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.
and also by degrading and raising the cost of care for others. The ACA is largely financed by more deficit spending, but it is partially paid for, and that includes cuts to Medicare and taxes on commercial insurance.
Which should be a warning to conservatives who support single payer -- the government has a track record of reducing the access of middle-class people to care to fund expansion of access to the poor and lowered government expenditure. This is widespread in places like the UK. Do you honestly think this won't happen in a single-payer U.S. system in a much bigger way? Of course it would.
It's entirely 100% up to us. Right now the biggest roadblock to universal health care is not those against it but rather those who say they are for it but refuse to actually vote for it or condemn those that lie to them.
Single payer is just one monopoly with its own board, officers, overcompensated public-employee unions. It obtains its profi-...sorry, reserves, from a public coerced at the muzzle of the state--and will buy and enrich itself with abandon using that and more borrowed money.
No country on Earth has survived single-payer without sacrificing their competitiveness and the employability of their beleaguered citizenry.
Single payer is just one monopoly with its own board, officers, overcompensated public-employee unions. It obtains its profi-...sorry, reserves, from a public coerced at the muzzle of the state--and will buy and enrich itself with abandon using that and more borrowed money.
The concern is valid but it's all up to us. If we continue to refuse to put country over party that is what we will get. Again, it's up to us.
Quote:
No country on Earth has survived single-payer without sacrificing their competitiveness and the employability of their beleaguered citizenry.
The concern is valid but it's all up to us. If we continue to refuse to put country over party that is what we will get. Again, it's up to us.
I'm not insuring anybody's neuroses and phobias and imagined diseases and moral hazards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
We do not have competition.
More and more, with each insidious step, the country is being lowered to the standards of those countries with their hands tied behind their backs, chronically under- and unemployed, saddled with onerous, high tax mandates. Because of that, there will naturally be increased competition with them for the bottom.
The ACA is largely financed by more deficit spending, but it is partially paid for, and that includes cuts to Medicare and taxes on commercial insurance.
So who do you think should pay the bill? Total spending in the US last year for healthcare was about $3 trillion. That number won't change, and hasn't changed because of ACA. Somebody has to pay for healthcare and the ACA-haters don't want it to be either the government or themselves. So who should pay for our healthcare?
I'm not insuring anybody's neuroses and phobias and imagined diseases and moral hazards.
More and more, with each insidious step, the country is being lowered to the standards of those countries with their hands tied behind their backs, chronically under- and unemployed, saddled with onerous, high tax mandates. Because of that, there will naturally be increased competition with them for the bottom.
We will note....you didn't actually dispute my point.
So who do you think should pay the bill? Total spending in the US last year for healthcare was about $3 trillion. That number won't change, and hasn't changed because of ACA. Somebody has to pay for healthcare and the ACA-haters don't want it to be either the government or themselves. So who should pay for our healthcare?
I hate the ACA Because it was nothing more than a sell out to the insurance and pharmaceutical industries. Costs have continued to sky rocket and the insurance companies are begging for more.
I would start to pay for it with the trillions we waste overseas with what we spend on the stupid wars and billion dollar bribes.
Then, I am already paying for health care. The government can't actually pay for anything. We can institute a program that covers everyone for less than what those of us who pay now are paying.
It's not going to include record insurance profits and its going to require us to start minding out own business.
We will note....you didn't actually dispute my point.
Your point is you want single payer, and I've just argued distinctly against it.
I'm also arguing against anything more than the baseline of Medicaid and high risk pool. And if employees insist on company insurance policies, then their jobs are increasingly at risk for indulging in--and paying on--provider increases bumped up on whim.
Guaranteeing payment on those same provider increases only encourages their growth. And only encourages spending on extravagances and nest-lining, including for palatial medical settings.
Your point is you want single payer, and I've just argued distinctly against it.
My point was to dispute your idea that we have competition in this country.
We do not....if we actually did the need for UHC would indeed probably be less.
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.
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.
