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.
Administration is always needed in any large complex venture. The ACA and some states (ours) limit the overhead of the insurance companies to 12%. It can't be 0% - that is, any way you look at it there will be massive costs involved (I think medicare is 5 or 6%)....
Socialism? Again, we have words and lack of meanings from decades ago. I feel like I'm watching 1950's TV.
Utilities are regulated. Yet I don't hear people screaming "socialism". Then again, some of the same yappers got mad at Epipen or Pharma Bro when they wanted to be "capitalists".
I'm more of a logical and reasonable guy. Doctors and health care workers and pharma all deserve to make profits. But, like electric and gas and many other things - they must be regulated.
Very simple. Much easier than yapping slogans.
Medicares overhead is less than 3%. The insurance companies profits are capped, not their overhead from what I understand.
They don't provide services, they complicate them. Medicare for everyone makes sense, but I doubt we will see it in my lifetime. Too much profit and fat CEO salaries at stake.
I read a statistic somewhere that medical insurance companies profit, after all is said and done, is around 5%. If that's true, it just goes to show how broken the model really is that they need to screww you out of your home and life savings just to make a 5% profit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed
The best the US can do at this point. IMO, is have Medicare for 100% of the permanently resident population (the same as the UK), and tightly control prices and regulation in the private sector (Germany's approach).
Yeah limit what they can do, and leave the important stuff to the public system.
Of course we could have it as soon as we get big money out of politics and kick out the puppets of big pharma and insurance companies from Congress. Until that happens, we see that huge numbers of people in here are terrified of Medicare-for-all and desperately quote Fox News and other propaganda mouthpieces from the donor class about wait times, taxes, big guv'ment and other programmed responses to any public service that would massively benefit ordinary Americans. Just like what happened prior to social security and Medicare. Once implemented they desperately defend these same programs.
Thats simple.. Dems worked with Pubs and gave up single payer and adopted 160 od GOP amendments.. then voila.. No GOP voted for it. So many Republicans believe Dems made the ADA law ( wrote it behind closed closed doors ala Ryan's latest stunt).. hide it from every body and GOP Congress.. Sometimes when one side is willing to compromise and give up something ..but when votes get counted.. None of those GOP amendments were agreed to by their caucus.
BTW much of those amendments were NOT what Libs wanted.. and in fact it's GOP amendments are causing the issues with ACA now..along with Red State sabotaging Medicare expansions.. refusing to have State sites for ACA signups. One doesn't wonder why those states failed in implementing the law and proper access. For 7 years ..GOP rhetoric demonized it.. and even with poor rollout .. 24 Million got HC ..some with subsidies and others who got HC coverages that actually covered things no one but the rich could afford prior.
I do recall having many discussions during 2009/2010 discussions, prior to passage of bill, with completely inaccurate beliefs of what it all meant.. I tried to explain it.. but mostly fell on deaf ears by the very ones today who have no appreciation of the benefits of ACA.
Prior to ACA.. No one with pre-existing conditions could get coverage unless filthy rich.. then there was "Lifetime limits" of claims.. Then of course there were those that bought the cheapest policy and found out afters years of premiums.. that their policy didn't cover a thing until they paid that deductible.
Insurance companies handed out Policies that gained premiums.. but never paid out 1 thin dime.. made a HUUGE profit.. Once ACA kicked in and Insurance couldn't bilk consumers like they had.. or out price policies beyond affordability .. voila.. Insurance were forced to abide by the rules.. and RED States reps demonized.. ALA.. HOW dare Dems make huge donors have to lessen their profits.. Capitalism SMH
Sorry.. but it's about time USA caught up with the rest of the Free World. It's not Socialism nor Communism nor anything else.. It's called.. STOP making citizens pay for a product that makes PROFITS for Corporations as that product really is a necessary evil in this day and age! Public services and donated HC workers who give of themselves free to help isn't enough to help the sick.
Anyone who is truly religious and follows the teachings cannot deny what was taught in the New Testament !! What GOP is preaching is basically aberrant to what is written in scriptures. Double standard/Hypocracy++++ ..
^^^ = the dictionary definition of "FREEDUMB."
Quote:
Originally Posted by engineman
You need to ask the Canadians that come to the US to see a doctor.
When I went to a doctor for a cataract job, he said lets do it Thursday. My snowbird neighbor went to her Ontario doctor also for a cataract job, he said "I will put you on the list, your turn will come up in about a year".
False argument. No one is discovering overnight they have cataracts. Most people know well in advance when they will need the surgery. I did. My sister did. Cataracts, in most people develop over many years. That patient's doc could easily have put her on the list in advance - and probably did - but, of course, she's not telling you that. Or, she did and you didn't hear her.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minethatbird
Well this man could have used the single payer system that works in Australia. But elected not to.
There was no issue with the care his mother was receiving. Jason didn't like the diagnosis. Jason Day (millionaire golfer) wanted - AND COULD AFFORD - second opinion in US. People do that all the time. This is not an example of delayed or poor care. Many people in one part of the US travel to another part of the US for a second opinion. And, many US people travel to Europe for specific procedures. These actions, in an of themselves, are no indictments of that country's health care system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oberon_1
Simple answer - republicans and conservatives do not want it. They are against any government run program.
However, they have a point. US government is not really used to manage many nation wide programs. In Germany or Switzerland it's a very common thing. Not so in America:
1) There will be a high number of those who want to take advantage and rob the system - from companies to providers to patients. Higher numbers than in Japan Switzerland or Germany.
2) A national health system may be quickly defended by congress. It happened to the veteran programs. It may be the same with a national healthcare system.
In such case, it will become a national catastrophe and the conservative prophecy will fulfill itself.
Similar to how the GOP has systematically defunded and undermined the ACA.
First you'd have to prove that it "works" in those countries. The number of people who buy additional insurance and go out of the country for treatment would argue that it DOESN'T work.
Also the US isn't like those other countries, they don't have the huge welfare class of the US and have very different tax structures. Just look at the way US liberals howl anytime someone mentions everyone paying their own way, or at least paying SOMETHING. Those other countries the left admire so much don't have a "47%" like the US. Just who do you think would pay for healthcare when one party thinks everyone should get it but only half should pay for it.
Well, gee, Mitt, let me turn the tables on you.
Certain people on this forum are quite fond of telling liberals that if they are so enamored of the way things work in other countries, they should move there. How about this? Since you are so worried about that "huge welfare class," we have in the US, why don't you move to a country that doesn't have one?
USA Is a Capitalist country. You either are onboard or not. Money talks, BS whining walks. We arent socilaists, full blown etc or a democracy. Constitutional Republic thats runs on making money. So, we wont do single layef, no money in it
The United States, Canada, Australia, Barbados, France, Italy, Mexico, Poland, Jamaica, Peru, Chile, Sweden, Switzerland, Panama, Bulgaria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Romania, Turkey and Portugal are all examples of capitalist countries
All democratic societies have a mixed economy — a combination of capitalism and socialism. It's not a matter of either-or. It's a matter of degree.
While you may think one has more social programs than another -- they are all are capitalist countries.
Here in the USA people have died waiting -- have they all been poor? There are some reports that as many as 30,000 vets have died waiting.
"[The Bismarck Model] relies on payroll deductions to fund nonprofit insurers and requires that they cover everyone. Coverage and medical pricing is strictly regulated by the state.
Aside from Germany, you’ll find variations of this system in France, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Japan.
Pro: Plenty of flexibility in choosing insurers and healthcare providers. Con: Doctors may seek higher fees through private clinics."
First you'd have to prove that it "works" in those countries. The number of people who buy additional insurance and go out of the country for treatment would argue that it DOESN'T work.
Also the US isn't like those other countries, they don't have the huge welfare class of the US and have very different tax structures. Just look at the way US liberals howl anytime someone mentions everyone paying their own way, or at least paying SOMETHING. Those other countries the left admire so much don't have a "47%" like the US. Just who do you think would pay for healthcare when one party thinks everyone should get it but only half should pay for it.
More Americans leave the U.S. for healthcare than citizens from any other country:
I read a statistic somewhere that medical insurance companies profit, after all is said and done, is around 5%. If that's true, it just goes to show how broken the model really is that they need to screww you out of your home and life savings just to make a 5% profit.
Yeah limit what they can do, and leave the important stuff to the public system.
United Healthcare last year was 46 billion in revenue and 7.24 billion of that was profit which is significantly more than 5%.
Now, if we take that 7.24 billion and then generously assume only a ten percent overhead ( I know it's was higher than that) then that is approximately 11.84 billion sucked out of the system for providing zero care, and that is only one company.
11 billion dollars would buy a lot of knee replacement surgeries and prescription drugs.
What makes the US different, that would make such system a disaster?
K street is what makes the US different.
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.
