Single payer healthcare (Bernie Sanders)

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by chagla, Sep 13, 2017.

  1. chagla macrumors 6502a

    chagla

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2008
    #1
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/13/bernie-sanders-universal-healthcare-medicare-for-all

    This is NOT socialism! It's astounding that USA spends much more than any other country yet healthcare in the current state leaves a lot to desire. So who is really benefiting from it? Not the general population for sure. Why not remove the middle man from the picture?
     
  2. BoxerGT2.5 macrumors 68000

    BoxerGT2.5

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    #2
    Because people don't trust the government. Try having a conversation about SS, they can't do it. Why give them another 3rd political rail?
     
  3. jkcerda macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #3
  4. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #4
    It raises taxes according to the story I read this morning..

    It's counting on the power of fed gov to lower prices and if they're the only game in town then they will. I still want to know how docs are going to pay they student loans and such back. Like I've said before the European system is a complete system and it works but there are more components than this.

    I don't think he's really trying to get his legislation approved he's using it as a conversation starter, since we are going to have to have a healthcare talk again soon.
     
  5. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #5
    I'm for UHC, but people have to realize in the short-term it's going to be expensive for a lot of people. Employer Health Plans, for example, will largely disappear during the transition. Politically, this and the Climate towards taxes make UHC almost impossible to implement
     
  6. DearthnVader macrumors 6502a

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #6
    Who is paying for it now?

    You are.

    Who would be paying for socialised medicine?

    You would.

    How much are you paying, that goes to profit of private insurance companies, their officers, employees, and shareholders?

    Do these private insurance companies try and negotiate price on your behalf, or do they just pass the cost increases on to you in higher premiums and deductibles?
     
  7. BoxerGT2.5 macrumors 68000

    BoxerGT2.5

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    #7
    Worked wonders in his home state. :rolleyes:

    Even medicare isn't a "complete system", people on medicare still require supplemental insurance to cover what medicare doesn't.
     
  8. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #8
    Complete system as in education costs and research cost sharing.

    I can't charge you 100k for school and then dictate what you an make after you graduate, I can't expect you to spend a billion dollars in R&D then dictate what you sell your product for.

    The nice part of single payer is it will eliminate medicare, medicaid, VA, military care, and all the state level programs one big umbrella there will be cost savings there.
     
  9. BoxerGT2.5 macrumors 68000

    BoxerGT2.5

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    #9
    Sanders doesn't care about educating doctors and R&D for new drugs. He want's 330 million people on government healthcare.
     
  10. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #10
    I want 330 million on some sort of government or blended no cost at point of service health care too. Like I said initially I don't think he's really trying to advance this as legislation he's using it as a conversation starter. No one really like the ACA no matter the party so this is a debate we're going to have to take up again and he's started it.
     
  11. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #11
    How do you know your first sentence is True? 330 million insured is a lot more money being spent into the Healthcare system than our current fraction of insured. He also wants 300 million to have Healthcare. If there was a non Governmental way to achieve this end that was cheaper and/or more efficient - I believe we would've heard of it by now...
     
  12. tgara macrumors 6502a

    tgara

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2012
    Location:
    Connecticut, USA
    #12
    We were told the last time during the run-up to the Obamacare legislation that prices would come down because of the purchasing power of the government. Well that didn't work out quite the way they told us, didn't it?

    Here's a pro tip: Whenever the government says it can do anything to lower costs, don't believe them.

    There is zero chance this legislation will ever pass. In addition to raising taxes, the plan also includes several controversial policy proposals. It would authorize the universal government health system to negotiate the cost of prescription drugs, an idea that essentially amounts to price-fixing. It would also require abortion to be included as a benefit, but federal funds are currently prohibited from paying for abortions.
     
  13. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #13
    When Fed Gov is the only payer prices have to be what Fed Gov is willing to pay. When the ACA was first talked about the public option was still in it and if it remained part of the bill it would have lowered prices because there's no profit incentive in the public sector.
     
  14. tgara macrumors 6502a

    tgara

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2012
    Location:
    Connecticut, USA
    #14
    That all sounds good but never works in practice in government contracting. The true cost will be many times whatever the government people say it is. Look at the current state of the Veteran's Administration for a preview of how this plan would work.

    Here's and idea: Let's lower taxes for everybody and let people use the extra money to buy a private health care plan of their choice.
     
  15. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #15
    There won't be government contracting that's reserved for a service provided to the government. This will be a list of what the government will pay for a service period.
     
  16. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres,Tiocfaidh ár lá
  17. jkcerda macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #17
    not only do we have the freedom to die, we have the freedom to chose when & how, hell we have assisted suicide here in the U.S and it's LEGAL.
     
  18. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #18
    Ag
    its not legal everywhere. I think only 2 states allow it.
    --- Post Merged, Sep 13, 2017 ---
    How are you going to force people to buy healthcare. Lowering taxes won't do **** to fix healthcare. The VA is worthless because there is no oversight and huge waste in administration costs.
     
  19. eatrains macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2006
    #19
    Never understood why healthcare should be treated differently from police, fire, education, and other public services.

    And I would think the right would want to relieve businesses from having to pay for their employees' healthcare?
     
  20. GermanSuplex macrumors 6502a

    GermanSuplex

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    #20
    Lower taxes will only work if tax loopholes are closed for the wealthiest, ensuring that everyone pays into the pool. That will never happen. Taxes are like any other sort of checks-and-balances scenario, and when both the poor AND the wealthy are subsidized by the middle class, any raising or lowering of taxes won't really do much, either public services we all rely on suffer, or the average working American has more money taken out of their pocket.

    Come to think of it, if you eliminated big-money spending and donations in politics, most problems would probably find a way to work themselves out.
     
  21. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres,Tiocfaidh ár lá
    #21
    Six states I think.Mind you the rather large country to the north plus The Netherlands,Belgium,Switzerland and Luxembourg all have assisted dying laws. There are other places where it is technically illegal but prosecutions don't take place (it is widely practiced in a lot of countries but not publicly acknowledged ).I didn't answer his post because of "American exceptionalism".
     
  22. BoxerGT2.5 macrumors 68000

    BoxerGT2.5

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    #22
    How do I know?, because for as much as he talks about medicare for all, he's never once mentioned the later. It's a pretty vital component. Otherwise we can all start expecting and accepting the UK cancer survival rates.

    What do you suspect UHC will cost in this country? Medicare outlays are going to be upwards of $1.2 trillion in 10yrs. That's for roughly 55 million people age 65 and older and those on permanent disability. How much do you think we're going to need for the other 270 million people?
     
  23. jkcerda macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
  24. Populism macrumors regular

    Populism

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2014
    #24
    Interested what any PRSI medical doctors think about this.
     
  25. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #25
    See...that's a nice speculative pivot you did there in the first paragraph. Both of my aunts currently live in the UK (i'm from there), and while their prognosis is not particularly good (they're in their late 70s) - they have gotten treatments they couldn't get here. Point being, I don't buy your argument.

    Two, to your point, it will cost a lot. I don't think anyone is arguing this. I already posted that the initial costs-of-transition could be difficult. Yet, you're ignoring how much money is currently being spent into Private Insurance. This is ultimately about keeping costs down for everyone. Not holding on to your nice private health plan because it suits you. There are always deferred costs of ignoring the people you mentioned that don't come up as Health Care costs - they're just costs - with no benefit to anyone.
     

Share This Page

67 September 13, 2017