Republicans for a single-payers healthcare system (attorneys, Clinton, Obama, military)

[wnewberry22]

Originally Posted by rorqual

First, Republicans should be for Obamacare because:


Mitt Romney First Introducing the Individual Mandate at Heritage in Jan. 2006 - YouTube

I'm categorically opposed to Obama care. It exacerabtes the pricing problem and does little to impact long term solvency and debt issues. It is good in that it extends coverage but it will do so with a huge price tag and no true remedy to it. I support a single-payer system because of the price reductions seen in other nations...I believe that we could replicate that here.

Obamacare again, is good that it insures most everyone, but I think it could be worse for long term cost. We need to move beyond this crap law and into a Medicare for all type system.

[Think4Yourself]

Originally Posted by wnewberry22

**sorry about the type error in the subject.

I used to be onboard for a way to reform our system to a more market centered approach, but the proposals I keep hearing won't address the primary issues. We need a long term answer to health reform and I believe that a single-payer (medicare type) system is the way to address this. I believe that the GOP needs to get on board with this. Conservatives in Canada and Europe acknowledge this system has broard positive results and the GOP needs to do the same.

The Australian system seems to be one of the most effective. Listed below is some information from their system.
Life Expectancy: 81.4
Infant Mortality: 4.2
Physicians per 1000 people: 2.8
Per capita expenditure per person: 3353
Healthcare cost as a % of GDP: 8.5
% of government revenue spent on healthcare: 17.7

And now...the same categoties for the United States:
Life Expectancy: 78.1
Infant Mortality: 6.8
Physicians per 1000 people: 2.4
Per capita expenditure per person: 7437
Healthcare cost as a % of GDP: 16
% of government revenue spent on healthcare: 18.5

As you can see...the numbers are certainly skewed in the Aussies favor. At this time I see no viable way that is being advocated by the GOP to resolve this issue. All the answers still result in a convoluted public/private amalgamation that has proven itself to be remarkably inefficient.

Are there other moderates, or center right folk that support a single payer system or am I the only one?

It would simply cost less and deliver better care to everyone. That's the bottom line. USP actually addresses the cost issue and brings costs down.

[crone]

Everything I have read indicates that some form of government already pays for 60% of the healthcare cost. Medicare, Medicaid, VA, military, government employees. Business pays for 20%. All we are talking about is the other 20%.

Medicare for all and get rid of the insurance companies.

[workingclasshero]

Originally Posted by jmking

You already pay single-payer coverage. But can not use it until you retire and or become disabled--medicare. So, not only do we pay for for-profit independent insurance coverage and or contribute to group coverage, we also pay for the single payer medicare at the same time. Yes, we can afford it by far.

how wrong can you be

1. mediCARE is not singlepayer...it is a 80/20 insurance

2. the closest thing to singlepayer is medicAID

fact to cover all 320 million people at 80/20 would cost about 3 trillion a year...to cover all at 100% would cost about 6 trillion

number of tax FILERS 130 million...number with a POSITIVE TAX LIABILITY about 65 million

6 trillion divided by 130 million is......46k.

do you ( a taxpayer) have 46 THOUSAND DOLLARS laying around YEARLY.....I think not

even at the 3 trillion mark...that is over 23 thousand a year


singlepayer is ABUSE of the taxpayer

[workingclasshero]

Originally Posted by wnewberry22

.........t. I support a single-payer system because of the price reductions seen in other nations...I believe that we could replicate that here.

oh please
singlepayer will not control these costs

how are you going to control the cost of medical equipment(mri or xray machines, etc)??????most xray machine are made in denmark

how are you going to control the cost of the rising electric bills the doctors/hospitals are facing????

how are you going to control the rising property tax/rent/mortgage that doctors face?????

how are you going to control the cost of supplies(gauze, plaster, silk, rubber, polystirene( a oil product)?????especially some supplies that arent even american

how are you going to control the cost of people salaries???? a maximum wage???

how they are going to control the employment costs for Doctors, nurses, technicians, hospital food operators, hospital linnon cleaning service, custodial services, medical transcribers........are you going to 'nationalize' every profession that is even remotely connected to medicine????

how are they going to control malpractice INSURANCE COSTS?????

dont you get it... medicine (like anyother SERVICE) costs money,,(,money that our government doesnt have)


I ask a simple question.....HOW are you going to control costs OF MEDICINE, not INSURANCE..........because you CANT...and it will get worse and worse as inflation devalues our dollar

when your doctor charges you $100...its not $100 going into his pocket

he/she still has to pay rent/lease/mortgage
still has to pay an electric bill
still has to pay for supplies
still has to pay THE NURSE/RECEPTIONIST/RECORDS KEEPER
still has to pay ofr that mri/xray machine (equipment) etc

and you are not going to lower THOSE costs by the government or insuance


how are you going to control the cost of medical equipment(mri or xray machines, etc)??????most xray machine are made in denmark(((((((why does that PROCEEDURE of getting an MRI cost 4k???.......because the MACHINE itself cost 1.4 million dollars.......and the tech that runs it has to make ATLEAST minimum wage......and then the DOCTOR/SPECIALIST has to READ(analyze) the MRI

it can take YEARS before that machine has even paid for itself..and you have the cost of the personnel and the electric to run it, on top of that)))))))




=============================

how are you going to control the cost of the rising electric bills the doctors/hospitals are facing????(((((you understand the AVERAGE hospital spends 430,000 dollars a MONTH on ELECTRICITY ALONE...that's 5,160,000 (5.1 million) a year just in electric costs........10,000 hospitals in the usa.....that's 51,600,000,000.....51 BILLION dollars spent each year by hospitals just on electric..................................not to mention custodial costs, food costs, laundry costs, sanitation costs, staff costs, etc)))))))....you realize how many hospitals have GONE OUT OF BUSINESS because they cant make a profit enough to stay afloat...and the government is a good part of the problem

[workingclasshero]

Originally Posted by Think4Yourself

It would simply cost less and deliver better care to everyone. That's the bottom line. USP actually addresses the cost issue and brings costs down.

no, it doesnt

[middle-aged mom]

Originally Posted by pch1013

Given the enthusiasm with which certain ideologically-motivated governors have been declaring their intent to "nullify" certain aspects of the ACA, it's hard to imagine that all 50 states would go along with single-payer, at least at first.

The elected state politians protect their fifdoms and insurance is BIG business.

[middle-aged mom]

Originally Posted by wnewberry22

We need to move beyond this crap law and into a Medicare for all type system.

The law is the way it is because there are 50 states that will go to the mat to protect their fifdoms.
The consumers bear the cost of the ineffieciencies/redundancies.

[Ponderosa]

It is going to take a long time to unwind the ACA and in the end, it probably will work to delay what is the inevitable move to single payer. The public option that was dropped from ACA was the means by which ACA would have evolved into single payer and the insurance companies knew it and killed it. Once the public option disappeared, a better approach to single payer would have been to let ACA fail and then gradually increase the eligibility for Medicare, by allowing early retirees to buy in for example, and lowering eligibility thresholds over time. Now it looks like we will have to go through the pain of being at the mercy of private insurers aided and abetted in their fleecing by the US Government.

[A Common Anomaly]

Wow, I was shocked when I read this post by a Republican - a Republican who acknowledges facts over ideology. You are certainly a rare breed.

Originally Posted by wnewberry22

Conservatives in Canada and Europe acknowledge this system has broard positive results and the GOP needs to do the same.

American conservatives take on a different breed. They are hardly moderate like our Canadian or European counterparts. They are hardly moderate in a historical sense. Republicans were much more moderate, sensible, and intelligent from Eisenhower to Nixon than from Reagan and onward (I will give Reagan a few kudos - he wasn't a full blown neocon or a radical like today's GOP).

I don't see the GOP changing anytime soon. They are more radical and regressive as ever, even though America hates them. They lost the Presidency, the House, and the Senate to the popular vote to a par Democratic party.

The American Taliban (i.e. GOP) does not recognize facts and evidence. They are obvious to reality, hence why they are stuck in a perverse ideological world that is breaking down all around them.