Allow Americans to purchase health insurance across state lines?

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I think the one thing dem and gop would agree on is that the main reason our HC is so much more expensive than anyone's else is lack of market transparency.

very true!!! Easy solution is a Republican capitalist law requiring that prices be published in a comparable way. It alone would slash cost 50% but because liberals lack the IQ to understand capitalism we cant have it.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

[ But Washington loses control is health insurance is sold across those state lines.

yes McCarran Furguson exempted states from federal anti trust laws preventing them from screwing up health industry. If states could interfere "regulate" the toothpaste market it would be as screwed up as health care market. 1+1=2

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Why would the gop want that? I mean it may be a good idea, but it further big gummit control.

not really if it free consumers to buy where they want and not be restricted by state govt it is a tiny step toward capitalism so Republicans would support it. Ideally they want full capitalism.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Put another way, more competition because of a national rather than state/regional market might save money NATIONALLY. But it's hard to see how Red states' benefit.

what??? nationwide or world wide competition would benefit all states and drive down prices about 80%.

 

[forkup]

If what you say is true, then health care should have become both higher quality and cheaper.

you have learned 6 times now that liberals made capitalism illegal in health care with McCarran Furguson in 1945. Should we go for 7 times?? Do you want to be a liberal for the rest of your life?

Edward if you have no intention of ever answering the premise of what I say only spewing rhetoric there is no point in continuing. I have
given you facts not talking points. I have answered every single one of your points. You have literally copy pasted single sentences of my posts so you wouldn't have to reply to what I say. You my dear friend are a hack who isn't capable of having adult conversations. I wish you a happy healthy life, so you won't have to avail yourself to your health care system to much.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

. Let's put what you say here [capitalism makes things better and cheaper] to the test. If what you say is true, then health care should have become both higher quality and cheaper.

I have explained to you 8 times that liberal utter idiots made capitalism in health care illegal in 1946 with McCarran Furguson. Have you ever seen a conservative who has to run from a debate like you do? What does that teach you?

 

[forkup]

. Let's put what you say here [capitalism makes things better and cheaper] to the test. If what you say is true, then health care should have become both higher quality and cheaper.

I have explained to you 8 times that liberal utter idiots made capitalism in health care illegal in 1946 with McCarran Furguson. Have you ever seen a conservative who has to run from a debate like you do? What does that teach you?

Lol love how your counter goes from 6 to 8 lol seems you math isn't in your repertoire. As to the McCarran Ferguson act.
The McCarran–Ferguson Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1011-1015, is a United States federal law that exempts the business of insurance from most federal regulation, including federal antitrust laws to a limited extent. The McCarran–Ferguson Act was passed by the 79th Congress in 1945 after the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Association that the federal government could regulate insurance companies under the authority of the Commerce Clause in the U.S. Constitution and that the federal antitrust laws applied to the insurance industry.
How does this in any way prevent capitalism? And if you say the it restricts the ability to shop around read this.http://www.naic.org/documents/topics_interstate_sales_myths.pdf And I notice that you still have nothing but putting out talking points. Let's try this. If your next reply doesn't answer this question I will simply not reply anymore.
According to a 2000 study of the World Health Organization, publicly funded systems of industrial nations spend less on health care, both as a percentage of their GDP and per capita, and enjoy superior population-based health care outcomes. If Capitalism is the answer why do publicly funded programs fair better????

 

[Onyx]

That's one of the GOP's big selling points of their healthcare 'plan'.

Problem is, it's already allowed.

The Federal government does not prohibit it. Some states do.

I believe the majority of states prohibit it, and the point of the provision would be to mandate that all states allow it.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

How does this in any way prevent capitalism?

OMG!!! under capitalism states are not allowed to restrict trade or capitalism. Utter liberal fools passed Furguson precisely to prevent capitalism!!! 1+1=2[/QUOTE]

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

If Capitalism is the answer why do publicly funded programs fair better????

utter pure 100% ignorance!!!
actually Medicare, Medicaid, Schip, Tricare, VA, IHS, free clinics, and illegal interstate competition are public programs. When a conservative and liberal meet the conservative ends up running a kindergarten.
Is it time for you to run from the debate with your liberal tail between your legs?? Ever see a conservative who has to run from a debate? What does that teach you? It has been my honor to serve you your ABC's!

 

[forkup]

If Capitalism is the answer why do publicly funded programs fair better????

utter pure 100% ignorance!!!
actually Medicare, Medicaid, Schip, Tricare, VA, IHS, free clinics, and illegal interstate competition are public programs. When a conservative and liberal meet the conservative ends up running a kindergarten.
Is it time for you to run from the debate with your liberal tail between your legs?? Ever see a conservative who has to run from a debate? What does that teach you? It has been my honor to serve you your ABC's!

Still not answering. Why do countries COMPLETELY publicly funded do better???? I promised I wouldn't answer someone who isn't willing to answer to what I ask so I will not engage you anymore. If we play by different rules there is no point.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Why do countries COMPLETELY publicly funded do better????

America is actually more completely public funded with 10 or so different organizations providing health care and with massive public interference in areas not 100% public. 1+1=2

 

[Markle]

The vast majority of Canadians who do seek health care in the US, are people who were travelling on vacation or business and became ill while in the US.

Then why are our hospitals on our Northern border filled to overflowing? Also, why then do you send your women with complicated pregnancies to the US for care?

As for waiting, I'm certain you are familiar with this annual report.

Waiting Your Turn: Wait Times for Health Care in Canada, 2016 Report
— Published on November 23, 2016

This edition of Waiting Your Turn indicates that, overall, waiting times for medically necessary treatment have in-creased since last year. Specialist physicians surveyed report a median waiting time of 20.0 weeks between referral from a general practitioner and receipt of treatment—longer than the wait of 18.3 weeks reported in 2015. This year’s wait time—the longest ever recorded in this survey’s history—is 115% longer than in 1993, when it was just 9.3 weeks.

There is a great deal of variation in the total waiting time faced by patients across the provinces. Ontario reports the shortest total wait (15.6 weeks), while New Brunswick reports the longest (38.8 weeks). There is also a great deal of variation among specialties. Patients wait longest between a GP referral and Neurosurgery (46.9 weeks), while those waiting for Medical oncology begin treatment in 3.7 weeks.

[...]
Patients also experience significant waiting times for various diagnostic technologies across the provinces. This year, Canadians could expect to wait 3.7 weeks for a computed tomography (CT) scan, 11.1 weeks for a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan, and 4.0 weeks for an ultrasound.

[...]

Read more: Waiting Your Turn: Wait Times for Health Care in Canada, 2016 Report

 

[Markle]

Still not answering. Why do countries COMPLETELY publicly funded do better????

As you know, unless they are tiny countries, they do NOT. Nor do they contribute anything toward creating new life-saving and extending drugs, procedures or technology.

Were it not for our healthcare for profit system, millions more would be dead.

 

[Markle]

Removing obamacare mandates is not the problem selling across state lines, which can be done now. It is the state mandates and networks that makes it nearly impossible to sell across state lines. I believe your state has 52 mandates that have to be placed on a health insurance policy. How many mandates are we talking about across 50 states. Good luck with that.

All insurance policies, regardless of the state where they are sold, must meet the mandates and requirements of Obamacare. That's why so many companies have dropped issuing policies in many states.

 

[Markle]

For the net effect of List of countries by life expectancy

As you know, healthcare has little or nothing to do with a person's life expectancy at birth.

 

[forkup]

Still not answering. Why do countries COMPLETELY publicly funded do better????

As you know, unless they are tiny countries, they do NOT. Nor do they contribute anything toward creating new life-saving and extending drugs, procedures or technology.

Were it not for our healthcare for profit system, millions more would be dead.

Wrong on both counts. My country Belgium is tiny, same cannot be said for Japan, Germany, France and loads of different industrialised countries who have publicly funded health care systems. As to these countries not contributing. List of Nobel laureates in Physiology or Medicine - Wikipedia
Although The US is strongly represented, you can not claim it's the only nationality present. In fact since the millennium only 2004 and 2006 was a solo American effort. And even tiny Belgium is on this list several times and groundbreaking research is still being done here.For instance this discovery will if they are capable of making medicine from it, probably give Belgium another nobel price in medicine.Belgian breakthrough in cancer research . So your prejudice doesn't match reality.

 

[forkup]

For the net effect of List of countries by life expectancy

As you know, healthcare has little or nothing to do with a person's life expectancy at birth.

Although life expectancy isn't the only criteria of which to judge quality of health care, saying it has nothing to do with is is false.
Of 17 high-income countries studied by the National Institutes of Health in 2013, the United States was at or near the top in infant mortality, heart and lung disease, sexually transmitted infections, adolescent pregnancies, injuries, homicides, and rates of disability. Although not all of the factors here mentioned are medical in nature, some are.Health care in the United States - Wikipedia
I'm perfectly willing to compare using different factors, just know that I do have bases for comparison between the US and Belgium. And like my posts in this thread show. Belgium doesn't have waits for getting your medicine from the pharmacist. We go and get our meds. No people calling insurance companies to see of a certain med is covered. We have more doctors per population. Physicians (per 1,000 people) | Data Our doctors make housecalls. Not only doctors but also physical therapists, nurses. Lol our health insurance companies even provide emergency babysitters if a family has need of it. (this service is not free but it is affordable) We have less opioid addictions and less unnecessary medical tests. So if you want to make a case for for profit healthcare, then I have the put forth the challenge to you, to make a case for it being superior in a testable way.

 

[Markle]

Although The US is strongly represented, you can not claim it's the only nationality present. In fact since the millennium only 2004 and 2006 was a solo American effort.

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care
Brief Analyses | Health

No. 649
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
by Scott Atlas

Medical care in the United States is derided as miserable compared to health care systems in the rest of the developed world. Economists, government officials, insurers and academics alike are beating the drum for a far larger government rôle in health care. Much of the public assumes their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex. However, before turning to government as the solution, some unheralded facts about America's health care system should be considered.

Fact No. 1: Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.[1] Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

Fact No. 2: Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.[2] Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.

Fact No. 3: Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.[3] Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them.

Fact No. 4: Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.[4] Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate and colon cancer:

• Nine of 10 middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to less than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
• Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a pap smear, compared to less than 90 percent of Canadians.
• More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a PSA test, compared to less than 1 in 6 Canadians (16 percent).
• Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with less than 1 in 20 Canadians (5 percent).

Fact No. 5: Lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report "excellent" health compared to Canadian seniors (11.7 percent versus 5.8 percent). Conversely, white Canadian young adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower income Americans to describe their health as "fair or poor."[5]

- See more at: 10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care

Fact No. 6: Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the U.K. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long - sometimes more than a year - to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer.[6] All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada.[7] In England, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.[8]

Fact No. 7: People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand and British adults say their health system needs either "fundamental change" or "complete rebuilding."[9]

Fact No. 8: Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians. When asked about their own health care instead of the "health care system," more than half of Americans (51.3 percent) are very satisfied with their health care services, compared to only 41.5 percent of Canadians; a lower proportion of Americans are dissatisfied (6.8 percent) than Canadians (8.5 percent).[10]

Fact No. 9: Americans have much better access to important new technologies like medical imaging than patients in Canada or the U.K. Maligned as a waste by economists and policymakers naïve to actual medical practice, an overwhelming majority of leading American physicians identified computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the most important medical innovations for improving patient care during the previous decade.[11] [See the table.] The United States has 34 CT scanners per million Americans, compared to 12 in Canada and eight in Britain. The United States has nearly 27 MRI machines per million compared to about 6 per million in Canada and Britain.[12]

Fact No. 10: Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.[13] The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other single developed country.[14] Since the mid-1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to American residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined.[15] In only five of the past 34 years did a scientist living in America not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.[16] [See the table.]

Conclusion. Despite serious challenges, such as escalating costs and the uninsured, the U.S. health care system compares favorably to those in other developed countries.

- See more at: 10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care

 

[Markle]

Although life expectancy isn't the only criteria of which to judge quality of health care, saying it has nothing to do with is is false.

It most certainly has nothing to do with life expectancy. Even you should know the actual reasons for the difference.

The vast number of countries leading the United States are of one race, one nationality, one culture. The United States is multicultural. Of critical importance is the composition of those races. Many are genetically predisposed to have a longer life span. Their diets and cultures are widely varied those also lead to longer or shorter lifespans.

Two brief examples. Norway has a longer average lifespan than does the United States as a whole. But, take Minnesota, their lifespans are equal to that of Norway. Minnesota has a large population of Scandinavians and their population is mostly white and Asian. Hawaii is another good example of longer lifespans than the entire US. Most of Hawaii residents are of Asian descent who have longer lifespans, the state is mostly all one race.

Did you know that different countries even have different criteria for determining a live birth? In the United States if an infant takes one breath, it is considered a live birth. In other countries, an infant is not considered a live birth until it has survived seven days.
Pr
You really need to inform yourself. Unless you are too lazy and just wish to parrot the Progressive talking point lies.