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.
Not only does universal healthcare lead to better health outcomes, it is more cost efficient. What hasn't been mentioned in this thread, is that it also more business friendly. UHC frees business entities from the massive costs of providing healthcare to its employees, thus enabling them to focus on conducting business and making profits -- the natural role of private enterprise.
Here's an excellent article from...Harvard Business Review arguing this very thing:
Well...................... yes they would- it really depends on the state, as there are marked differences in reimbursement for different states.
MANY physicians and hospital systems stratify patients with regard to payer class. Mayo Clinic states quite publically that medicare and Medicaid go the back of the line. Try getting a Mayo referral today when you are on medicare- you will wait forever IF you are eventually seen.
MANY surgical practices would no longer be able to keep their doors open. Medicare reimburses very poorly for most surgical procedures, which take much longer than seeing patients.
This is a fact that most of the public (and probably those politicians pressing medicare for all) don't understand. Yet I am sure that they would implement it anyway, then struggle in crisis mode to repair the damage after the exodus of a large component of specialty providers.
In my specialty, MOST of the providers are leaving the office based, fee for service models and seeking employed positions in hospitals. Why? They can charge 7-10X as much as one can charge in the office and capture a facility fee. That practice drives healthcare costs up, but it is what the Feds have dictated. We have been squeezed with high overhead and declining reimbursement.
Try hiring a neurosurgeon today and tell them they will be paid on an "eat what you kill basis". They will tell you to go to hell, as the going rate is $1-$1.2 million to start and most new neurosurgeons cannot generate nearly that income in revenues, as they are too slow. If they were "asked" to take medicare rates in a fee for service systems without hospital financial support, there would no longer be any neurosurgeons (except at universities who are supported by the state and the Feds). It is a little tough to keep your trauma center designation without 24/7 neurosurgery coverage.
There is no reason doctors can't make compellingly high wages in "socialized medicine." They do in other countries.
1. Doctors wouldn't be working for "Crazy Bernie" - that's nonsense.
2. Healthcare in Canada is good and they don't have the "Three Stooges" involved. They have talk doctors who get paid well enough.
3. Becoming a plumber instead of as doctor? Please.
Well...................... yes they would- it really depends on the state, as there are marked differences in reimbursement for different states.
You are making the exact same mistake everyone that argues against programs like this always make. Assuming nothing changes. It will and even then "depends on the state", is not the same as "most practices".
Believe it or not, there will not be a program that puts doctors out of business in any state. The rest of your post is hyperbole. Discuss things like an adult. We are not going to pay doctors in chickens and venison.
Nobody has said doctors would be out of job or doctors would be poor; nobody even said universal health care should never be considered.
The thread is about Bernie Sander's idea of universal health care,
A full single-payer system means everyone gets coverage from the same insurance plan, usually sponsored by the government. Medicare-for-all, a phrase that gained currency with the presidential campaign of Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, means everyone gets Medicare, but, depending on the proposal, it may or may not allow private insurers to offer Medicare as well.
Meanwhile, lots of countries achieve universal healthcare—everyone is covered somehow—but the method can vary. For example, France requires all citizens to purchase coverage, which is sold through nonprofits. In Germany, most people get insurance from a government-run “public option,” while others purchase private plans. In England, healthcare is provided through the tax-funded National Health System.
I personally don't mind universal health care, as long as the quality of health care improves for EVERYBODY, not just the poor. Bernie Sander's idea is not convincing enough to me. It is what it is.
Plus, you also need to take "quality of life" into consideration. Doctors already face an alarming high suicide rate. This whole "oh, you get paid well" b.s. is tiring. Do you (yourself) want to treat 2000 patients/month or do you want to treat 600 patients/month with the same amount of salary? Come on.
Also, Do explain to me why few doctors want to work for VA hospitals?
some 57,000 veterans new to the VA system have had to wait up to three months to see a doctor after requesting an appointment. Also 63,000 veterans already in the system are facing long waits as well. Why is that?
Don't tell me the answer is VA is facing funding problem. No, this is not true at all.
Last edited by lilyflower3191981; 04-21-2019 at 12:31 PM..
No program has cut doctors wages. If anything they will increase. They will no longer have the cost of dealing with multiple different insurances. They will no longer have to chase after non pays. They should see lower malpractice costs. With people like Sanders, they will even see lower educational costs.
Wrong. If crazy Bernie's old plan is used payments to doctors and hospitals are cut severely.
Quote:
M4A would markedly increase the demand for healthcare services while simultaneously cutting payments to providers by more than 40 percent relative to private insurance rates, reducing payments to levels that are lower on average than providers’ current costs of providing care. It cannot be known how much providers will react to these losses by reducing the availability of existing health services, the quality of such services, or both.
All of these reports note that these are "conservative" estimates, Blahous said "It is likely that the actual cost of M4A would be substantially greater than has been estimated." The plan is also underfunded by over a trillion dollars every year, and beyond the first ten years costs continue to rise as a share of GDP.
Blahous, RAND, and UI all express concern over low healthcare provider payment rates, as well as the shortages and/or cost to fix them. Cost savings of administration and lower drug prices combined don't cover even half the cost of added demand from increased coverage.
Quote:
As noted earlier, the federal cost of enacting the M4A Act would be such that doubling
all federal individual and corporate income taxes going forward would be insufficient to fully
finance the plan, even under the assumption that provider payment rates are reduced by over 40
percent for treatment of patients now covered by private insurance. Such an increase in the scope
of federal government operations would precipitate a correspondingly large increase in federal
taxation or debt and would be unprecedented if undertaken as an enduring federal commitment.
Loony Jayapal's plan would cost even more than crazy Bernie's, as it proposes more coverage and also provides coverage for illegal aliens. At the press conference announcing the plan she said:
Quote:
It is time to ensure that health care is right, and not a privilege, guaranteed to every person in our country. It is time for Medicare for all.
Note that she used the words "every person in our country" as opposed to "citizens" or even "Americans." Which means she wants us to pay the health care costs of anyone who wanders in to the country.
How do doctors earn more under either of these proposals?
All of these reports note that these are "conservative" estimates, Blahous said "It is likely that the actual cost of M4A would be substantially greater than has been estimated." The plan is also underfunded by over a trillion dollars every year, and beyond the first ten years costs continue to rise as a share of GDP.
Blahous, RAND, and UI all express concern over low healthcare provider payment rates, as well as the shortages and/or cost to fix them. Cost savings of administration and lower drug prices combined don't cover even half the cost of added demand from increased coverage.
Loony Jayapal's plan would cost even more than crazy Bernie's, as it proposes more coverage and also provides coverage for illegal aliens. At the press conference announcing the plan she said:
Note that she used the words "every person in our country" as opposed to "citizens" or even "Americans." Which means she wants us to pay the health care costs of anyone who wanders in to the country.
How do doctors earn more under either of these proposals?
How does this compare to current total cost of healthcare currently? Be sure to include insurance cost as well. Remember their revenue is also a cost to the healthcare system.
Wrong. If crazy Bernie's old plan is used payments to doctors and hospitals are cut severely.
The CFRB argues that the continued rising of health care costs is unsustainable. They also argue ways of lowering those costs but their projections include non of those ideas.
Other countries are doing fine. Yes, they use some of these ideas. (such as a reformed bidding process). We can do all of that.
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.
