Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 03-30-2017, 09:36 PM
 
Location: Houston
26,979 posts, read 15,849,164 times
Reputation: 11259

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by craigiri View Post
The answer to this question is quite simple - and is relevant in MA and VT and other states which desire (and/or are close) to Universal Health Care.

States are STILL part of the USA and subject to the high costs (Pharma, medical devices, norms of salaries, building and capital costs) that our entire system is based upon.

Putting it another way - our current cost per person in the USA is 10.5K per person per year.
If the cost in CA or the USA was, as it is in the TOP health care countries in the world, 30-40% lower - then it would be quite easy to provide universal health care.

So - in summary - what California and other states are saying is "we can't afford that Wall Street Driven Predatory Capitalism 2X the price health care".

Nothing wrong with that! We obviously need to shave down the costs so states CAN. Also, as others may have mentioned, the US Government picks up 2/3 of the nation's costs - so CA would have to make sure they get al their tax money back (and even debt and deficit spending money) before attempting this.

Complaining about CA not being able to afford this is like saying "Yeah, at Whole Foods Prices we can't afford to feed the poor". Of course we can't. We need wholesale pricing, not the ripoff we current all face.
What you are arguing is that the feds already take in enough dollars to fund 100% of healthcare costs.

Well, I tell ya what tell someone to give the details and heck I would even vote for that.

Of course i remember premiums were going down 2500 bucks so ya need to convince me.

Last edited by whogo; 03-30-2017 at 09:46 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-31-2017, 04:59 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
27,042 posts, read 13,295,225 times
Reputation: 19266
The pharma companies have been charging thousands of pounds/dollars for drugs that cost pennies to make, and the UK is now outlaw some of theses practice, fining drug companies and even involving the Serious Fraud Office and Courts.

I suggest Trump follows the UK's example especially in relation to price fixing.

Drugs firms are accused of putting cancer patients at risk over price hikes - Guardian

Pfizer fined record £84.2m over NHS overcharging - Guardian

Serious Fraud Office expands generics price-fixing inquiry | News | Pharmaceutical Journal

Drug firms will be barred from extortionately raising NHS drug prices | Daily Mail Online

Drugs firm lower the costs of 14 key cancer drugs | Daily Mail Online

Huge price rises for drugs to be banned | News | The Times & The Sunday Times

Health Service Medical Supplies (Costs) Bill: consideration of Lords Amendments
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2017, 05:10 AM
 
Location: Concord NC
1,859 posts, read 1,641,673 times
Reputation: 5175
California needs Univision health care more than it does Universal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2017, 05:31 AM
 
17,290 posts, read 29,349,509 times
Reputation: 8691
We kinda already do though. Medicare is a single payer plan. As is Medicaid. I don't know anyone who isn't overall satisfied with Medicare. (Medicare is single payer, where you can essentially see any doctor, because 99% of doctors accept it. Compare to the VA, which is government run healthcare where you go to a government owned hospital, like they have in England).

So basically the poor and the old have "free" universal healthcare already.


Honestly a Medicare-for-all option would be good for the economy. Right now economic mobility is often dictated by the "need" to work at a certain place to keep health benefits. It stifles entrepreneurship as well. Private health plans still have a place (such as in Medicare supplement), but I see no reason why we can't expand it to cover all US CITIZENS and LEGAL residents. We already pay a Medicare tax. And employers lay out hundreds per month for employee contributions to private health plans.

Private health reimbursement rates are already not that far out of line with Medicare reimbursement rates, so doctors won't lose out. And, if Americans invested in prevention (saw the doctor more frequently for check-ups, when early warning signs show up, etc.) then there would be less spent on curing after an issue arises, which is more expensive).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2017, 05:51 AM
 
Location: *
13,242 posts, read 4,901,503 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7 View Post
We kinda already do though. Medicare is a single payer plan. As is Medicaid. I don't know anyone who isn't overall satisfied with Medicare. (Medicare is single payer, where you can essentially see any doctor, because 99% of doctors accept it. Compare to the VA, which is government run healthcare where you go to a government owned hospital, like they have in England).

So basically the poor and the old have "free" universal healthcare already.


Honestly a Medicare-for-all option would be good for the economy. Right now economic mobility is often dictated by the "need" to work at a certain place to keep health benefits. It stifles entrepreneurship as well. Private health plans still have a place (such as in Medicare supplement), but I see no reason why we can't expand it to cover all US CITIZENS and LEGAL residents. We already pay a Medicare tax. And employers lay out hundreds per month for employee contributions to private health plans.

Private health reimbursement rates are already not that far out of line with Medicare reimbursement rates, so doctors won't lose out. And, if Americans invested in prevention (saw the doctor more frequently for check-ups, when early warning signs show up, etc.) then there would be less spent on curing after an issue arises, which is more expensive).
I like the smell of common sense in the morning!

Now all you have to do is rationally persuade the government=bad, free market for-profit unfettered capitalism=good followers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2017, 05:58 AM
 
34,620 posts, read 21,540,819 times
Reputation: 22232
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
I like the smell of common sense in the morning!

Now all you have to do is rationally persuade the government=bad, free market for-profit unfettered capitalism=good followers.
Those people who refuse to accept a nanny and insist they can make their own choices are a bit stubborn.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2017, 06:09 AM
 
22,923 posts, read 15,431,657 times
Reputation: 16962
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
Those people who refuse to accept a nanny and insist they can make their own choices are a bit stubborn.
While having no problem accepting Homeland Security, the Patriot Act, agencies like the TSA, Universal Education, and any number of other "Nanny" oversights upon their daily lives. Methinks their priorities vis-a-vis this "phony expressed individualism" are completely fubarred.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2017, 06:40 AM
 
Location: *
13,242 posts, read 4,901,503 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan View Post
While having no problem accepting Homeland Security, the Patriot Act, agencies like the TSA, Universal Education, and any number of other "Nanny" oversights upon their daily lives. Methinks their priorities vis-a-vis this "phony expressed individualism" are completely fubarred.
Please stop making sense!

They also seem to have no problem whatsoever accepting their Big Business Brother in the WH Kremlin either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2017, 06:55 AM
 
8,307 posts, read 3,899,164 times
Reputation: 10631
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
Yes, a good part of it. As Milton Friedman stated, "You can have open borders or you can have a welfare state. You cannot have both."
That's a nonsense statement. We don't have open borders, never have had. Implementing a single payer health care system does not mean we have a "welfare state". It FEELS good though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2017, 09:05 AM
 
Location: Texas
37,937 posts, read 17,805,641 times
Reputation: 10366
Quote:
Originally Posted by GearHeadDave View Post
That's a nonsense statement. We don't have open borders, never have had. Implementing a single payer health care system does not mean we have a "welfare state". It FEELS good though.
That's a ridiculously ignorant statement.
Single payer is welfare. Do you actually believe all of the people are actually paying for coverage? rhetorical
43 Million on food stamps. Yea that's not an indication.
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 > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:46 AM.

© 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