CDZ Could (actual) Conservatives support this kind of single payer?

[dblack]

One thing would help us all is to know the truth. That would put us, the insurance companies, the government and the MP's on the same page. No lies. No secrets. Then we could all make an informed decision. And I'll betcha $1 to a hole in a donut, that a lot more of us would agree on something.

True enough. But for a TON of people, that's just not possible. And within a week for another ton, would've been a bad decision.

Then it would seem the insurance is providing them some value, no?

Of course it's vague. Without the facts and honestly, any conversation about this, including congressional critters and 90% of the insurance employees, would be nothing more than a guessing game.

Why does Congress need to get involved?

 

[YoursTruly]

Then it would seem the insurance is providing them some value, no?

Sure, the concept of insurance is a great idea. What I'm supporting here is Health Insurance ran by the medical professionals, from top to bottom. No middle man.
Payments get sent in to what ever office the MP's come up with. Be in a district office, a state office or a national headquarters office. As well as the claim by the MP's who are actually seeing the patients.

Why does Congress need to get involved?

There's these things called lobbyist.

 

[Mac-7]

It's not remotely communist. It might share some superficial similarities with a communist state (they're both totalitarian, authoritarian and opposed to individual rights), but that's as far as it goes.

Isnt that far enough?

the fact that in china individual citizens are treated no better than cattle at a market should be all you need to know about the CCP

I suspect that some people here are communists and dont want the bad reputation of Red China to sully the reputation of Marxism

is that your point?

 

[dblack]

Sure, the concept of insurance is a great idea. What I'm supporting here is Health Insurance ran by the medical professionals, from top to bottom. No middle man.
Payments get sent in to what ever office the MP's come up with. Be in a district office, a state office or a national headquarters office. As well as the claim by the MP's who are actually seeing the patients.

Well, I think that's a bit naive. Even if it's "run by doctors" it will require the same work (to process claims, manage accounts, write policies etc...). People who do that work will still need to be paid. People who finance the endeavor will still expect a return on their investment. I say this, in part, because the original health insurance companies began as organizations "run by doctors". But it's not the kind of thing doctors are trained to do, or even want to do, so they hired others to do it for them - ultimately in the form of entire companies, insurance companies.

I agree with you, however, that in most cases insurance is unnecessary overhead. And the less we use it, the better off we'll be.

The problem, in my view, isn't so much who is running the insurance, but rather our irrational expectations, and a fundamental misunderstanding of what insurance is.

Insurance is a hedge against financial risk. It's a tool for people who have a savings account and don't want to lose it all to bankruptcy in the face of a catastrophe. This implies something important - insurance is NOT a way to provide health care to people who can't otherwise afford it. It's NOT a social safety net, and can't function as one no matter how many legal mandates we pass. People who can't afford basic health care don't need insurance. They need money.

Fixing the problem will require changing our expectations. We need to realize, as a nation, that insurance isn't "free health care" (in fact, it's very expensive health care). We need to understand that the less insurance we use, and the more we pay for health care out-of-pocket, the better off we'll be.

This was actually starting to happen before ACA. People were increasingly turning to "catastrophic" policies, policies with high deductibles and co-pays. These policies were rarely "used". They were merely there to cover you in case things got really bad. But they were also very cheap (I had one, early 2000's, with a $150/mo premium). Predictably (here's where you can thank lobbyists), these policies were banned by Congress via ACA. (Technically, they're still around - but they cost five times as much, defeating the purpose).

Unfortunately, rather than working to dispel our delusions around health care, our leaders have chosen to indulge them. Rather than identifying the factors making health care so expensive, and resolving them, so that we can actually afford to pay for our own health care, politicians have been selling the idea that they can get someone else to pay for your health care. ie free shit. And as long as voters think that can vote themselves free shit, we're going to keep circling this drain.

 

[dblack]

Isnt that far enough?

It's inaccurate and misleading. It gives people the wrong idea about what communism is.

the fact that in china individual citizens are treated no better than cattle at a market should be all you need to know about the CCP

Agreed.

I suspect that some people here are communists and dont want the bad reputation of Red China to sully the reputation of Marxism

is that your point?

No. More the opposite. It feeds misconceptions about communism. Naive people think that Chinese communism is responsible for their economic gains, and it's exactly the opposite. Abandoning communism was how they turned things around.

 

[Mac-7]

Abandoning communism was how they turned things around.

They did not abandon communism so much as adopt the fascist economic model as a subset

 

[dblack]

They did not abandon communism so much as adopt the fascist economic model as a subset

It sounds like you're just using "communism" as a catch-all term for totalitarian government. And while I'd agree that a communist state is inevitably totalitarian, communism has a more specific meaning. We need to understand the words we use.

 

[Mac-7]

It sounds like you're just using "communism" as a catch-all term for totalitarian government.

If I am so is china which officially calls itself a communist country

 

[dblack]

If I am so is china which officially calls itself a communist country

Yes. And pro-wrestlers call themselves "athletes".

 

[Mac-7]

Yes. And pro-wrestlers call themselves "athletes".

the CCP calls itself communist and thats good enough for me

 

[dblack]

the CCP calls itself communist and thats good enough for me

LOL - me too. It tells me it's obviously a lie.

 

[Donald H]

No....you're a slave, you're just not smart enough to realize it.



See if the collar fits:

​

The Dog and the Wolf​

A gaunt Wolf was almost dead with hunger when he happened to meet a House-dog who was passing by. "Ah, Cousin," said the Dog. "I knew how it would be; your irregular life will soon be the ruin of you. Why do you not work steadily as I do, and get your food regularly given to you?"

"I would have no objection," said the Wolf, "if I could only get a place."

"I will easily arrange that for you," said the Dog; "come with me to my master and you shall share my work."

So the Wolf and the Dog went towards the town together. On the way there the Wolf noticed that the hair on a certain part of the Dog's neck was very much worn away, so he asked him how that had come about.

"Oh, it is nothing," said the Dog. "That is only the place where the collar is put on at night to keep me chained up; it chafes a bit, but one soon gets used to it."

"Is that all?" said the Wolf. "Then good-bye to you, Master Dog."

Better starve free than be a fat slave.

There are 14 better places for America above 15th. that don't require starvation. And most dogs don't get chained up at night as you suggest in America. The way people treat their dogs is an indication of the social values and social conditions under which the people live.

Canada is hardly #1 in quality of life if one must live on their knees, begging for the right to think and speak.

The parameters on which quality of life is determined are listed in my link. We don't score the highest on some but we score consistently high enough on all of them to place us at #1.

'Safety' alone must pull America down a couple of places. It's an example of compromising other qualities of life for the sake of too many Americans gooned out on handguns.

We should go down the whole list together and you could try to explain how Canadians aren't allowed to think and speak?

 

[Donald H]

the CCP calls itself communist and thats good enough for me

Of course they are. What other country is more communist than China? Modern communism is working in Laos, Cuba, and Vietnam too.

All of them need a basis in communism in order to evolve into capitalist societies with social limitations on companies and corporations.

If they didn't their corporations would be running off to foreign countries, leaving the parent country with no way of taxing the renegade company. Much like how American companies are cheating their country and their country's people out of a piece of the pie.

Much like how Walmart has abandoned the American shiip to go to China and employ China's labour force. Walmart certainly doesn't complain about having to live within the rules of communism!

 

[PoliticalChic]

There are 14 better places for America above 15th. that don't require starvation. And most dogs don't get chained up at night as you suggest in America. The way people treat their dogs is an indication of the social values and social conditions under which the people live.

The parameters on which quality of life is determined are listed in my link. We don't score the highest on some but we score consistently high enough on all of them to place us at #1.

'Safety' alone must pull America down a couple of places. It's an example of compromising other qualities of life for the sake of too many Americans gooned out on handguns.

We should go down the whole list together and you could try to explain how Canadians aren't allowed to think and speak?

Shakespeare must have you in mind when he wrote....

The lady doth protest too much, methinks​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_lady_doth_protest_too_much,_methinks
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_lady_doth_protest_too_much,_methinks
But....living where you do, your envy and jealousy is understandable.

 

[Mac-7]

course they are. What other country is more communist than China? Modern communism is working in Laos, Cuba, and Vietnam too.

I doubt if either of us are qualified to comment on those places

at one time during the soviet era those countries were part of the worldwide communist wave

but the soviets fell apart and now there is no central communist conspiracy to take over the world in the name of marxism

but there is china which is determined to rule the world under whatever moniker you prefer

 

[Donald H]

Sure, the concept of insurance is a great idea. What I'm supporting here is Health Insurance ran by the medical professionals, from top to bottom. No middle man.
Payments get sent in to what ever office the MP's come up with. Be in a district office, a state office or a national headquarters office. As well as the claim by the MP's who are actually seeing the patients.


There's these things called lobbyist.

You realize that the MP's will need to form their own 'insurance' branches of their businesses?
How do you visualize that as cutting out gouging for exorbitant fees and corruption?

MP's or doctors aren't going to take on the duties of the insurance companies or the new companies they form under their practices.

You'r not limiting the 'for profit' aspect or the amount of 'profit'. Government does that with laws that restrict the amount of 'profit' being made off of the backs of the people in need. Then everybody shares in the cost of HC.
Then overall it costs roughly half as much as the US system.

 

[Donald H]

Shakespeare must have you in mind when he wrote....

The lady doth protest too much, methinks​

The lady doth protest too much, methinks - Wikipedia
The lady doth protest too much, methinks - Wikipedia
But....living where you do, your envy and jealousy is understandable.

Don't refer to me as 'the lady'. That's being sexist.

Here's the list: I'll judge Americ on it for you and then you can disagree.

• A good job market (a real unemployment rate of 17% with people working an hour a week being classed as employed.
• Affordability (Good access to goods and services supplied from China!)
• Economic stability (Rates high in comparison to others)
• Family friendly ( far too many neighbourhoods stricken with gun violence on the streets)
• Income equality (rated the worst in the world's modern industrialized countries)
• Politically stable (bordering on revolution and a fascist takeover)
• Safety (gun vilence running rampant)
• Well-developed public health system (rated the poorest of the moder industrialized countries.
• Well-developed public education system (turmoil in the schools over protecting children from Covid) (bad results coming from schools where funding is inadequate.

It's a wonder that America makes 15th. hon.

 

[Donald H]

I doubt if either of us are qualified to comment on those places

at one time during the soviet era those countries were part of the worldwide communist wave

but the soviets fell apart and now there is no central communist conspiracy to take over the world in the name of marxism

but there is china which is determined to rule the world under whatever moniker you prefer

China will likely rule the world, but it will be done by peaceful means. That's being demonstrated in Afghanistan before the US is even able to scramble out with it's tail between it's legs. Russia likewise.

I just hope ISIS isn't able to take down a C-130 with a S.A.M. that's loaded with 600 Marines! That would bring on carpet bombing of the civilian population in return.

 

[YoursTruly]

It sounds like you're just using "communism" as a catch-all term for totalitarian government. And while I'd agree that a communist state is inevitably totalitarian, communism has a more specific meaning. We need to understand the words we use.

Words mean things. But to guys like me who don't subscribe to either party, this video explains it all. As in how it doesn't matter which side thinks they're right or wrong. The far right and the far left is just wrong for most people. No matter what side a person is on, they still don't want the government interfering with their lives unless they need/want something.

 

[Donald H]

Faith is the mode for both traditional religion, and for what you profess and proclaim.

I can see some truth in 'faith' playing a part in my beliefs. I can profess and proclaim a lot of 'faith' in science.

But it's faith that is subject to being modified as science learns more and more.
Can you say the same about the 'Adam and Eve' line of bible bunk?