the government going to force people to go into medicine, when there's no financial incentive?
Click to expand...

Who says doctors won't be compensated? I'd like to see proof of this "severe rationing." We have had Medicare for the elderly and disabled for over 50 years. Where is the "severe rationing" here? Why is hyperbole the only argument that the right can make when it comes to adopting the ways of civilized nations and providing for our citizens?

As for physician compensation, do you think that most ppl who go through the extremely rigorous process to become a physician are doing it solely for the salary? If we taxpayers covered the cost of their education, and they were off the hook for massive student loan debt, don't you think they'd be happy still making way over the national average? I have worked with and studied alongside medical students and physicians for years. I never once in all that time heard anyone say that they went into that field for the paycheck.
 
Hello Stretch,

I see you have some of the disparaging liberals banned from this thread.

I approve of mutually respectful discourse and whatever has to be done to preserve it.
 
Oneuli said:
It's verified in the sense that there's ample evidence to convince any honest and intelligent person. But, in terms of its ability to convince you, it will always be unverified, since for you the only test for the validity of evidence is whether it lines up with your received prejudices.
Click to expand...

I din't think you could verify the data, and it appears that I was correct.
 
Oneuli said:
One thing I find interesting is how little media attention was paid to the fact that the US ranking in national life expectancy, globally, went from long-term decline in the pre-Obamacare era (down to 49th, according to our own CIA's ranking), to an actual increase since Obamacare passed (passing Denmark and Portugal, among others, and cutting 2/3 of the EU's lead over us). It's a pretty impressive reversal, and it's gone almost entirely unremarked in the media. Possibly that's because our number is still so embarrassing -- ranking behind so many nations that are poorer than us and spend half what we do on healthcare. It's a bit like a college sports team celebrating that they went from ranking 49th to ranking 42nd -- it's still a lousy ranking, so what's to celebrate? But if you'd been falling ever lower in the rankings for decades, and then suddenly started rising, after implementing a new training regimen for the team, it would make sense to look at that success and think about how to expand on it, even if there was a long way to go.
Click to expand...

So you say.
 
Legion said:
I din't think you could verify the data, and it appears that I was correct.
Click to expand...

As you know, I provided links to reputable sources confirming my claims with hard data. You just will claim the data isn't "verified" because it hurts your feelings. That's why we all laugh at you.
 
Legion said:
According to statistics you cannot say are accurate?
Click to expand...

The statistics are accurate. They just conflict with your prejudice so you will claim otherwise, without the slightest evidence to support your claim. Then you wonder why nobody in your life takes you even a little seriously.
 
Oneuli said:
As you know, I provided links to reputable sources confirming my claims with hard data. You just will claim the data isn't "verified" because it hurts your feelings. That's why we all laugh at you.
Click to expand...

As you know, you cannot verify the accuracy of the statistics you cited.

Reread the thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top