You clearly don't understand the concept of insurance.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Republicans can't deal with medical care:
- Thread starter Supposn
- Start date
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Cheaper by half and get full coverage. We can fold the VA, Medicare, and Medicaid into national healthcare. If we have universal coverage, we do not need them.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
that's the same lie you gave us about Obamacare.....and yet my premiums doubled......
Medical treatment isn't a right. Those that believe it is likely believe that other things they refuse to do for themselves, but should be doing, is owed to them.
What about those that don't pay those particular taxes?
The system I've been under for dozens of years has worked fine for ME. It's not my responsibility to help pay for you if you get ill and can't afford it.
You do know there is a way for all you bleeding hearts that say you care to have things the way you want when it comes to the situation you used as an example. You can find all of those that fit it and personally/privately pay their costs. It's interesting that you say you're happy to help but do so by supporting someone else being forced to fund it.
Would be? Pure speculation.
Are you claiming everyone would pay the same amount in taxes? If not, is everyone going to get same level of care or is the amount of care going to be based on the amount of taxes you pay?
Granule, are you ambidextrous or schizophrenic? The left side of your brain doesn't know what the right side is writing or thinking?
First. within post #7 you accused me of being appreciative of the Constitution's "Bill of Rights", (which is true, but I had not explicitly stated so within this thread).
Then within post #20, you accuse me of claiming to be "the bill of rights"?
Respectfully, Supposn
Since when does "TRUTH" need convincing? Its lies that need individuals to be so gullible that they purchase the bull shit being sold. Health Care is no more a human right than is slavery. No one can force a physician to work through dictatorial mandates without that service being considered a type of "indentured" servitude. Its just like the penal institutions....slavery by any other name...is still slavery.
People are responsible for their own health as a form of personal responsibility. Your neighbor is not responsible to share in the cost of your physical upkeep any more than they are entitled to share in their neighbors earned income. Its all a form of social communism.
Freedom and Liberty cannot co-exist with social communism as communism uses threats of penalty such as fines and or imprisonment that require individual liberty to be vacated. Socialism and Liberty are no more compatible than water and oil.Mine dropped. My wife got leukemia when the ACA came out. We were lucky and it helped pay for her treatment. She is in remission. The cost of her treatment was enormous. That is the American way you defend.
The simple fact is every other industrialized country has universal coverage and they get full coverage. They pay half what we do for the medical system. It is not more costly and covers everyone. Why does that offend you? What is wrong is for-profit medicine. We are allowing corporations and greedy fucks to loot the ill.They will charge "all the traffic will bear".
CFM, I suppose what both Rjhenn and Gonzomin are referring to is USA's prior and our current healthcare policies were and are in comparison to those of the world's all other industrial nations' healthcare policies, the most expensive per their nations' populations' persons, and per patient.
Although USA's aggregate medical costs are the most expensive among industrial nations, The consequences due to many of those other nations' healthcare policies are superior to that of the USA; (i.e. other nations are all doing it at lesser cost and many of them are doing it better than what USA has or is now accomplishing).
Respectfully, Supposn
Aw…..the socialist TEAR JERKER tactic. Your wife just "GOT" leukemia without making any free will decisions along the path of life that might have exposed her to some form of carcinogenic agent.....either through accident of ignorance. And its the villages responsibility to pay for her free will decisions?
The thought never once occurred to you or your spouse to invest in some type of Catastrophic health insurance all through your young adult lives....? So your neighbors are responsible for your lack of planning in your failure to spend pennies where DOLLARS are now required? 
Eagle_Eye
Well-known member
Glad to hear your wife is in remission. It is funny those that love Obamacare are those who's premiums dropped compared to those who's premiums increased. There are several reasons why universal health care would not work for us here. One of which is the size of our population. No industrialized nation with universal health care comes close to us in population. That said here is a site that gives an honest evaluation of Universal health care.
"Advantages
Universal health care lowers health care costs for an economy. The government controls the price of medication and medical services through negotiation and regulation.
It eliminates the administrative costs of dealing with different private health insurers. Doctors only deal with one government agency. U.S. doctors must deal with many private insurance companies, Medicare, and Medicaid. It standardizes billing procedures and coverage rules. Companies don't have to hire staff to deal with different health insurance company rules.
It forces hospitals and doctors to provide the same standard of service at a low cost. In a competitive environment like the United States, health care providers focus on new technology. They offer expensive services and pay doctors more. They try to compete by targeting the wealthy. They charge more to get a higher profit. It leads to higher costs.
Universal health care creates a healthier workforce. Studies show that preventive care reduces the need for expensive emergency room usage. Before Obamacare, 46% of emergency room patients went because they had no other place to go. They used the emergency room as their primary care physician. This health care inequality is a big reason for the rising cost of medical care.
Early childhood care prevents future social costs. These include crime, welfare dependency, and health issues. Health education teaches families how to make healthy lifestyle choices, preventing chronic diseases.
Governments can impose regulations and taxes to guide the population toward healthier choices. Regulations make unhealthy choices, such as drugs, illegal. Sin taxes, such as those on cigarettes and alcohol, make them more expensive.
Disadvantages
Universal health care forces healthy people to pay for others' medical care. Chronic diseases, like diabetes and heart disease, make up 85% of health care costs. These diseases can often be prevented with lifestyle choices. The sickest 5% of the population consumes 50% of total health care costs. The healthiest 50% consume only 3% of the nation's health care costs.
With free universal health care, people may not be as careful with their health. They don't have the financial incentive to do so. Without a copay, people might overuse emergency rooms and doctors.
Most universal health systems report long wait times for elective procedures. The government focuses on providing basic and emergency health care.
Governments limit payment amounts to keep costs low. Doctors have less incentive to provide quality care if they aren't well paid. They might spend less time per patient to keep their costs down. They have less funding for new life-saving technologies.
Health care costs overwhelm government budgets. For example, some Canadian provinces spend 40% of their budget on health care. That reduces funding for other programs like education and infrastructure.
To cut costs, the government may limit services with a low probability of success. It may not cover drugs for rare conditions. It may prefer palliative care over expensive end-of-life care. On the other hand, the U.S. medical system does a heroic job of saving lives, but at a cost. Care for patients in the last six years of life makes up one-fourth of the Medicare budget. In their last month of life, half go to the emergency room. One-third wind up in the intensive care unit and one-fifth undergo surgery."
https://www.thebalance.com/universal-health-care-4156211
Attachments
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
probably because both those statements are lies......as I said my premiums doubled, therefore it is not true to say it isn't more costly.........and there are still millions who are not covered, just as there were before.......you realize that every demmycrat running for president has pledged to replace it with Medicare for all, right?........nobody loves Obamacare.......
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
were you aware that neither Obamacare or Medicare changed that in any way?......
Individuals’ Catastrophic Medical costs: I originally posted this topic last year within a different group. The link from which I quote is from a NY Times article dated July 3, 2018 and was linked the next day within an MSN web site. The article's title is entitled “Obamacare Is Proving Hard to Kill”, by Reed Abelson.
Respectfully, Supposn
Originally posted by Supposn
Individuals’ Catastrophic Medical costs:
Federal insurance for catastrophic medical costs on behalf of individuals:
Excerpted from Congressman Paul Ryan’s website. He forwarded a transcript concerning his positions of regarding USA’s healthcare policies; Racine [WI] Journal News, Mark Schaaf, July 7, 20217.
“Republicans have proposed the federal and state governments subsidize the cost of care for people in the individual market with catastrophic illnesses, Ryan said. He believes that will make it easier to insure people in those high-risk pools at a more affordable price”.
Paul Ryan’s advocating federal insuring catastrophic medical costs of individuals. That’s a concept that both sides of the political aisle could agree upon.
I’m a proponent for federal acceptance of fiscal responsibility for catastrophic medical condition regardless if patients were or were not previously insured. Hospitals must be reimbursed for those extraordinary expenditures.
Excerpted from: Obamacare Is Proving Hard to Kill - The New York Times
US - ob...cid%3Dspartanntp - News - msn
“...In Minnesota, which created a reinsurance program to help pay for customers’ expensive medical conditions, carriers are actually seeking lower premiums. A midlevel policy in Minneapolis is priced at $302 a month. ...”.
Respectfully, Supposn
Originally posted by Supposn
Individuals’ Catastrophic Medical costs:
Federal insurance for catastrophic medical costs on behalf of individuals:
Excerpted from Congressman Paul Ryan’s website. He forwarded a transcript concerning his positions of regarding USA’s healthcare policies; Racine [WI] Journal News, Mark Schaaf, July 7, 20217.
“Republicans have proposed the federal and state governments subsidize the cost of care for people in the individual market with catastrophic illnesses, Ryan said. He believes that will make it easier to insure people in those high-risk pools at a more affordable price”.
Paul Ryan’s advocating federal insuring catastrophic medical costs of individuals. That’s a concept that both sides of the political aisle could agree upon.
I’m a proponent for federal acceptance of fiscal responsibility for catastrophic medical condition regardless if patients were or were not previously insured. Hospitals must be reimbursed for those extraordinary expenditures.
Excerpted from: Obamacare Is Proving Hard to Kill - The New York Times
US - ob...cid%3Dspartanntp - News - msn
“...In Minnesota, which created a reinsurance program to help pay for customers’ expensive medical conditions, carriers are actually seeking lower premiums. A midlevel policy in Minneapolis is priced at $302 a month. ...”.
Glad to hear your wife is in remission. It is funny those that love Obamacare are those who's premiums dropped compared to those who's premiums increased. There are several reasons why universal health care would not work for us here. One of which is the size of our population. No industrialized nation with universal health care comes close to us in population. That said here is a site that gives an honest evaluation of Universal health care.
"Advantages
Universal health care lowers health care costs for an economy. The government controls the price of medication and medical services through negotiation and regulation.
It eliminates the administrative costs of dealing with different private health insurers. Doctors only deal with one government agency. U.S. doctors must deal with many private insurance companies, Medicare, and Medicaid. It standardizes billing procedures and coverage rules. Companies don't have to hire staff to deal with different health insurance company rules.
It forces hospitals and doctors to provide the same standard of service at a low cost. In a competitive environment like the United States, health care providers focus on new technology. They offer expensive services and pay doctors more. They try to compete by targeting the wealthy. They charge more to get a higher profit. It leads to higher costs.
Universal health care creates a healthier workforce. Studies show that preventive care reduces the need for expensive emergency room usage. Before Obamacare, 46% of emergency room patients went because they had no other place to go. They used the emergency room as their primary care physician. This health care inequality is a big reason for the rising cost of medical care.
Early childhood care prevents future social costs. These include crime, welfare dependency, and health issues. Health education teaches families how to make healthy lifestyle choices, preventing chronic diseases.
Governments can impose regulations and taxes to guide the population toward healthier choices. Regulations make unhealthy choices, such as drugs, illegal. Sin taxes, such as those on cigarettes and alcohol, make them more expensive.
Disadvantages
Universal health care forces healthy people to pay for others' medical care. Chronic diseases, like diabetes and heart disease, make up 85% of health care costs. These diseases can often be prevented with lifestyle choices. The sickest 5% of the population consumes 50% of total health care costs. The healthiest 50% consume only 3% of the nation's health care costs.
With free universal health care, people may not be as careful with their health. They don't have the financial incentive to do so. Without a copay, people might overuse emergency rooms and doctors.
Most universal health systems report long wait times for elective procedures. The government focuses on providing basic and emergency health care.
Governments limit payment amounts to keep costs low. Doctors have less incentive to provide quality care if they aren't well paid. They might spend less time per patient to keep their costs down. They have less funding for new life-saving technologies.
Health care costs overwhelm government budgets. For example, some Canadian provinces spend 40% of their budget on health care. That reduces funding for other programs like education and infrastructure.
To cut costs, the government may limit services with a low probability of success. It may not cover drugs for rare conditions. It may prefer palliative care over expensive end-of-life care. On the other hand, the U.S. medical system does a heroic job of saving lives, but at a cost. Care for patients in the last six years of life makes up one-fourth of the Medicare budget. In their last month of life, half go to the emergency room. One-third wind up in the intensive care unit and one-fifth undergo surgery."
https://www.thebalance.com/universal-health-care-4156211
That is the concept of insurance. The healthy pay for those who get sick. Same for auto insurance. we who drive safely pay for you road maniacs.
The difference in America is the profit makers loot the system. Insurance companies add cost and complexity to health insurance in America and make the insurance side of illness torture. Insurance takes billions out of the system. Their mantra is making the sick fight for the care they paid for. There is more profit in denial than service.
Our system is fucked up and wrong. It should be fixed.
Of course. But it also made fundamental changes that were the start of a better system. Obama could not fight insurance companies and big PHARM and get anything passed. Their lobbying power and political contributions make them extremely powerful. It was a small first step that Repubs fought from day one.
Americans are realizing that our for-profit system is cruel and a pot of gold for looters and corporation thieves.
The Repubs are on the wrong side of this issue. It will hurt them. Polling shows healthcare was a major issue in the mid terms.
Eagle_Eye
Well-known member
Instead of rebuttal of the points in the article you give baseless left wing talking points. You do realize that most of the countries that have single payer also have a mix of those evil insurance companies. Get back to me when you have some valid arguments. BTW like car insurance those that are less healthy pay a higher rate health insurance rate than younger healthier people.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
that would be the election where Republicans added seats in the Senate, right?......
Those evil insurance companies in America are looters.In Germany, you pay for health insurance. The cost is 7.3 percent of income. That covers everything minus some small copays.