see my reply to FightThePoorer. Fraternally…
Spreading 'Like Wildfire': Majority of Americans—Including 74% of Democrats—Now Support Single-Payer
No advertising expenditures needed; no wasted money on office space/skyscrapers, company vehicles, and other wasteful perks; no ceo’s or salespeople (travel, meal, hotel) costs; no duplicate paperwork; no wasteful stock buybacks to enhance management; no incentive to deny applicants or claims; no stress about changing jobs and losing health care; no spendy co-pays on doctor visits or drugs; no need to decipher and challenge the byzantine bills which say your insurance didn’t cover such and such costs during your multi-day stay in the hospital.
No thanks. Give me some of that old time free market religion. It’s so efficient!
More accurate polls show Democratic support at over 80%.
Just because the majority of the American people want something, what makes us think that our so-called leaders will listen and consider giving it to us? The health scam industry owns more of our politicians than we the people do and these politicians will keep doing the reverse Robin Hood thing (stealing from the poor and giving to their masters) until there is nothing left for them to steal. The majority of Americans wast Marijuana legalized too, you think the DEA is ever going to let that happen? What we the people want is pretty far down on the list of what the so-called leadership is ever going to allow to happen. Get used to it.
But why would 43% oppose it? I understand why the 25% of Americans who are rich assholes, Nazis, KKK or Libertarian government haters would oppose this. Like Pau Ryan, they just want to privatize everything. But what about the nearly 20% beyond them who oppose it? Does anyone who isn’t filthy rich really LIKE our crappy capitalist medical system? Why would they?
Well, the fourth circuit just wrecked Maryland’s attempt to facilitate price controls. Good thing the 2016 peace candidate’s nominees are filling the courts.
Do you not actually understand that, when administered through a single payer system that assures everyone has healthcare, that these costs also drive up savings in the form of avoided lost wages, avoided homelessness, avoided bankruptcies, avoided emergency room costs, avoided serious health episodes and other benefits?
You see, like so many who only focus on “costs” you never really ask or answer the related and equally important question, “As opposed to what?”
There is nothing in my comments that suggests I would be gaming the system. To the contrary, it is you who would game the system, by going uninsured and shifting the risk of paying for your future serious injury or disease on the rest of us.
You are right that unnecessary processes drive up costs. The same cannot be about costs necessarily incurred to garner greater savings.
This is only true with respect to unnecessary costs. Again, costs incurred to obtain greater savings do not lower output – in fact, they increase output.
As for running a business, I’ve run several, including a brief role as a senior manager in an HMO and self-insurance administrator, which I left because of the fundamentally immoral business model it uses. But, of course, your assertion to the contrary is simply another ad hominen attack.
After you claimed government insurance was inefficient (“famously efficient government spending”), RockyMountainView gave evidence that VA government administrative costs are highly efficient vs. private insurance.
No response from you, so, evidently - if you have a background in medical insurance - your claim was not just wrong, but fraudulent.
“Before RomneyCare wreaked havoc on the healthcare system, I routinely went to cash only doctors and dentists. The prices were quite a bit lower than what I would have paid in insurance pre-”
Gee, sorry that botched, $100,000 brain surgery you needed didn’t work out - but at least the cash-only doc skedaddled, so you’re only a ranting, drooling imbecile and don’t face medical bankruptcy on top of it.
In the absence of universal single payer healthcare, I’m actually rather ambivalent about letting you buy a catastrophic policy, provided you’re required to buy one and it’s sufficient to protect the rest of us from picking up the shortfalls in your coverage.
That said, using the private insurance market for insurance is a foolish way to do it, as insurance companies are, to use your vernacular, famously inefficient and drive up total costs for everyone. Their business model can’t survive unless they can underpay healthcare providers and overcharge the insured in order to carve a share of the healthcare money for themselves – not so with a Medicare-for-all/Single Payer Universal Health Care system.
As for paying for me, that won’t be happening. I intend to remain fully insured to the bitter end.
Then you should be all for a Medicare-for-all/Single Payer Universal Health Care system, instead of the system you argue for. It delivers health care at the lowest overall cost, with no one left out.
The simple solution to such a freeloader problem is to turn the ambulance around and have them dump FightThePower back home, to suffer and die for his (her?) earlier choices. Seems appropriate for someone who had the money back when and didn’t spend it on his (her?) healthcare. (the sarcasm is aimed at you, RockyMountainView)
Government provided healthcare has a different sort of ‘freeloader’ problem. There is a lot of Medicare and (worse) Medicaid fraud, fraud that the government agencies spend no money trying to combat. (Private insurance does spend money attempting to fight fraud.)
BTW, the god of our modern economy, John Maynard Keynes, once said in a different context “In the long run we are all dead.” So live life meaningfully while you can.
But see here,
Canadian Health Care Wait Times More Than Double In 25 Years, Report Finds
Canada has a ‘safety valve’. If the wait becomes unbearable they scrounge up the money and go get treated in the USA.
What nonsense. There are waiting lists because EVERYONE gets health care. Does this register on you? In the USA people who can not afford health care do not GET IT. If Canada said ok 2 million Canadians will no longer get health care then the waiting lists are gone.
As to the Canadians going to the USA for health Care more bull. It less 1 percent. There MORE AMERICANS going to Mexico and Canada for health care. In fact in Nova Scotia it estimated 50 percent of issued health care cards are faked. There no reason to fake a health care card if you are a Canadian. The fake cards are being used by Americans who can not afford care in the USA.
As to the Fraser institute they are a BS operation. They were specifically asked why that when making comparisons between the US and Canada and health care wait times they did not include Americans who could not afford care at all so did not go on a wait list. They replied it would “distort their numbers” . That outfit finds the results it wants to find through such chicanery. They are a right wing funded “think tank” much like those stupid "think tanks " funded by the Koch brothers in the USA.
“I simply wish to be able to buy the insurance I want.”
Back to your evident wish to pick and choose which government taxes you’ll pay:
“An approach so sane that I can’t be allowed to opt out of it?..I’ll not oppose ‘single payer’…as long as it’s…voluntary…Oh, we can’t allow choice on that can we?”
Nope. No more than you have “choice” about being taxed for military spending or traffic signs. That’s how law under democratic government works: a majority vote for laws all must obey, taxes all must pay.
You’re ok with missiles but don’t like stop signs?
Tough shit - a majority of elected rep’s decide the U.S. will be safer w/military spending; + a majority think U.S. drivers and pedestrians will be safer w/driving norms codified into law for which all are taxed - whether or not you think we need missiles or you “use” stop signs.
And now a majority of citizens want single payer health care, and may well press their elected reps for it - meaning all would pay, as w/military spending, traffic signs etc.
Oh but wait - maybe you want ANY law, any tax to be voluntary? Then American government’s not for you. Beat it.
“Canadian Health Care Wait Times-”
Yup, particularly for non-urgent care. And Canadians overwhelmingly support it anyway - probably because it led to their living longer, healthier lives; and because, across the border, they see Americans’ disgraceful health stats under private insurance.
“A new poll conducted by the Toronto-based Nanos Research points to overwhelming support — 86.2 percent — for strengthening public health care rather than expanding for-profit services.”
You missed an important point in the Fraser Institute yearly report. The wait time on the list has been getting worse, and has doubled in 25 years. Why is that? If healthcare works as well as advocates claim, why would the wait time be getting worse?
USAmerica has its own national provided healthcare, the VA and the Indian Health Service, and both are plagued with problems. The VA also has wait lists, hidden wait lists to nowhere. The VA hospital administrators who set those up weren’t fired; instead they got bonuses. Most people would not consider that a good way to run a public service. (Maybe you do…?)
Waiting exists in other national health services. I have read instances of it in Britain and Italy. One elderly man was scheduled for to receive a health procedure in a few months time. As the time neared the system rescheduled it for a few months further out. He may have realized then, or after one or two more occurrences of this, that the system had no intention of ever giving him the procedure.
Raised eyebrow. First I have heard of this, although in a sense not surprising. First question is “Why Nova Scotia?” If a person can’t afford healthcare in America, but can afford to travel, and to acquire a fake Canadian health-card, wouldn’t they go to New Brunswick or Quebec instead?
Years ago I exchanged posts with a person from Alberta. He said that when the plan was established in Alberta anyone who showed up for treatment was treated. Then they noticed masses of people coming up from Montana and issued health cards good only for residents of Alberta. He complained that Montanans came up because America doesn’t provide healthcare for the poor. My opinion is that so many people are willing to go out of their way to get something that’s ‘free’.
Nova Scotia, as a poorer province compared to the others, probably receives Federal money to help provide Canadian-Medicare, and it and its citizenry and doctors probably have an incentive to commit fraud against the rest of the Confederation.
Must be pleasant to ad-hominem dismiss research centers and their reports that you disagree with. … So sad when people can’t discuss things anymore because of accusations that this or that or some person is hopelessly biased and lying.
A better way of phrasing it is “If the program is so good, why must people be compelled to buy it?”
Two elements there,
- That it is good, &
- The price is right.
In the private sector it works all the time. Makers offer products like 8-track tapes, Beta video tapes, cellular phones, CDs, smaller floppy disks, thumb drives, digital cameras. If it adds value, at a good price, people buy it, otherwise it goes into the discard. 8-track tapes and Beta video tapes had a short product life, because they lost out to better products.
How good stuff works doesn’t transfer well over to collective majority-rule decision making. I know of only three ways to fix mistakes in the public system:
- Through the legislative or bureaucratic system. This might take Saul Alinsky-style protests. … You’re still working on that for military spending…
- Wide spread breaking the law, sometimes also known as ‘Civil Disobedience’. That and protests is how the military draft ended. Would revising marijuana laws have ever happened if everyone had obeyed the law, and there weren’t massive numbers of people, led by Cheech and Chong, disobeying the law?
If Single payer was such a good idea, then it would have happened by itself, like Google more or less taking over the search engine line of business, or it could be implemented by a state, like New Jersey copying Belgium. It wouldn’t need a national law making it happen.
The Fraser institute was founded for a very specific purpose. They advance an agenda of everything from our health Care system to our Public schools systems being privatized. They are funded by Corporations that see profit opportunites when such is done.
When it comes to “waiting lists” what they did in the USA was just DROP all of the persons who could not access health care because including them would drive waiting time averages WAY up and this is not the outcome they wanted, so they just did not count those people.
This in and of itself demonstrates their BIAS just as the Think Tanks that claim “lowering taxes to the rich increases GDP growth” are biased.
The fact remains over 86 percent of Canadians support our health care system whereas in the USA 74 percent of Americans want something like our system. Which system is more democratic and how is it that in the USA the MINORITY get to dictate the type of system US Citizens should have.
By the way , one of the single largest sources of revenues in many of our drug stores here in Vancouver is from US Citizens coming up by the bus load to buy drugs. In order to do that they have to see a Canadian Physician yet the for profit Health Care system and their paid for lackeys in Congress like to pretend this does not happen.
A bit like the Texas panhandle, where most people favor alcohol prohibition, but quite a few hop in the car, and drive across the county line to buy some…
- BTW, you misread the statistic in the story. That is 74% of Democrats support Single Payer. According to the article, it is a bare majority of all Americans. Their answer might change once they are reminded of how the costs play out, decrease in insurance premiums, big increase in taxes.
First, at least one segment of the US for profit Health Care system is willing. But it is blocked by US drug makers. Everyone knows about the buses. … One can look up the arguments of the drug makers against re-importation. I am pretty sure that I would not be persuaded by their arguments. BTW, I favor re-importation, and one reason I favor it is that it would induce US drug makers to negotiate harder against price breaks for Canada and Europe.
Take a look at these articles.
7-30-2001 Milton Friedman’s take on America’s Health system problems, worse than all-private or all-government
How to Cure Health Care
by Milton Friedman
Monday, July 30, 2001
“A Swiss system with no real enforcement, sloppy economic thinking, and no dynamic, consumer-driven insurance market? A Swiss system that replaces Swiss efficiency with American sentimentality? It didn’t work when it was called Obamacare. It won’t work when it’s called Trumpcare or Ryancare or McConnellcare, either.”
One thing that gets no more than a mention in the article is the “Essential Minimum Coverage” that a health insurance plan must provide. From what else is said in the article, I suspect that Essential Minimum Coverage is much smaller in Switzerland
than in the ACA, and that the Swiss have resisted rentiers’ efforts to increase the Essential Minimum Coverage.
Read more at:
excerpt = “Actually, I don’t think industry, with its connotation of private enterprise and exertion, is any longer the right word. The late great Joseph Rago of the Wall Street Journal foresaw that Obamacare would “convert insurers into government contractors in the business of fulfilling political demands.” Rago was arguing (against PolitiFact) that Obamacare did indeed represent a de facto “government takeover of health care,” even if it wasn’t overt nationalization.”
I suspect we have exchanged enough posts, and Common Dreams’ automatic system will tell us to stop.
“A bit like the Texas panhandle, where most people favor alcohol prohibition, but quite a few hop in the car, and drive across the county line to buy some.”
Good call: heck, it would be a LOT like the Texas panhandle, if 0.15 percent of the panhandle pop. crossed state lines to buy alcohol - plus that number was estimated by liquor stores.
0.15 percent…why, the system’s falling down around their gosh-darn ears and they still overwhelmingly support it and pay taxes for it. What the heck is…oh yea - increased life expectancy since it started, worse health outcomes in private insurance U.S. next door…
"By one estimate by a right-leaning Canadian think tank, there were 52,513 Canadians (0.15 percent of total population) who traveled outside of the country (not necessarily to the United States) to receive non-emergency medical care. This figure was reported in a survey that asked physicians, rather than patients themselves, to estimate how many patients traveled outside of the country. There is no information about exactly what procedure these patients may have received, and it did not ask specifically why the patients traveled outside of Canada for care.
“There is limited reliable information to support Trump’s claim. The most comprehensive report uses data from 20 years ago, and found that 90 out of 18,000 people surveyed for the Canadian National Population Health Survey said they had received health care in the United States in the previous 12 months… Trump’s exaggeration of this one data point to extrapolate a larger trend earns him Three Pinocchios.”
"A better way of phrasing it is ‘If the program is so good, why must people be compelled to buy it?’”
And that’s why you say all taxes should be voluntary. You don’t feel safer with that stop sign opposite the school. Heck, you don’t even drive, and it’s not your kids that cross the street to get to the school. So why should you be taxed for it?