Medicare For All Study

[iprph90]

Then you'll see the shit you're in when everyone responsible for providing healthcare is a government employee.

If this is not degrading the worth of human beings that earns an honest living, then what is?

Regardless, I don't want to quibble about this point. American government employees in all sectors have a strong work ethic compared to other nations.

I agree with you. Single payer doesn't mean there will be no choice. Americans will use their ingenuity to come up with solutions that will provide ample choices on how we will consume healthcare. 99% of what I have said comes down to advocating a fair health care system accessible to all its people that reigns in cost and provides quality of care. Personally, I believe, if the current trend continues, there is a clear and present danger that more and more Americans will be at the mercy of an extreme greed and profit motivated industry that will keep on increasing premiums, deny services, not insure pre-existing conditions, and bankrupt households. I mean, this is happening now!!

I think our polity has become extremely polarized. We have more information than ever before, yet many of us not able to clearly sift through the things that really matter. At the end of the day, we all essentially care about the same things- , a good place to live, good schools, safety, security, quality health care, and clean environment, etc. We can disagree on the process, but let's not lose sight of our goals.

 

[smallfil]

Eat right, exercise, raise your kids right, pray you have good genetics.... and avoid the whole damn thing for as long as possible. And then go out fast when its your time. That's the best solution imo.

It is not going to matter in the end if we got Socialized Medicare for All because the huge cost over runs will result in doctors prescribing pain relievers for serious diseases like cancer because there are not enough monies to go around. Add to that the huge number of patients, like 200-300 daily. That is not a typo. I asked the service rep at Kaiser how many patients they handle daily in their 8 hours nowadays since, there were so many in line. He said around 250 daily on average. My doctor before Obamacare used to see me for 30 minutes which is not a whole lot of time but, now, he takes 10 minutes tops and in a hurry to get out of the room and attend to the next patient. I do not begrudge him knowing he probably, has 50-70 patients a day nowadays.

 

[DTB2]

American government employees in all sectors have a strong work ethic

Are you going to buy me a new keyboard, one without Diet Coke sprayed all over it?

 

[NeoTrader]

American government employees in all sectors have a strong work ethic compared to other nations.

That's not what I hear from other Americans. @DTB2 seems to be part of the overwhelming majority of Americans who disagree with you on this.

I agree with you. Single payer doesn't mean there will be no choice.

This is the exact opposite of what I wrote. How do you agree with me?
Single payer, by definition, means absolutely no choice, except for those fortunate enough to be able to afford the shitty monopoly from government, which they are forced to do, and pay a private alternative(just like it is here in Brazil).

Americans will use their ingenuity to come up with solutions that will provide ample choices on how we will consume healthcare.

So, basically, you defend a system that will be forced down the throat of Americans and you already anticipate that they will have to use their ingenuity to come up with solutions so that they will have ample choices aside from that system. (Presumably, because the system is crap, otherwise, why would they need to come up with solutions for this?)

Wow, you really think things through, eh?

99% of what I have said comes down to advocating a fair health care system accessible to all its people that reigns in cost and provides quality of care. Personally, I believe, if the current trend continues, there is a clear and present danger that more and more Americans will be at the mercy of an extreme greed and profit motivated industry that will keep on increasing premiums, deny services, not insure pre-existing conditions, and bankrupt households. I mean, this is happening now!!

I've already addressed this:

the main thing would be to end regulatory stupidity and make insurance companies in much bigger numbers to compete. Less red tape + more competition = Even lowers costs and more quality.

You simply chose not to recognize this as a solution. You instead preferred to keep defending a monopoly as a solution to an oligopoly and based this "genius" solution on your personal opinion of American government employees. An opinion that is not shared by a great number of other Americans.

 

[iprph90]

except for those fortunate enough to be able to afford the shitty monopoly from government, which they are forced to do, and pay a private alternative(just like it is here in Brazil).

This basically describes the private alternative we have in our healthcare system today with big insurance cos. in full control. It is an option that is a proven failure in terms of outcomes and exorbitant costs as I have cited in my first post. Ask anyone who has had to deal with insurance claims in the US- obfuscation of cost for services rendered with umpteen providers trying to collect for services- and in some cases not even provided.

The system is inaccessible to many because cost are spiraling out of control. The wealthy already are paying out of pocket for superior care not to mention futuristic treatment options for the mega rich which insurance will never cover. Americans are frustrated with inferior and inaccessible care while paying more dollars.

My point with Medicare expansion is that in spite of your lack of knowledge about it. It has evolved to become very efficient agency......Yes the very system that is run by government employees. No need to reinvent the wheel. The system is proven to control cost and reduce waste. Is it perfect? No. Is there room for improvement? Yes.

• The CBO has predicted that the rising cost of private insurance will continue to outstrip Medicare for the next 30 years. The private insurance equivalent of Medicare would cost almost 40 percent more in 2022 for a typical 65-year old.

NeoTrader said:
"the main thing would be to end regulatory stupidity and make insurance companies in much bigger

That would help bring costs down, but the main thing would be to end regulatory stupidity and make insurance companies in much bigger numbers to compete. Less red tape + more competition = Even lowers costs and more quality.

Unfortunately, these have become ideas that are so far fetched, that it is virtually impossible to put them into effect.

You left out the the second part this which I quoted above. So, you admit that your solution is unachievable.

So, basically, you defend a system that will be forced down the throat of Americans and you already anticipate that they will have to use their ingenuity to come up with solutions so that they will have ample choices aside from that system. (Presumably, because the system is crap, otherwise, why would they need to come up with solutions for this?)

I don't see any contradiction here. Innovation is in our DNA. I'm not straightjacketing the single payer system to a rigid model without room for improvement. It might even spur collaboration with government. If someone has a good idea and can prove outcomes folks will listen. The way I view single payer healthcare is essentially catastrophic coverage that every individual in a society is protected by coverage and aren't bankrupted by illness, denied care for chronic conditions, or hedge seeking care because of cost and die of a heart attack. One of the major outcomes of the ACA (Obamacare) was that it mandated preventive care for the insured. This in itself saved thousands of lives. I would like to see much more emphasis on prevention including nutrition and psychological counseling.

 

[CaptainObvious]

Bernie has a plan for Joe LunchBucket, it's bad news and really bad news. The bad news is his economic policies will have you in the unemployment line. The really bad news is you will have medicare replacing the healthcare you lost with your job. Wait, that's good news, right? Well, not really. Medicare isn't free so your unemployment check should just about cover the cost, you won't have the money to purchase a supplement, many hospitals will go belly up which means you wait, and wait, and wait some more to see the doc. Other than that, it's all good.

 

[NeoTrader]

This basically describes the private alternative we have in our healthcare system today with big insurance cos. in full control. It is an option that is a proven failure in terms of outcomes and exorbitant costs as I have cited in my first post. Ask anyone who has had to deal with insurance claims in the US- obfuscation of cost for services rendered with umpteen providers trying to collect for services- and in some cases not even provided.

The system is inaccessible to many because cost are spiraling out of control. The wealthy already are paying out of pocket for superior care not to mention futuristic treatment options for the mega rich which insurance will never cover. Americans are frustrated with inferior and inaccessible care while paying more dollars.

My point with Medicare expansion is that in spite of your lack of knowledge about it. It has evolved to become very efficient agency......Yes the very system that is run by government employees. No need to reinvent the wheel. The system is proven to control cost and reduce waste. Is it perfect? No. Is there room for improvement? Yes.

• The CBO has predicted that the rising cost of private insurance will continue to outstrip Medicare for the next 30 years. The private insurance equivalent of Medicare would cost almost 40 percent more in 2022 for a typical 65-year old.

NeoTrader said:
"the main thing would be to end regulatory stupidity and make insurance companies in much bigger


You left out the the second part this which I quoted above. So, you admit that your solution is unachievable.



I don't see any contradiction here. Innovation is in our DNA. I'm not straightjacketing the single payer system to a rigid model without room for improvement. It might even spur collaboration with government. If someone has a good idea and can prove outcomes folks will listen. The way I view single payer healthcare is essentially catastrophic coverage that every individual in a society is protected by coverage and aren't bankrupted by illness, denied care for chronic conditions, or hedge seeking care because of cost and die of a heart attack. One of the major outcomes of the ACA (Obamacare) was that it mandated preventive care for the insured. This in itself saved thousands of lives. I would like to see much more emphasis on prevention including nutrition and psychological counseling.

That would help bring costs down, but the main thing would be to end regulatory stupidity and make insurance companies in much bigger numbers to compete. Less red tape + more competition = Even lowers costs and more quality.

Unfortunately, these have become ideas that are so far fetched, that it is virtually impossible to put them into effect. But, this could at least show a direction in which to go. Contrary to the current "accepted" ideas that don't work and never will work, because they are just more of the same that actually created the problems I mentioned(more regulation increasing government's role in healthcare, etc...)

You can go on pretending I didn't right this all you want to keep living your fantasy. Single Payer doesn't work. Never has and never will.
You tried to change the subject by stating that single payer could be "catastrophic insurance". The two things have absolutely nothing to do with each other. And catastrophic insurance is a very good idea which again fits perfectly with what I wrote: Less regulation leads to more competition, which leads to greater number of choices, including hiring only catastrophic insurance, if one wants to. And this is not hard to achieve. During the time I lived in Austria, I had a private insurance for catastrophic situations and emergency for €90,00/month. Which covered me and my wife.

This doesn't exist in Brazil. Why? Because insurance companies are forbidden to sell this type of insurance because of regulation. Insurers are forced to offer "minimum coverage" which naturally makes costs be much higher than it otherwise would be. The poorest, which would benefit the most from this type of coverage don't have access to it. And it is all justified by politicians that say that they force insurers to offer minimum coverage to "protect them". Essentially condemning the poor to be stuck with the crappy single payer system from government.

But, again, don't change the subject. This has absolutely nothing to do with single payer, which is terrible idea, since it is a monopoly.

 

[WeToddDid2]

Bernie will change that.

Supplements will be required to be paid monthly and triple the current amount?

 

[piezoe]

Why don't all doctors accept Medicare payments?

Bernie gonna fix that too?

nearly all do provided they are in a specialty that treats patients that qualify for medicare.

 

[piezoe]

They have no choice? Those who have achieved enough to become a doctor or those truly capable of becoming a doctor are smart enough to have tons of other choices.

Can you name just one other choice? Just one!