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.
Questions for the progressives on this thread. Do you support the framework/tenets/ideals of the British system, the Canadian system, or neither? If neither, then is there another country that has a system in place that you admire? If so, which country?
Questions for the progressives on this thread. Do you support the framework/tenets/ideals of the British system, the Canadian system, or neither? If neither, then is there another country that has a system in place that you admire? If so, which country?
There's a lot of ignorance about the subject matter.
All national healthcare systems are universal healthcare systems, but not all universal healthcare systems are national healthcare systems.
There are two primary systems of healthcare: Bismarck and Beveridge.
The Beveridge System is national healthcare, as practiced in the UK, Portugal, Spain and Sweden.
The Beveridge System is illegal in the US according to the Supreme Court's Sebelius decision, see National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, US Supreme Court 183 L. Ed. 2d 450 (2012)
The Canadian system is an hybrid of the Beveridge System and thus illegal in the US.
The Bismarck System and hybrids of the system are universal healthcare systems practiced by Germany, France, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Italy, etc etc etc.
The Bismarck System may be legal in the US, under certain specific conditions.
Neither doctors nor hospitals can be forced into a Medicare-for-All plan, and there are prior court rulings dealing with it.
Best case scenario, a universal system that permits an opt-out for everyone.
That would create a two-tiered system, one for private insurance, who would get the best care, and then one for everyone else on the government system, which would require rationing of healthcare, or the federal debt gets bloated and you run into financial and economic problems.
I'm no expert on health insurance. I do know, however, the government made a mess of the VA health care, a significantly smaller population than single payer health care for all citizens. Common sense says the government would create the same mess it did for veterans if Medicare for all is implemented.
Nothing is free. No program the government runs is efficient.
Getting rid of the ACA while not covering folks, if done on a GOP party line, will be the last time the GOP will have a majority in the house and senate for a generation.
I agree. The GOP has not demonstrated much in the intelligence department. We need a third, common sense party.....now.
Getting rid of the ACA while not covering folks, if done on a GOP party line, will be the last time the GOP will have a majority in the house and senate for a generation.
actually, dems have done horrible in House and Senate elections ever since they imposed ACA on our nation on a party line.
Blue Shield was one of the companies complicit in rigging and royally screwing up the healthcare system that we have to live with now, along with Blue Cross and the American Hospital Association
Along with Blue Cross?
Blue Cross / Blue Shield...
Blue Shield is the original name, before the lobbyiost made sure it would be for profit and a cash cow.
Show me the money! You get into the politicians pocket, you can have anything you wish.... I'll be dead soon and I need to live it up while I can, said the politician.
Blue cross, is Blue Shield..
The reason it could not be for-profit before, was because it is a pyramid scheme and they were illegal.
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.