Home | About | Donate

Spreading 'Like Wildfire': Majority of Americans—Including 74% of Democrats—Now Support Single-Payer


#61

No, what we will point out is that by not participating you will be foisting your costs on the rest of us when you have a serious health event and can’t pay for it but get your healthcare nonetheless. You simply want to be a freeloader. We want to minimize the costs to all of us and equally share the burden of healthcare. Citizenship in a civilized society comes with some responsibilities. People like you are part of the problem.

Your ad hominen attacks are a form of logical fallacy, the most common form, in fact, and carry no weight around here.


#62

Oh right, and it use to be excellent care, far better than most single payer plans. Have you visited a consulting agency about your situation, sometimes there are ways to adjust for eligibility without resorting or things like divorce. You just have to know what they are and get some guidance if people are not helping as they should. I know what you mean there should be a way forward that doesn’t result in damage to your health.


#63

if someone suggested a divorce to a vet as part of an entrance/benefits interview, that someone should not be employed any more. That’s a pretty gross ethical violation. Generally, if you’re a vet that’s not earning income and you can’t be carried on a spouse’s pan, then you’ll be approved. Half the patients that go there are double dipping on insurances–a lot are on medicare, too–suggesting they don’t even need the care at the VA (one of my pet peeves, actually) But yeah, usually a trip to see the patient benefits admin will result in a solution. If you don’t have access to medical and you’re a veteran, the VA will see you as an indigent patient.


#64

I’m not a Vet but I had to arrange care for family that were. I know at one point it became difficult to manage both Tri-care and Medicare. The preference though was Tri-care. One medication under Medicare was a $75 dollar co-pay, with Tri-care it $3.50.

Sometimes you can separate assets and there are others that are perfectly legal.


#65

A few, to borrow you vernacular, not so obvious facts would useful here. Specifically, that prices are beasts altogether different from costs and it’s vitally important keep the two concepts separate.

I’ll focus on MRIs as an example. The installed cost, including facilities, of a brand new, state-of-the-art 3 Tesla MRI machine can reach $5,000,000. The typical life of an MRI is 11.4 years, or 136.8 months. If you 100% finance an MRI at 8% APR, you’ll be paying about $33.5k per month to pay for the machine.

If you perform 5 scans a day on average, you’d need to charge $223 per scan to pay for the machine. If it costs you, say, $100 per scan for a tech to run the machine ($500 per day – more than those techs get paid I’m guessing) and $400 per scan for a professional radiologist or physician to read the scan ($2,000 per day), then your “cost” to have an MRI machine and run it and read its results is about $723 per scan. Mind you this is for a brand new state-of-the-art machine. Most machines are not nearly as costly.

Meanwhile, the average price for an MRI scan in the US is $2,611, nearly four times the cost of the most up-to-date state-of-the-art machine.

Don’t be so quick to buy the argument that these machines and their support systems are nearly as costly as the prices charged for them.


#66

“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 most law under democratic government works: a majority vote for laws all must follow.

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.

And now a majority want healthcare for all - minority view notwithstanding.

Oh but wait - you want ANY law to be voluntary? Then American government’s not for you. Beat it.


#67

see my reply to FightThePoorer. Fraternally…


#68

Let’s see:

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!


#69

More accurate polls show Democratic support at over 80%.


#70

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.


#71

Do you actually not understand the principle that adding non healthcare personnel and non healthcare related processes to the mix drives up costs?
Seriously?
Clearly you’ve never run a business.

For me this isn’t a hypothetical point.
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 premiums and co-pays.
These professionals simply had lower costs and were willing to pass at least some of that on.
One after another these folks were forced out of business as the hilariously named ACA encouraged/ forced the industry to consolidate into bigger and bigger corporations. They either retired of submitted to closing private practice to become drones in a large organization

I also worked on medical office management software for 3-4 years that had to run in 12 countries.
“Single payer” is a nightmare. As screwed up and corrupt the U.S. insurance system is, it was a piece of cake compared to Canada and the U.K., for example.
We literally had programmers quit to find easier work when we started those modules because of the insane rules required to bill the governments.

We also had team members from those countries with personal experience with wonderful government healthcare. When a family member in those countries was diagnosed with something serious, they brought them to the States for treatment. We had a Canadian team member whose mother was diagnosed with a serious heart condition. She was told to stay in bed for the next few months until she could be dealt with. Another team member had a mother in the U.K. who was found to have breast lumps. She was told it would be six months before they could proceed with treatment. Needles to say, both moms were immediately brought here for treatment.

Fact: Your desire to game the system notwithstanding, unnecessary processes in any system drive up costs.

It’s a fundamental law of life and physics that friction (unnecessary people/processes) added to any system increases energy (money in this case) demands and/or lowers output.
Period.


#72

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?


#73

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.


#74

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.


#75

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.


#76

I simply wish to be able to buy the insurance I want.
I’d like to buy a catastrophic policy with a large deductible and reasonable payments. But I can’t.
Oh, that’s right. Your claim about me leeching off the system is a smoke screen.
It’s not at all about me taking care of me and my family.
I’m supposed work my ass off to stay healthy, which I actually do, so I can pay for you.

Private insurance is a REALLY low bar to beat.
It doesn’t matter if volunteers manage the plan for free if the total true costs (including tax collection and compliance) are high.
I simply don’t want it.

What makes you think I had a failed brain surgery? Do I write like a “progressive”?

And why shouldn’t I have to pay for what I need?
Seriously, why shouldn’t we have to pay for what we get out of life?
Do you really think that you should be able to acquire the things you want for less than the costs?

My goal is to get the costs as low as possible to make healthcare, for example, more affordable for everyone who needs it.

My doctors didn’t “skedaddle”. They were run out of business by the Fascist combination of big business and government making private practice untenable.
.


#77

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.


#78

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.


#79

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.


#80

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.