Actually single payer is a private healthcare system with the government as the insurance company. Private healthcare companies still exist in this system. We do need to move to Medicare for all.
Get The Super Greeedy Wealth Extractors Out Of Health Care. We Need Single Payer NOW!
- Thread starter PoliTalker
- Start date
Actually single payer is a private healthcare system with the government as the insurance company. Private healthcare companies still exist in this system. We do need to move to Medicare for all.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello and welcome distraff,
If we could start from scratch I would favor a completely government-run system where the government owns the facilities, hires all the health care workers. I would still like to look at that, but I doubt many would have the dedication to principle required to make that transition, so the next logical step is Medicare For All. We can see huge savings by cutting out the profit-taking and wasted efforts of big insurance.
If we could start from scratch I would favor a completely government-run system where the government owns the facilities, hires all the health care workers. I would still like to look at that, but I doubt many would have the dedication to principle required to make that transition, so the next logical step is Medicare For All. We can see huge savings by cutting out the profit-taking and wasted efforts of big insurance.
There is a huge transition that HAS to occur...and WILL occur.
As you suggest, it is best done in a more moderate way...rather than through great upheaval.
The people who oppose this are doing so mechanically. They will oppose all move toward sanity in the "healthcare for all" continuum.
Once the move to something akin to "medicare for all" is made...MOST people will see the economic benefit and will back it...and will back the future moves to even greater sanity on the issue.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Frank,
I wonder if it would be possible to make the big transition to total government health care over time by setting up a government system which initially handled only the birth of newborns, then continued to meet their needs are they grow up, gradually changing into a system which met their needs as children, and later as adults. Phase out old health care as the people age out. Phase in, and mature, the new health care system as people grow and mature.
OB GYNs are a total rip-off anyway, operating a complete racket. Childbirth should normally be initially handled by well trained Midwives, who are skilled at knowing when a birth becomes high risk, at which point they would refer to Doctors. It is a tremendous waste for the whole nation to pay for highly skilled surgeons (OB) to perform natural childbirth, something they are absolutely NOT trained in and have very little expertise at.
Since we normally utilize very expensive surgeons to do natural childbirth, (not normally surgery or medicine, but a natural process,) they often perform unnecessary surgeries (C-Section,) which cost far more than natural childbirth. These C-Sections also often result in complications CAUSED BY THE DOCTORS. That really comes as no surprise. If your primary tool is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail.
Locate birthing facilities near the OR, have the surgeons ready and on call if needed, but let Midwives do what they specialize at, are trained for, and are best at. There is a huge savings available right there, which we can use to lower our cost of health care more in line with other nations who use a system just like this, pay less for their health care, and have a better outcome with fewer deaths at or near birth.
It has been documented that women who give birth naturally experience a feeling of empowerment. And the babies are healthier. Also, once a C-Section is performed, it almost guarantees that subsequent births must be done by C-Section. How lucrative for OB/GYNs.
I wonder if it would be possible to make the big transition to total government health care over time by setting up a government system which initially handled only the birth of newborns, then continued to meet their needs are they grow up, gradually changing into a system which met their needs as children, and later as adults. Phase out old health care as the people age out. Phase in, and mature, the new health care system as people grow and mature.
OB GYNs are a total rip-off anyway, operating a complete racket. Childbirth should normally be initially handled by well trained Midwives, who are skilled at knowing when a birth becomes high risk, at which point they would refer to Doctors. It is a tremendous waste for the whole nation to pay for highly skilled surgeons (OB) to perform natural childbirth, something they are absolutely NOT trained in and have very little expertise at.
Since we normally utilize very expensive surgeons to do natural childbirth, (not normally surgery or medicine, but a natural process,) they often perform unnecessary surgeries (C-Section,) which cost far more than natural childbirth. These C-Sections also often result in complications CAUSED BY THE DOCTORS. That really comes as no surprise. If your primary tool is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail.
Locate birthing facilities near the OR, have the surgeons ready and on call if needed, but let Midwives do what they specialize at, are trained for, and are best at. There is a huge savings available right there, which we can use to lower our cost of health care more in line with other nations who use a system just like this, pay less for their health care, and have a better outcome with fewer deaths at or near birth.
It has been documented that women who give birth naturally experience a feeling of empowerment. And the babies are healthier. Also, once a C-Section is performed, it almost guarantees that subsequent births must be done by C-Section. How lucrative for OB/GYNs.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Flash,
When the primary focus is on making money, delivering health care becomes the secondary focus. A government health care system would not close a local facility because it is not profitable. The purpose would be to deliver good health care for the community, and to remain committed to the community, whatever that takes.
When the primary focus is on making money, delivering health care becomes the secondary focus. A government health care system would not close a local facility because it is not profitable. The purpose would be to deliver good health care for the community, and to remain committed to the community, whatever that takes.
Certainly an idea to consider, Poli. EVERY idea has to be considered.
MY FAVORITE: Fund new doctors and nurses the way we fund new officers for the military. Schools where students are paid to attend (and get excellent grades)...with a period of service due upon graduation. Government clinics for medial events (often minor) that send people to emergency rooms...staffed by these people...many of whom may decide to become "lifers", as military officers do.
I also think GOVERNMENT ought to be in competition with private providers and drug companies. If we have to order drugs from China or India...so be it.
I am delighted that new drugs are being developed...but if the ultimate objective is to make MONEY for the few with huge capitalistic investments...then screw it. If we have to live with the drugs we have...and die a bit earlier...let that be. In the meantime, we can have government funded drug development competing with private companies.
The cost of drugs is absurd...AS IS THE COST OF UNNECESSARY TREATMENT...which will decrease markedly in government operated facilities.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Frank,
I absolutely agree. Service to your country can and should include medical service.
And I also agree on having the government produce drugs. The problem with big pharma is they don't try to cure anything. Have you ever heard of a new drug coming out that cures something? No. They are all treatments, remedies. Makes sense. Big Pharma is in business to make money. If they went around curing diseases, they would work themselves out of a job. It is in their better financial interest to avoid creating any cures. Remedies are far more lucrative than cures, so that's what they produce. I would not be surprised to learn that if they accidentally created a cure, that they would shelve it and never release it. They would keep it a total secret. Worse yet, I would not put it past them to release new viruses upon the public for which only they have the remedy. What is to prevent them from doing this? Would it even be illegal? Maybe it has already been done.
I absolutely agree. Service to your country can and should include medical service.
And I also agree on having the government produce drugs. The problem with big pharma is they don't try to cure anything. Have you ever heard of a new drug coming out that cures something? No. They are all treatments, remedies. Makes sense. Big Pharma is in business to make money. If they went around curing diseases, they would work themselves out of a job. It is in their better financial interest to avoid creating any cures. Remedies are far more lucrative than cures, so that's what they produce. I would not be surprised to learn that if they accidentally created a cure, that they would shelve it and never release it. They would keep it a total secret. Worse yet, I would not put it past them to release new viruses upon the public for which only they have the remedy. What is to prevent them from doing this? Would it even be illegal? Maybe it has already been done.
Govt is not required to charge enough to cover costs so they can defeat competition.
But there is no constitutional authority for the govt to be in the healthcare business.
For many healthcare professionals the primary focus is not on making money but that is an important incentive. When that incentive does not exist there is little motivation to do anything as can be seen at some VA facilities. In countries like France, with relatively good healthcare, you periodically read about doctors going on strike because of pay and poor working conditions. This illustrates changing the system does not necessarily improve the conditions. People do not suddenly become altruistic and care only about good healthcare because their profit incentive is removed. And, there is little innovation.
"Doctors are angry that they are being overworked to compensate for a serious staff shortage, which currently sees around 30 percent of hospital practitioner jobs sitting vacant."
https://www.thelocal.fr/20160926/frances-hospital-doctors-stage-week-long-strike
http://blog.independent.org/2015/12/23/french-doctors-lose-strike-against-free-health-care/
"Thousands of French doctors went on strike on Tuesday to protest against a new health reform modelled on Britain's NHS system, and which they say will make them victims of state red tape. The GPs and specialists began an eight-day walkout in protest against changes that would adopt the principle of "free at the point of delivery", a system the NHS adopted at its birth in 1948."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...s-strike-in-protest-at-NHS-style-reforms.html
Unrelated but interesting:
"Why Do Patients Stop Dying When Doctors Go on Strike?"
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...do-patients-stop-dying-when-doctors-go-strike
Medicaid is an additional 576b. And yes we do overpay dramatically.
Largely eradicated: Smallpox, malaria, polio, hookworm, measles......
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Celticguy,
That can be arranged.
Especially if it lowers the cost of health care and delivers a better result by being goal-oriented to do so.
That can be arranged.
Especially if it lowers the cost of health care and delivers a better result by being goal-oriented to do so.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Flash,
In America, the people fear the government.
In France, the government fears the people.
In America, the people fear the government.
In France, the government fears the people.
If Medicare and Medicaid overpaid dramatically most of the students in medical school would not going into specializations instead of primary care.
But they all face similar healthcare problems--keeping costs down and quality care.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
What modern for-profit Pharma corporation accomplished anything like that?
The guy that cured polio refused to profit from it, said his creation 'belonged to the people.'
And where are the cures for those diseases? Again, all we can do is treat them. They keep coming back. How convenient for the people who sell the treatments for profit.
Sirthinksalot
Verified User
PoliTalker,
I don't understand why some on left willfully ignore the profit motive. If pharma companies have no chance at making a profit, there will be no new drugs. Do you have any idea how much it costs to bring a new drug to market? Or how much regulatory red tape there is? Not to mention the majority of drug candidates never get approved for one reason or another. When that happens, all the resources a company has put into development go down the toilet.
It would be nice if the highly educated scientists working in the pharmaceutical industry did it out of the good of their hearts, but people need to make a living. Even "greedy" scientists.
New drugs are mostly conceived by colleges or private labs. If they look promising, the drug company takes them over. https://successfulstudent.org/best-drug-design-colleges/ Our tax dollars and tuition create drugs. That argument about the cost of making drugs is fake. A successful drug makes mega billions of dollars.
As an example, Humira profits went up in 2017 by 15 percent to 18.5 billion. Not a bad year.
As an example, Humira profits went up in 2017 by 15 percent to 18.5 billion. Not a bad year.
Last edited:
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Flash,
Which is why health care should be focused on the goal of actually providing the most effective health care at the lowest cost; instead of focusing on earning the greatest profits by providing whatever healthcare they can get the market to accept.
Which is why health care should be focused on the goal of actually providing the most effective health care at the lowest cost; instead of focusing on earning the greatest profits by providing whatever healthcare they can get the market to accept.
here is what wealth gives you in the only industrialized country that does not have universal care. https://www.alternet.org/personal-h...-earns-you-15-extra-years-life-span-over-poor You get 15 years and get to watch the poor die.