Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness > Health Insurance
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-25-2017, 10:52 AM
 
Location: NNV
3,433 posts, read 3,750,850 times
Reputation: 6733

Advertisements

Just to add fuel to the fire...

Why single payer health care is a terrible option (Opinion) - CNN

I don't think single payer is the way to go...the cost is being underestimated by those who support the idea. California would have passed it if the cost was supportable (and you know how we like taxes!)...

The Medicare for all idea is intriguing. I would be concerned about fraud. That would have to be addressed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-25-2017, 01:12 PM
 
Location: Vancouver
18,504 posts, read 15,548,466 times
Reputation: 11937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Romano View Post
Just to add fuel to the fire...

Why single payer health care is a terrible option (Opinion) - CNN

I don't think single payer is the way to go...the cost is being underestimated by those who support the idea. California would have passed it if the cost was supportable (and you know how we like taxes!)...

The Medicare for all idea is intriguing. I would be concerned about fraud. That would have to be addressed.
The article has flaws, including suggesting people in Canada wait for urgent cancer concerns, or wait for urgent brain surgery. We don't.

The article obfuscates the issue of drugs by focusing on approval processes in different countries, when it's the ability to have cheap access to the drugs that is more important. What good is a new drug to someone who isn't insured for it? Does it really matter that the US approve 4 more drugs in the same time period than the UK? It's a desperate argument.

Again, if UHC is so horrible, why is it that in countries like Canada, no one want to get rid of the system?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2017, 01:30 PM
 
Location: Southern California
29,267 posts, read 16,741,456 times
Reputation: 18909
Could the fact that U.S. has 300+Million population and other countries like Canada work with 30+Million population. All the countries in Europe are all smaller populated countries vs the U.S. huge population. I don't know what are the answers and so many who think they know get a lot of push back and negative inputs.

I hear the U.S. is $20T in debt and so many countries are deep in debt too. Where does all that debt end up. Erase the debts and keep printing money. Do our best with the tax systems and go on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2017, 01:35 PM
 
3,886 posts, read 3,503,278 times
Reputation: 5295
Most drug approvals are for: 1. me-too drugs 2. New indications. From the FDA:

Quote:
Pediatric exclusivity does not accrue only to the product that was studied in the pediatric population. It attaches to all the applicant's formulations, dosage forms, and indications for products with existing marketing exclusivity or patent life that contain the same active moiety. For example, if a firm markets an oral formulation, a topical cream, and an ophthalmic containing the same active moiety and all the products have remaining marketing exclusivity or patent life, and if the firm conducts studies regarding the active moiety in accordance with a Written Request, 6 months additional exclusivity will be granted to ALL DOSAGE FORMS AND ALL INDICATIONS with the same active moiety as the drug studied.
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/developmen.../ucm077915.htm

Looking at drug approvals is a very bad measure for comparisons.

The big problem with single payer is similar to ACA's problem - most employer insured are relatively happy with what they have. That's most people. Much fewer people will gain from changes to the status quo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2017, 01:37 PM
 
3,886 posts, read 3,503,278 times
Reputation: 5295
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natnasci View Post

Again, if UHC is so horrible, why is it that in countries like Canada, no one want to get rid of the system?
Gee, I thought you folks to the north envied our system?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2017, 02:05 PM
 
Location: Vancouver
18,504 posts, read 15,548,466 times
Reputation: 11937
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaminhealth View Post
Could the fact that U.S. has 300+Million population and other countries like Canada work with 30+Million population. All the countries in Europe are all smaller populated countries vs the U.S. huge population. I don't know what are the answers and so many who think they know get a lot of push back and negative inputs.

I hear the U.S. is $20T in debt and so many countries are deep in debt too. Where does all that debt end up. Erase the debts and keep printing money. Do our best with the tax systems and go on.
It's not the size of the population that really makes the difference IMO. It's the political set up. State rights, vs Federal rights etc. Once you clear a path for UHC, the numbers shouldn't make a difference.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2017, 02:08 PM
 
Location: Vancouver
18,504 posts, read 15,548,466 times
Reputation: 11937
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbear99 View Post
Gee, I thought you folks to the north envied our system?
I have/had enough family and friends in the US to see the good and the bad. If you have great affordable coverage in the US, you're fine...kind of. Moving about is more difficult I understand. Having to change coverage at 65 is another. It's all seamless here in Canada.

I posted this video in another thread, but it gives two doctors view on UHC


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHE8EV40-Hs
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2017, 05:16 PM
 
Location: So Ca
26,721 posts, read 26,798,919 times
Reputation: 24785
Quote:
Originally Posted by pilotpair View Post
California considered a single-payer plan and rejected it because it would cost twice the current state budget.
It was rejected because it didn't include a plan to fund it. It was a poorly thought out bill that didn't stand a chance of passing.

Single payer health care was destined to fail in California | The Sacramento Bee
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2017, 05:41 AM
 
5,153 posts, read 3,083,950 times
Reputation: 11038
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaminhealth View Post
Could the fact that U.S. has 300+Million population and other countries like Canada work with 30+Million population. All the countries in Europe are all smaller populated countries vs the U.S. huge population. I don't know what are the answers and so many who think they know get a lot of push back and negative inputs.

I hear the U.S. is $20T in debt and so many countries are deep in debt too. Where does all that debt end up. Erase the debts and keep printing money. Do our best with the tax systems and go on.
In modern banking systems, debt is money. If we "erase the debts" we are pulling money out of the economy. This is a big problem because it leads to deflation and what's commonly called a "crash".

You are correct in noting that the only solution politicians have is "printing money" which today means issuing more debt. The bankers are happy to accommodate their spending because they earn a vig on every deal.

As far as healthcare goes, "free" government debt/money dumped into the hands of the insurance industry has done nothing but raise prices for consumers. Sure it has helped a tiny fraction of the sob-story cases get coverage, but these could have been funded anyway at a small fraction of what we pay now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2018, 04:52 PM
 
Location: Southern California
29,267 posts, read 16,741,456 times
Reputation: 18909
This will probably never happen in the U.S.

Again, would Single Payer be the same as Medicare for all.

People do have to take more responsibility for their own health, first and foremost. Stay out of doctors and hospitals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness > Health Insurance

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top