Single Payer: Alive and Well (vs, retired, money, government)

[juppiter]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

Every country people point to have people paying for 2 health insurance plans to be able to get and pay for any viable health care.
Sounds like medicare for everyone type of plan.

But what about the people that don't work and don't contribute ?

We have that problem as it is. Why do you think the doctor bills the insurance such outrageously high prices? To cover all the uninsured patients who get in for less money.

[workingclasshero]

Originally Posted by juppiter

We have that problem as it is. Why do you think the doctor bills the insurance such outrageously high prices? To cover all the uninsured patients who get in for less money.

actually to cover thier overhead

meanwhile the government will make suck LOWBALL payments through medicare/medicaid (and slow to pay too) that doctors and hospitals have difficulty making overhead

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by juppiter

We have that problem as it is. Why do you think the doctor bills the insurance such outrageously high prices? To cover all the uninsured patients who get in for less money.

Single payer means the government pays all the costs on behalf of the individual.
In countries with single payer the government has taken over the healthcare industry to a point and dictates cost and in some countries is the employer of healthcare workers.

We do not have that here.

To go single payer the government would have to nationalize healthcare and institute a new payroll tax.
Is that what you want ?

[bUU]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

So why don't you carry the burden of the poor?

We are working on that - together. Even though you don't like it.

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

Why do you live in luxury compared to the world's poor?

Are you proposing to extend ACA to the entire world. You!!?!?! That will require having a federal government over the world itself, as we have over the nation, so that's quite a long journey you're trying to take on, but more power to you if you're really sincere about caring that much about others.

You mean you don't really care that much about others?

Really?

Shocking!

Originally Posted by kidkaos2

We don't realize that because it isn't true.

Of course it is. You just don't want to admit it.

Originally Posted by kidkaos2

If the ACA was a step towards single payer, then dismantling it is a step away from single payer.

Wrong. That's an immoral step away from affordable healthcare for those who can least afford it. That is evidently the right-wing's intent - to pile more misery and suffering on people they don't care about. ACA is the stop toward something better. If that is single-payer, then single-payer will be passed, set-up and ready to roll-out to replace ACA through a planned and controlled cut-over.

You really don't seem to know much about how to switch from one system to another responsibly. It's strange that you're commenting on it given that limitation.

Originally Posted by kidkaos2

And single payer is unconstitutional.

You're covering all the right-wingers' immoral bases today eh?

Originally Posted by kidkaos2

It really doesn't matter whether single payer would be good or bad, because it isn't legal.

But ACA is, so what you're saying is that ACA is the closest we can get to single-payer now. Thanks for admitting that.

Originally Posted by xray731

Buu - I think it's unfair that you label all the republicans living in luxury and not caring.

Good thing that that is not what I wrote. If you find yourself having to change what I wrote into something I didn't write, just so you could come up with something to say in response, then you should use that as a hint to realize that you didn't really have something worthwhile to say about what I actually did say.

Here's what I wrote:

Typical right-winger: "All that matters is satisfying my desires. To hell with basic human decency.

So let's pick it a part. I wrote, "Typical", and you decided to change that to "All".

Strike One

Then I wrote "right-winger" and you decided to change that to "Republicans".

Strike Two

Then I wrote that all that mattered to them was satisfying their desires and you decided to change that to them living in luxury.

Strike Three

Would you like to take a second try at responding to what I actually wrote? Or are you willing to apologize for misstating my perspectives in your reply?

Originally Posted by xray731

I don't like the blanket statements and generalizations made

Tough. Personal attacks are not permitted here.

Originally Posted by xray731

when your own Democratic candidates and representatives are millionaires - but they have you believing that the Republicans are only for the rich.

You are working very hard to avoid admitting the difference: Republicans promote policy that benefits the rich, in the vast majority of disputes with Democrats. Democrats, by contrast, promote policy that benefits the rich much less often, and benefits the poor quite often, as compared to Republicans. It isn't a matter of what people ARE - what matters is what they try to do, what impact they try to have on society itself.

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by bUU

We are together. You don't get a pass.

Are you volunteering to extend ACA to the entire world. Let's get ACA working well in the US first and then revisit your idea.

Of course it is. You just don't want to admit it.

Wrong. That's an immoral step away from affordable healthcare for those who can least afford it. That is evidently the right-wing's intent - to pile more misery and suffering on people they don't care about. ACA is the stop toward something better. If that is single-payer, then single-payer will be passed, set-up and ready to roll-out to replace ACA through a planned and controlled cut-over.

You really don't seem to know much about how to switch from one system to another responsibly. It's strange that you're commenting on it given that limitation.

You're covering all the right-wingers' immoral bases today eh?

But ACA is, so what you're saying is that ACA is the closest we can get to single-payer now. Thanks for admitting that.

No, medicare is the closest we've gotten towards single payer.

[artisan4]

The US system may evolve into one similar to the Canadian provinces; private practice, public payment. I would definitely pay more in taxes to make sure everyone is covered and doesn't go bankrupt. The last five years in the American system has really opened my eyes, and bank account.

[bUU]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

No, medicare is the closest we've gotten towards single payer.

That's true, and I think it would have been great if the GOP would have simply allowed extending Medicare to everyone. Oh well, maybe that will replace ACA someday. Are you going to help bring that about?

[Mr. Mon]

Originally Posted by artisan4

The US system may evolve into one similar to the Canadian provinces; private practice, public payment. I would definitely pay more in taxes to make sure everyone is covered and doesn't go bankrupt. The last five years in the American system has really opened my eyes, and bank account.

The establishment of the exchanges is more likely to pave the way towards a system that resembles those in Germany or Belgium. The individual pays into an exchange via a payroll deduction and that exchange covers the cost of care. As much as I like the idea of true single payer, we have too much private insurance and associated jobs to just scrape it overnight for a taxpayer based one.

Ideally we need to adopt Medicare for all, or dump it and put everyone on an exchange with tax payer coverage of the retired and poor. But this is America and we decided about 40 years ago that we can't have nice things.

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by bUU

That's true, and I think it would have been great if the GOP would have simply allowed extending Medicare to everyone. Oh well, maybe that will replace ACA someday. Are you going to help bring that about?

Well the GOP didn't vote for Obamacare. This was the Democrats.
And I agree. If CONGRESS (both D & R) just extended medicare and medicaid via premiums that would have been a better solution for the small percentage of Americans that wanted insurance and could not get it.

Not one Republican voted FOR Obamacare. Obamacare was created by the Dems and passed by the Dems and signed by the Dems. Pelosi, Reid and Obama are the ones that got this passed into law.

[bUU]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

Well the GOP didn't vote for Obamacare.

But they would have filibustered anything more substantial than it.

Admit it.

At least to yourself, if not publicly.

And the Blue Dogs wouldn't have voted for something more substantial than ACA.

Admit it.

At least to yourself, if not publicly.

How many times are you going to trot out the same tired, discredited rhetoric, Happy?