Home | About | Donate

'I Can't Afford That': Trapped and Injured in a Subway Station, Woman Begged Bystanders Not to Call Ambulance Due to Expense


#81

Obvious origin? There you go again, with your projected assumptions.

I’d say the clear origins are those screaming about how they don’t want their tax dollars paying for someone else’s health care - that person being the “leech” - the “welfare queen” - the lazy dregs of society - while they are the responsible contributors - and nothing could be further from the truth.

The people who support improved, expanded Medicare for ALL - meaning most Americans - who you obviously don’t respect as having enough intelligence to understand that single payer isn’t “free” - understand that Medicare is funded by tax dollars. Because it’s the tax dollars THEY pay. So the problem with understanding how it’s paid for - isn’t with those who support it.

You should really give up the act at Common Dreams on single payer. You and your team are far more transparent to far more readers than you realize.


#82

You haven’t read the bill or you don’t understand what it does and does not do. For one thing the bill its self is not complete, some of your claims are impossible because it hasn’t been decided yet. Don’t take my word for it but you don’t have the big picture on this. I know the propaganda being posted but very few facts.


#83

That’s the nature of voting. If you don’t like his appointees, get someone else elected.

If you think you’ve made an argument to stay with the U.S. health care system instead of Canadian or Australian style single-payer, you’ve got a long way to go with the majority of the American people living in the real world with the current system, as is.

I haven’t assassinated your character either - you are the one making (what you obviously think are your little clever) yet quite clearly snide swipes at mine. And in every post - with you clearly obsessed with pursuing me with nasty personal attacks as a single payer advocate. Along with other members of your little gang from the insurance and pharmaceuticals.

You will not defeat us with your online games. Many readers see through what you are doing, and for whom, far more often than you think. You actually deepen people’s resolve to achieve the kind of real change you oppose. For reasons you don’t state.


#84

You posted to me saying my post was inaccurate when it was yours that was inaccurate. How about you do your investigations, and I’ll do mine.

I said nothing of the kind.


#85

You and your pals love to write in generalities because if you were required to be specific or stick to facts, you wouldn’t have any argument.

Again, your real problem with single payer isn’t anything you’re willing to honestly state.


#86

Now you’re literally trolling. This is what I posted:

That’s the nature of voting. If you don’t like his appointees, get someone else elected.

If you think you’ve made an argument to stay with the U.S. health care system instead of Canadian or Australian style single-payer, you’ve got a long way to go with the majority of the American people living in the real world with the current system, as is.

I haven’t assassinated your character either - you are the one making (what you obviously think are your little clever) yet quite clearly snide swipes at mine. And in every post - with you clearly obsessed with pursuing me with nasty personal attacks as a single payer advocate. Along with other members of your little gang from the insurance and pharmaceuticals.

You will not defeat us with your online games. Many readers see through what you are doing, and for whom, far more often than you think. You actually deepen people’s resolve to achieve the kind of real change you oppose. For reasons you don’t state.


#87

We all want good health care Owl, I as much as anyone, That was my job. When an improvement is available I’ll be the first to vote for it.


#88

If you don’t think single payer is “an improvement” over our current system, I have nothing else to discuss with you. You’re literally in outer space. And I didn’t create that characterization - you just did with such an absurd statement.


#89

Fine with me.


#90

Really? You’re the one who’s been relentlessly pursuing me on this board - along with your little gang team - on single payer. I haven’t been seeking conversation with you, “health care advocate.”

One thing I’ll say to any other readers, at this juncture, though: communicating with posters such as fern strengthen my conviction that it is utterly futile to continue voting for corporate Democrats. I’ve concluded as much, regardless, because they do not intend to ever to go to a single payer Medicare for All system in the genuine sense. But this kind of reinforces it again and again and again.

Hey, let them lose to Trump again in 2020; that seems to be their choice.


#91

Don’t post to me again.


#92

Why not? You just posted to me.


#93

P.S. Amazon dot com Genius: You mention the cost of the ambulance. All brought down by single payer. The evidence is in every other wealthy developed nation with single payer - what is normal everywhere else - how much health care costs there - and how much it costs here. That point is further backed by our own non-partisan Congressional Budget Office. (But one supposes you know far more than they do, as well, thanks-be to Jeff Bezos!) And even when so widely recognized and accepted as FACT - like, theory of evolution (yeah, you nevertheless, go with ‘intelligent design!’)


#94

I make a statement that is a little different. I have reasons to doubt that single payer would be an improvement over our current system. I am pretty sure that our current system could be improved in a free market way that would be, in point of cost and service to patients, better than what is.

Take a study of state governments trying to come up with their share of the money to pay for Medicaid. It is a struggle every session. And Medicaid always shorts paying the doctor and the hospital, hence why so few doctors are willing to take one as a patient. That is what Single Payer would look like, whatever level of government is paying for it, whether it is California’s plan currently on the ballot or your proposed H.R. 676.
- Sen. Bernie talks about ‘Medicare for all’. I jestingly call it ‘Medicaid for all’.

For the fun value …

Not too hard to find a few. Neil Young and William Shatner, by choosing to live in the USA instead of Canada, have traded their health care system for ours.

Check, BarnOwl, with the Eco-socialists on this site. As much as they might personally favor socialism and single-payer, they would also be the first to assert that first we have to eat right and purge pollutants and dangerous objects from our lives. Staying healthy comes before access to a doctor. Not as a matter of policy priorities, but in day-to-day choices.


#95

I don’t know how you have reasons to doubt that single payer would be an improvement over our current system if it means 35-45k Americans would NOT die every year for lack of health care, and, 600k would NOT go into medical bankruptcy (along with the high numbers of homelessness created, as a result - it’s a leading cause) - along with the host of anxieties and fears that plague most Americans - I daresay, minimally, 65% who support single payer Medicare for all - because they no longer would have to live with these issues, that, I guess, you don’t - and as a minority of privileged.

The Medicare for ALL model is NOT “Medicaid for ALL.” As you point out, doctors and hospitals are not sufficiently reimbursed - and in many cases, it is health care in name only because people can either not find doctors within the system, or, not find doctors in time, or, the corruption in the system illegally excludes their coverage when they are legally entitled to coverage but unable to obtain the representation to fight for what is supposed to be theirs, and by law.

That being said, I in no way oppose Medicaid expansion - it saves lives. Make no mistake about this.

But, Medicare is a positive model, in part, because there ARE doctors and hospitals who ARE sufficiently reimbursed (compared to Medicaid, at least). It is also NOT contingent on a poverty model - meaning that you are flushing money down the drain (as in Medicaid) making people work the equivalent of a second job just keeping their Medicaid going because of the corruption and bureaucracy and 19th C Dickensian thinking built into the fabric of such a poverty model like system.

You wouldn’t believe (just for starters) the trees that are dying for Medicaid (if you don’t believe what people have to go through to maintain it - or if, when they can’t - it’s like the death penalty - the wheels kept turning for Troy Davis no matter what he tried to say or do. That’s the nature of the Wizard of Oz - the mysterious little man hiding behind the curtain - or, in the case of some states - their so-called “Health Care Authorities.”)

Bernie’s bill S1804 is NOT Medicaid for All. It doesn’t rise to the gold standard of HR676 - for example, it still maintains the Medicaid model for the elderly - which is abhorrent - but it is a huge step forward for the United States, including beyond a so-called overall Medicaid expansion by state.

Medicaid has monetary issues exactly because it is not a Medicare for all model, it maintains the bureaucratic poverty policing/19c Dickensian fake moralism and assessments/waste - and - also because it doesn’t reimburse doctors sufficiently. You get what you pay for - in more ways than one. Paying less often costs more. It’s unreal how much more people are willing to pay (especially in the GOP and corporate DP wing) in order to pay less to maintain some false sense of superiority and what boils down to, as, an apartheid medical system.

Apartheid is NOT medically or scientifically sound as a system.

You are quite wrong about Neil Young. He is a progressive and strong supporter of a Canadian style single payer Medicare for All model in the United States. It is one of the reasons he endorsed and supported Bernie Sanders for president. He lives in the United States NOT because he supports our health care system - he opposes our health care system. He lives in the United States because he’s wealthy and can afford to - including our health care system. As for William Shatner, I don’t know him as well - but he doesn’t live here BECAUSE of our health care - he lives here as virtually a U.S. actor who can afford to. Canadian and Australian conservatives SUPPORT their single payer health care systems. It’s not about “left/right.” It’s about plain common sense. The same is true of European conservatives on their single payer style health care systems.

We stand alone in the world in this insanity. It’s time for the private insurance cartels to GO. Way past time. They’ve outlived their business “life-cycle,” so to speak. No business is meant to live forever and their time has long come. We shouldn’t be artificially keeping them alive sucking on the proverbial teat of the Nanny State. We should be pulling the plug - and letting them go.

I agree that state single payer cannot as effectively cover costs and care as a national system. We need national single payer. However, it’s kind of like pot legalization. As it passes in one state, it will spread to others, with legislation ultimately at the federal level. So people should fight for, and support, state efforts to get it passed, however imperfect. We’re not talking about utopia - we never were. But we’re talking about a YUGE step forward for the United States - into the 21st Century where the rest of our allies already - and have long -resided.

There is no real debate that it works. This is like debating theory of evolution. There’s no debate. It’s fact.

As for eco-socialists - the Green Party is a party of eco-socialists. They support national single payer. It’s part of their party platform. And - they don’t take corporate monies - which is why they can be “good” on their pledge to go into elected office and represent this position without betraying voters - like the corporate Dems have.

I am all for puuurging pollutants, etc. I don’t see why these are competing issues. I don’t know any corporate free candidate who supports single payer Medicare for all and doesn’t support environmental issues, as well.

Nor does supporting single payer mean that you don’t take responsibility for your health. But our current system prevents people from doing so, entirely. People can’t get preventive health care exams - mammograms, colonoscopies, glaucoma tests, periodontal cleanings. This is taking responsibility - IF - you can afford it. Most people cannot.

It doesn’t sound like you have really experienced people close to you -or in your own life - having to struggle with getting dire medical care in the current medical system. The wide-spread suffering, the deaths of loved ones, co-workers, neighbors. This is not a game. I don’t know anyone who could NOT support single payer if they were truly familiar with the realities of the American health care system. It is grotesque, inhumane, murderous,utterly immoral - and catastrosphic. It is also a parasite on our free market system and economy. It is BAD for business - large and small. 3 US auto manufacturers released public statements that they would rather make cars in CANADA because of their excellent single payer health care system - it costs them, as employers LESS. And I don’t know any Canadians who would trade theirs for ours. Or Australians - or any other UHC nation - as in Europe, for example. They look at our society in terms of health care - and they rightly see TOTAL MADNESS.


#96

I never said that. In fact, I will put the question: If single payer is so good, why won’t it work just as well for a small place, like Vermont, or Nova Scotia, or the Bahamas, as you claim it would if only instituted in the whole UK, or France, or the USA?

A side question: You and many others point to how much lower health costs are in UK, France, Canada, Australia, etc. How much did their single payer lower their costs from what the costs had been before it was established? [I read in the history books that the U.K. had to put off setting up their system for a few years, until they were able to get a loan from the USA. It apparently cost a lot of money to set up. …]


#97

Well, I guess I misunderstood - what I thought implied more insight with respect to one of your remarks. (I like to assume the best in others, but sadly, that’s not always the case.) But … one example of why state single payer is not as effective as single payer at the national level - is the fact that a number of states don’t have income tax. And remember, we want to win - and you don’t want us to … right?

On your last point - coincidentally, there is a telling comparison. And I bet you know about that too. You see, when the U.S. started out on its present disastrous course, thanks be to Richard Nixon (who is eternally burning in hell, napalm-style - good enough!), Canada was starting single payer.

At that time, we were basically twins in terms of health care.

Here’s how we compared after 35 years.

You have no argument. You lose again. And … what’s more - we Will win.

Ciao.


#98

If a single state adopted single payer, I expect that a state with an income tax is more likely than one without. BTW, you show your interest, (obsession?) with economic equality and redistribution.

I somewhat favor some deep blue state adopting single payer. You hope that it will serve as a leading good example, and other states will adopt it. I hope and expect that it will serve as a bad example, showing how incompetent American bureaucracy can be, and other states will avoid doing the same thing.

On my last question, last time, everyone points to other (single payer) countries paying less for health care than Americans do. I asked a narrow question. My guess is that should America adopt a single payer, that it won’t do anything for costs, except maybe cap their growth. I doubt that the implementers of single payer will be able to reduce America’s healthcare costs from the current 17% of GDP.

I started my comments questioning the belief that “if only America had single payer, then” a competent rescue squad would have shown up at that subway terminal within minutes, whisked the woman to quality care at a hospital, and not cost her anything.

Here are two articles:
4/28/2018 Health Canada Single payer
Commentary: Canada’s Health Care Is Abysmal. Why Would We Copy It?


Note that the article doesn’t say that Canadians are outright rejecting their national Medicare system.
But they are rejecting a fundamental tenet of it, wishing for an alternative, without going abroad, when they need it.

7-11-2018
Why Does the Left Want Universal Health Care? Britain’s Is on Its Deathbed


Not only do single payer advocates argue that all of the NHS’s problems stem from the Tories and not appropriating enough money for the NHS…