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.
It's blatantly obvious that the ACA was always designed to fail and serve as a stepping stone to single payer. I can understand how people think this is the best way for us to go, but I simply cannot believe that an entity as corrupt, unaccountable and inefficient as the US government can enact a single payer system that won't be a huge disaster. What we have now is a mess, but putting it in the hands of the government seems like the worst way to fix the problem.
The relationship between what everyone wrongly calls "health insurance" and the cost of healthcare is a one way relationship driven by the cost of healthcare, not the cost of health insurance.
"Health insurance" per se does not drive up the cost of healthcare service, however the inverse is true: the cost of healthcare services drives up the cost of "health insurance."
I think perhaps you misunderstood my meaning.
When I said "insurance" causes costs to rise... I meant "insurance" in the sense of "the use of insurance as mechanism to control and deliver payment for services as a third party rather than the consumer".
No economist who ever went to school ( I presume reconized economists have a degree) ever believed that third party payment "works", as it violates the premise of market sensitivity to the consumer's ability to pay.
Thus, our misuse of insurance, by pretending it is a 'third party payer' ( and what it would be if the government ran some scheme) is what drives up spiraling costs, since no cost/benefit decision is ever made by the consumer, who is deprived of both the knowledge and the consequences.
Sorry, but having $1000 dollars a stitch reduced down to, let's say for example, $500 (a 50% reduction in cost) because of "free market solutions" and paying in cash is still $500 that not everyone can afford. Your idea works in principle, but it is not practical for most people. Most of us don't have $500 just laying around
What you are saying is that nothing short of free is affordable?
It's blatantly obvious that the ACA was always designed to fail and serve as a stepping stone to single payer. I can understand how people think this is the best way for us to go, but I simply cannot believe that an entity as corrupt, unaccountable and inefficient as the US government can enact a single payer system that won't be a huge disaster. What we have now is a mess, but putting it in the hands of the government seems like the worst way to fix the problem.
When was the last time we had a massive outbreak of mad cow disease?
How often is your mail lost?
Planes don't crash very often.
The federal government is far from perfect, but lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater. I don't want an all encompassing single payer system, and I would oppose that. However, a regulated, mandatory level of care that is agreed upon by a majority is not beyond the realm of possibility.
There would be liberals screaming its unfair to the poor to cap what will be taken care of for them. There will be conservatives screaming its the end of freedom as we know it.
Generally, when both political sides disagree on something, its a good thing.
Which is why healthcare should never be designed around a for-profit financial industry.
Right, because you will never need to buy another MRI machine ever.....and if you need one, we all just hold hands and sing Kumbaya and an MRI will magically fall out of the sky from the MRI God.
Quote:
Originally Posted by juppiter
It is easy to look back now and say the US had a great health care system before, but it is just not true. Besides, a huge part of Obama's platform was to reform the system
Reform?
Are you serious?
I'm from Missouri, man, you'll have to show me in Obamacare where "Out-of-Network" is illegal?
Show me where it is illegal for hospitals to price-gouge?
Show me where it is illegal for hospitals to operate as monopolies?
Show me where it is illegal for hospitals to engage in price fixing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed
Sorry, but having $1000 dollars a stitch reduced down to, let's say for example, $500 (a 50% reduction in cost) because of "free market solutions" and paying in cash is still $500 that not everyone can afford. Your idea works in principle, but it is not practical for most people. Most of us don't have $500 just laying around
You don't understand the Free Market, but thanks for misrepresenting it with your Straw Man Fallacy just the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by juppiter
That was the reason for the individual mandate. However, that mandate appears to be unenforceable. The SCOTUS, in determining the constitutionality of the law, cited the mandate and its penalty as constitutional on the basis that it constituted a "tax." This paves the way for single payer, in which case health care will be paid for by a tax that is more enforceable than the individual mandate.
Uh-huh......and what did the former German Minister of Health say?
Let us read together in the hopes that we may understand.....
Virtual budgets are also set up at the regional levels; these ensure that all participants in the system—including the health insurance funds and providers— know from the beginning of the year onward how much money can be spent.-- Franz Knieps German Minister of Health (2009)
You collect $1.4 TRILLION in taxes, but the amount of healthcare that needs or must be spent is $1.9 TRILLION.
What happens?
Waiting lists....treatment is denied.....treatment is delayed.....treatment is diluted to the point of being ineffective....
In order not to trigger penalty payments, the KBV devised an Emergency Programme which would, in effect, ration drug prescribing for the rest of the year.
The Emergency Programme proposed five steps:
1. Waiting lists for prescription drugs and other prescription treatments (Heilmittel, which include physiotherapy, acupuncture etc.) except in life threatening or medically essential circumstances
2. Postponement of innovative therapy to the following budget year
3. Radical switching of prescriptions from brand to the cheapest generic
4. Prior authorisation of expensive therapies
5. In the event of budget being exceeded, ‘emergency prescriptions’ to be issued temporarily, for which patients would have to pay out-of pocket and personally claim reimbursement (in Germany, unlike France, patients pay only user charges out of pocket)
Source: Why Ration Healthcare? Page 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed
Luckily, practicality trumps ideology. Pnw is all ideology and no practicality. His ideas work in theory,but they do not work in practice.
Prove it, we'll wait...patiently...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
It's not discretionary spending. If your appendix is about to burst, you're not in a position to do comparison shopping. You just need that s.cker out, now.
If you do not understand how the Free Market works.....and obviously you don't...then just ask instead of lowering yourself below the curb with useless Straw Man Fantasies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
You're putting forward the pre-ACA US medical system as something that "works in practice"? Wow.
I don't know anyone saying. I have never said that. I have always been critical.
You have not had Free Market healthcare since 1933, so stop with the Fallacies.
Get over it already.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnwmdk
Oh, and...
A cash medical system will NOT charge $1000 for a stitch.
Consumer oriented businesses make themselves affordable.
It's how it works.
A cash medical system will not help your cause.
The problem --- from Day #1 --- was the hospitals. It was always the hospitals. It continues to be the hospitals. And unless common sense starts descending upon people, the problem will forever be hospitals.
Before you even think about a cash system, you must first return to the Free Market.
No more "Out-of-Network." No price-gouging by hospitals. No more price-fixing by hospitals. No more monopolistic cartels....and so on.
That is true, even if you want a single payer system.
At the end of the day, a single-payer system is nothing but fee-for-service, which inflates costs, rather than decreasing costs, and with that over-laid on top of monopolistic hospital cartels, you will all be screwed.
Economically...
Republicans can't just keep opposing Obamacare, and they haven't offered a viable alternative. Sooner or later, people will go with something, rather then nothing.
Ironically, IMO one of the biggest losers under single payer will be one of Dems' biggest supporters: unions. They tend to get better than average coverage at better prices than the general public. Will they gladly give up good insurance for average insurance and pay full ticket cost via taxes?
Ironically, IMO one of the biggest losers under single payer will be one of Dems' biggest supporters: unions. They tend to get better than average coverage at better prices than the general public. Will they gladly give up good insurance for average insurance and pay full ticket cost via taxes?
Again, this is where a hybrid system is beneficial.
Government mandates that all coverage, to a certain level (as decided by voters and lawmakers) is covered. They could also say that, if demand is overwhelming, that a waiting list is put into place.
But, this opens the door for private insurance to cover all health needs above the agreed upon limit. It can also eliminate your wait times, as you could insure that for yourself and private doctors with better levels of care can see you tomorrow.
Again, Republicans and many people are mistaken when they see single payer as an all or nothing approach. Many governments have a hybrid system that allows for private insurance to give a better standard of care. France, for instance, who has one of the best healthcare systems in the world is a hybrid public/private system.
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.
