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)
View Poll Results: Do you support a Medicare-for-all single payer system?
Yes 135 78.03%
No 38 21.97%
Voters: 173. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-25-2017, 05:41 PM
 
Location: London
12,275 posts, read 7,133,491 times
Reputation: 13661

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by PullMyFinger View Post
Yes and with strict price controls on pharmaceuticals.
Agreed. The pharmaceutical companies shouldn't be allowed to charge USA patients any more than they charge elsewhere. Right now, the US is being taken advantage of and being charged at least double what they charge anyone else in the world for the exact same thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-25-2017, 05:45 PM
 
3,458 posts, read 1,453,778 times
Reputation: 1755
Quote:
Originally Posted by odanny View Post
I think even conservatives would favor this model, but if their political leaders say this is a bad model, then, like all dutiful servants who put their leaders wishes before their own, they will be forced to comply.

Must suck to be a Republican.
Must suck to use such a broad brush. I wouldn't get use to it.
A lot of republicans would like single payer, it makes sense and it's more affordable. It's difficult to change a system from for profit to small or no profit. Plus, people will lose or have to change jobs. It won't be easy and some companies will lobby to keep the old system.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health...ystem_in_Japan
Japan has a model we could follow that might go over better. We could slowly change our system to it. Payment for personal medical services is offered by a universal health care insurance system that provides relative equality of access, with fees set by a government committee. All residents of Japan are required by the law to have health insurance coverage.
I believe that's were OBC was wanting to go but couldn't get there, and didn't know how to be forceful enough to do what it takes. I hope Trump is better at the game of politics simply because the rules aren't embedded in his brain. That's why people voted for him.

Now if everyone would relax and allow him to preside we might be better off.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2017, 05:48 PM
 
3,458 posts, read 1,453,778 times
Reputation: 1755
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohhwanderlust View Post
Agreed. The pharmaceutical companies shouldn't be allowed to charge USA patients any more than they charge elsewhere. Right now, the US is being taken advantage of and being charged at least double what they charge anyone else in the world for the exact same thing.
We are consumers of health, and that needs to change. Once it does, they no longer will be able to do big business regarding our health. But, they really, really like making so much money off of us, so they are going to lobby their butts off to keep it like it is.

It's obvious by all polls I've seen that the majority is ready to change to single payer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2017, 05:50 PM
 
Location: Houston
26,979 posts, read 15,879,874 times
Reputation: 11259
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohhwanderlust View Post
Agreed. The pharmaceutical companies shouldn't be allowed to charge USA patients any more than they charge elsewhere. Right now, the US is being taken advantage of and being charged at least double what they charge anyone else in the world for the exact same thing.
That means less drugs will be developed and more people will die. The solution is to reduce the fixed cost portiion of drug production i.e. the costs of brin ing a drug to market. The best way to do this is to repeal Kefauver-Harris.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2017, 05:51 PM
 
Location: Ohio
24,621 posts, read 19,152,432 times
Reputation: 21738
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike View Post
Do you support a Medicare-for-all single payer system?
No, not if it is like this:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-...-bill/676/text

The only thing I would support is a 25.6% HI Payroll Tax (12.8% for employer and employee) to generate the needed $2.5 TRILLION annually to cover Medicare-for-All.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2017, 05:55 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,971 posts, read 44,780,079 times
Reputation: 13681
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike View Post
Thats like saying Alabama has joined the 21st century because they have so high sales tax revenue and taxes on the poor. Its just meaningless nonsense.
European and Scandinavian countries have a 25% VAT tax and single payer health care. That's the comparison. Alabama has nothing to do with it. It has neither a 25% VAT nor single payer health care.

Quote:
Any single payer system is far cheaper than what we have today.
If that were actually true, Medicare and Medicaid would be far less costly to the federal government than they are, given the relatively small percentage of the population they serve.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2017, 05:58 PM
 
Location: London
12,275 posts, read 7,133,491 times
Reputation: 13661
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
That means less drugs will be developed and more people will die. The solution is to reduce the fixed cost portiion of drug production i.e. the costs of brin ing a drug to market. The best way to do this is to repeal Kefauver-Harris.
I don't see why they can't just slightly raise the prices they charge other countries to balance out not charging Americans exorbitant prices. Why must the US bear most of the burden?

What use is a developed drug if few can afford it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2017, 06:00 PM
 
Location: Keller, TX
5,658 posts, read 6,272,857 times
Reputation: 4111
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
That means less drugs will be developed and more people will die. The solution is to reduce the fixed cost portion of drug production i.e. the costs of bringing a drug to market.
What's that old adage?

You can have cheap drugs and safe drugs but you won't get any new drugs.

You can have cheap drugs and new drugs but they won't be safe drugs.

You can have safe drugs and new drugs but they won't come cheap.

I agree the cost to bring new drugs to market is enormous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2017, 06:07 PM
 
14,221 posts, read 6,955,379 times
Reputation: 6059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tokinouta View Post
Must suck to use such a broad brush. I wouldn't get use to it.
A lot of republicans would like single payer,
The problem is that none of the people Republicans elect to Congress support Medicare-for-all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2017, 06:12 PM
 
14,221 posts, read 6,955,379 times
Reputation: 6059
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
European and Scandinavian countries have a 25% VAT tax and single payer health care. That's the comparison. Alabama has nothing to do with it. It has neither a 25% VAT nor single payer health care.

If that were actually true, Medicare and Medicaid would be far less costly to the federal government than they are, given the relatively small percentage of the population they serve.
Medicare and Medicaid serve expensive groups to care for. European countries spend 10% of their GDP on health care. We spend 18% and we allow special interests to gobble up so much resources and rip us off that we pay for a national health care system already by spending more tax dollars on health care than almost any other country, but still dont get a national health care system.

Alabama has very high sales taxes and taxes on the poor. And very low wages for the poor. You have previously portrayed yourself as a proud social darwinist. Alabama is the closest we have to the 18th century system you would like to see.
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 03:48 PM.

© 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