Let's unpack some of the right wing's delusion and dishonesty. Is universal healthcare socialism?

[Brain357]

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You don’t understand markets?

PIss off.

Markets don’t work for healthcare. Once you figure that out you will see universal is only real option.

Listen, asswipe, I ask you above for clarification on what you mean by "work for healthcare" and you declined to answer, choosing instead to insult me. If want to continue the conversation, start with answering those questions. Until you do, the statement you keep chanting, "Markets don't work for healthcare", has no meaning.

Again:

Healthcare costs just go up, markets have no downward pressure on healthcare. The guy in an ambulance can’t shop a cheaper price so they just charge more and more...

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You are really slow. If there is no downward pressure on pricing, then markets aren’t working. It’s more of a monopoly situation and prices just increase. Competition is important in markets. Again the guy in an ambulance isn’t shopping around. What don’t you get?

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity.

But you're still ignoring my question. Is it that you don't understand it? Or that you just don't want to talk about it? What are you so afraid of? If you're going to claim that markets don't "work" for health care, you need to say what that means. What would it mean for a market to "work"? You seem to be assuming that the purpose of a market is provide everyone with their needs. You don't seem to want to admit that though. Why are you such a chickenshit about it? Can't you just have an honest conversation without all the evasion?

I’ve explained it several times. The number of emergency room patients in a day is dependent on the number of sudden illnesses and accidents. What they charge has no effect. So the price goes up and up. Markets don’t work for healthcare.

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity. But just ignore this and keep chanting. You're getting good at it.

Anyway, since you won't answer my question, I'll assume that you think the purpose of a market is to provide everyone with what they need, and that's where we disagree. A free market doesn't have a purpose, other than freedom. It allows people to pursue their own goals by trading and collaborating with others. It's really freedom that you're railing against. You want things to be controlled by the government. Why?

Being sick destroys all market dynamics. You need to figure that out.

I've already figured that out. I've been sick, without insurance. And I looked for medical service that I could afford. I avoided expensive ambulance service when I could. I negotiated for lower rates and asked about cheaper alternatives. Later, when I had insurance, I didn't give a shit about any of that. I went to the doctor that was close by and had the nicest office. I never asked about prices.

Anyway, none of your whinging about that has anything to do with whether markets "work" or not. Since you haven't specified what it means for a market to "work" there's no way to tell what the fuck you mean. But evasion seems to be your go to - so maybe that's intentional.

If you had figured that out you would know universal is the only way. Only the cheap stuff will ever be shopped. Emergency and life saving care breaks the market.

Only because of inefficient market participation by the Poor. With more full employment of capital by solving simple poverty individuals rates in any given market can be lower and would be more market friendly since more people would be participating in that market.

A simple example is a market where the price of a good is one hundred dollars with only one participant but could be fifty dollars with two participants, etc; if the seller only needs to generate one hundred dollars to achieve a profit in that market.

Obamacare greatly increased the number of people with healthcare. The costs continued to increase. It's a monopoly, they increase prices as they please.

It wasn't as market friendly as it could have been.

While Obamacare promised affordable health insurance for every American, and even penalized those who refused to buy it, the law did nothing to control underlying costs. The very structure of the law which imposed billions of dollars in new, costly regulations also led to higher and higher insurance premiums.--https://www.cms.gov/blog/thank-obamacare-rise-uninsured#:~:text=While%20Obamacare%20promised%20affordable%20health,higher%20and%20higher%20insurance%20premiums.

What I described works in any market, ceteris paribus.

You have a lot of excuses, but the fact is many more were insured and healthcare still soared. Markets don't work with healthcare.

 

[Rigby5]

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You don’t understand markets?

PIss off.

Markets don’t work for healthcare. Once you figure that out you will see universal is only real option.

Listen, asswipe, I ask you above for clarification on what you mean by "work for healthcare" and you declined to answer, choosing instead to insult me. If want to continue the conversation, start with answering those questions. Until you do, the statement you keep chanting, "Markets don't work for healthcare", has no meaning.

Again:

Healthcare costs just go up, markets have no downward pressure on healthcare. The guy in an ambulance can’t shop a cheaper price so they just charge more and more...

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You are really slow. If there is no downward pressure on pricing, then markets aren’t working. It’s more of a monopoly situation and prices just increase. Competition is important in markets. Again the guy in an ambulance isn’t shopping around. What don’t you get?

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity.

But you're still ignoring my question. Is it that you don't understand it? Or that you just don't want to talk about it? What are you so afraid of? If you're going to claim that markets don't "work" for health care, you need to say what that means. What would it mean for a market to "work"? You seem to be assuming that the purpose of a market is provide everyone with their needs. You don't seem to want to admit that though. Why are you such a chickenshit about it? Can't you just have an honest conversation without all the evasion?

I’ve explained it several times. The number of emergency room patients in a day is dependent on the number of sudden illnesses and accidents. What they charge has no effect. So the price goes up and up. Markets don’t work for healthcare.

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity. But just ignore this and keep chanting. You're getting good at it.

Anyway, since you won't answer my question, I'll assume that you think the purpose of a market is to provide everyone with what they need, and that's where we disagree. A free market doesn't have a purpose, other than freedom. It allows people to pursue their own goals by trading and collaborating with others. It's really freedom that you're railing against. You want things to be controlled by the government. Why?

Being sick destroys all market dynamics. You need to figure that out.

I've already figured that out. I've been sick, without insurance. And I looked for medical service that I could afford. I avoided expensive ambulance service when I could. I negotiated for lower rates and asked about cheaper alternatives. Later, when I had insurance, I didn't give a shit about any of that. I went to the doctor that was close by and had the nicest office. I never asked about prices.

Anyway, none of your whinging about that has anything to do with whether markets "work" or not. Since you haven't specified what it means for a market to "work" there's no way to tell what the fuck you mean. But evasion seems to be your go to - so maybe that's intentional.

If you had figured that out you would know universal is the only way. Only the cheap stuff will ever be shopped. Emergency and life saving care breaks the market.

Only because of inefficient market participation by the Poor. With more full employment of capital by solving simple poverty individuals rates in any given market can be lower and would be more market friendly since more people would be participating in that market.

A simple example is a market where the price of a good is one hundred dollars with only one participant but could be fifty dollars with two participants, etc; if the seller only needs to generate one hundred dollars to achieve a profit in that market.

Obamacare greatly increased the number of people with healthcare. The costs continued to increase. It's a monopoly, they increase prices as they please.

We need single payer at least, because with private health insurance, we are forced to prepay, and that eliminates any ability to argue about costs or quality.
Single payer gives that entity more clout to negotiate a better deal.

 

[Brain357]

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You don’t understand markets?

PIss off.

Markets don’t work for healthcare. Once you figure that out you will see universal is only real option.

Listen, asswipe, I ask you above for clarification on what you mean by "work for healthcare" and you declined to answer, choosing instead to insult me. If want to continue the conversation, start with answering those questions. Until you do, the statement you keep chanting, "Markets don't work for healthcare", has no meaning.

Again:

Healthcare costs just go up, markets have no downward pressure on healthcare. The guy in an ambulance can’t shop a cheaper price so they just charge more and more...

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You are really slow. If there is no downward pressure on pricing, then markets aren’t working. It’s more of a monopoly situation and prices just increase. Competition is important in markets. Again the guy in an ambulance isn’t shopping around. What don’t you get?

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity.

But you're still ignoring my question. Is it that you don't understand it? Or that you just don't want to talk about it? What are you so afraid of? If you're going to claim that markets don't "work" for health care, you need to say what that means. What would it mean for a market to "work"? You seem to be assuming that the purpose of a market is provide everyone with their needs. You don't seem to want to admit that though. Why are you such a chickenshit about it? Can't you just have an honest conversation without all the evasion?

I’ve explained it several times. The number of emergency room patients in a day is dependent on the number of sudden illnesses and accidents. What they charge has no effect. So the price goes up and up. Markets don’t work for healthcare.

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity. But just ignore this and keep chanting. You're getting good at it.

Anyway, since you won't answer my question, I'll assume that you think the purpose of a market is to provide everyone with what they need, and that's where we disagree. A free market doesn't have a purpose, other than freedom. It allows people to pursue their own goals by trading and collaborating with others. It's really freedom that you're railing against. You want things to be controlled by the government. Why?

Being sick destroys all market dynamics. You need to figure that out.

I've already figured that out. I've been sick, without insurance. And I looked for medical service that I could afford. I avoided expensive ambulance service when I could. I negotiated for lower rates and asked about cheaper alternatives. Later, when I had insurance, I didn't give a shit about any of that. I went to the doctor that was close by and had the nicest office. I never asked about prices.

Anyway, none of your whinging about that has anything to do with whether markets "work" or not. Since you haven't specified what it means for a market to "work" there's no way to tell what the fuck you mean. But evasion seems to be your go to - so maybe that's intentional.

If you had figured that out you would know universal is the only way. Only the cheap stuff will ever be shopped. Emergency and life saving care breaks the market.

Only because of inefficient market participation by the Poor. With more full employment of capital by solving simple poverty individuals rates in any given market can be lower and would be more market friendly since more people would be participating in that market.

A simple example is a market where the price of a good is one hundred dollars with only one participant but could be fifty dollars with two participants, etc; if the seller only needs to generate one hundred dollars to achieve a profit in that market.

Obamacare greatly increased the number of people with healthcare. The costs continued to increase. It's a monopoly, they increase prices as they please.

We need single payer at least, because with private health insurance, we are forced to prepay, and that eliminates any ability to argue about costs or quality.
Single payer gives that entity more clout to negotiate a better deal.

We usually have no idea of the cost or what insurance will pay. It's a disaster.

 

[danielpalos]

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You don’t understand markets?

PIss off.

Markets don’t work for healthcare. Once you figure that out you will see universal is only real option.

Listen, asswipe, I ask you above for clarification on what you mean by "work for healthcare" and you declined to answer, choosing instead to insult me. If want to continue the conversation, start with answering those questions. Until you do, the statement you keep chanting, "Markets don't work for healthcare", has no meaning.

Again:

Healthcare costs just go up, markets have no downward pressure on healthcare. The guy in an ambulance can’t shop a cheaper price so they just charge more and more...

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You are really slow. If there is no downward pressure on pricing, then markets aren’t working. It’s more of a monopoly situation and prices just increase. Competition is important in markets. Again the guy in an ambulance isn’t shopping around. What don’t you get?

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity.

But you're still ignoring my question. Is it that you don't understand it? Or that you just don't want to talk about it? What are you so afraid of? If you're going to claim that markets don't "work" for health care, you need to say what that means. What would it mean for a market to "work"? You seem to be assuming that the purpose of a market is provide everyone with their needs. You don't seem to want to admit that though. Why are you such a chickenshit about it? Can't you just have an honest conversation without all the evasion?

I’ve explained it several times. The number of emergency room patients in a day is dependent on the number of sudden illnesses and accidents. What they charge has no effect. So the price goes up and up. Markets don’t work for healthcare.

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity. But just ignore this and keep chanting. You're getting good at it.

Anyway, since you won't answer my question, I'll assume that you think the purpose of a market is to provide everyone with what they need, and that's where we disagree. A free market doesn't have a purpose, other than freedom. It allows people to pursue their own goals by trading and collaborating with others. It's really freedom that you're railing against. You want things to be controlled by the government. Why?

Being sick destroys all market dynamics. You need to figure that out.

I've already figured that out. I've been sick, without insurance. And I looked for medical service that I could afford. I avoided expensive ambulance service when I could. I negotiated for lower rates and asked about cheaper alternatives. Later, when I had insurance, I didn't give a shit about any of that. I went to the doctor that was close by and had the nicest office. I never asked about prices.

Anyway, none of your whinging about that has anything to do with whether markets "work" or not. Since you haven't specified what it means for a market to "work" there's no way to tell what the fuck you mean. But evasion seems to be your go to - so maybe that's intentional.

If you had figured that out you would know universal is the only way. Only the cheap stuff will ever be shopped. Emergency and life saving care breaks the market.

Only because of inefficient market participation by the Poor. With more full employment of capital by solving simple poverty individuals rates in any given market can be lower and would be more market friendly since more people would be participating in that market.

A simple example is a market where the price of a good is one hundred dollars with only one participant but could be fifty dollars with two participants, etc; if the seller only needs to generate one hundred dollars to achieve a profit in that market.

Obamacare greatly increased the number of people with healthcare. The costs continued to increase. It's a monopoly, they increase prices as they please.

It wasn't as market friendly as it could have been.

While Obamacare promised affordable health insurance for every American, and even penalized those who refused to buy it, the law did nothing to control underlying costs. The very structure of the law which imposed billions of dollars in new, costly regulations also led to higher and higher insurance premiums.--https://www.cms.gov/blog/thank-obamacare-rise-uninsured#:~:text=While%20Obamacare%20promised%20affordable%20health,higher%20and%20higher%20insurance%20premiums.

What I described works in any market, ceteris paribus.

You have a lot of excuses, but the fact is many more were insured and healthcare still soared. Markets don't work with healthcare.

I prefer economics.

The very structure of the law which imposed billions of dollars in new, costly regulations also led to higher and higher insurance premiums.

 

[Brain357]

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You don’t understand markets?

PIss off.

Markets don’t work for healthcare. Once you figure that out you will see universal is only real option.

Listen, asswipe, I ask you above for clarification on what you mean by "work for healthcare" and you declined to answer, choosing instead to insult me. If want to continue the conversation, start with answering those questions. Until you do, the statement you keep chanting, "Markets don't work for healthcare", has no meaning.

Again:

Healthcare costs just go up, markets have no downward pressure on healthcare. The guy in an ambulance can’t shop a cheaper price so they just charge more and more...

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You are really slow. If there is no downward pressure on pricing, then markets aren’t working. It’s more of a monopoly situation and prices just increase. Competition is important in markets. Again the guy in an ambulance isn’t shopping around. What don’t you get?

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity.

But you're still ignoring my question. Is it that you don't understand it? Or that you just don't want to talk about it? What are you so afraid of? If you're going to claim that markets don't "work" for health care, you need to say what that means. What would it mean for a market to "work"? You seem to be assuming that the purpose of a market is provide everyone with their needs. You don't seem to want to admit that though. Why are you such a chickenshit about it? Can't you just have an honest conversation without all the evasion?

I’ve explained it several times. The number of emergency room patients in a day is dependent on the number of sudden illnesses and accidents. What they charge has no effect. So the price goes up and up. Markets don’t work for healthcare.

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity. But just ignore this and keep chanting. You're getting good at it.

Anyway, since you won't answer my question, I'll assume that you think the purpose of a market is to provide everyone with what they need, and that's where we disagree. A free market doesn't have a purpose, other than freedom. It allows people to pursue their own goals by trading and collaborating with others. It's really freedom that you're railing against. You want things to be controlled by the government. Why?

Being sick destroys all market dynamics. You need to figure that out.

I've already figured that out. I've been sick, without insurance. And I looked for medical service that I could afford. I avoided expensive ambulance service when I could. I negotiated for lower rates and asked about cheaper alternatives. Later, when I had insurance, I didn't give a shit about any of that. I went to the doctor that was close by and had the nicest office. I never asked about prices.

Anyway, none of your whinging about that has anything to do with whether markets "work" or not. Since you haven't specified what it means for a market to "work" there's no way to tell what the fuck you mean. But evasion seems to be your go to - so maybe that's intentional.

If you had figured that out you would know universal is the only way. Only the cheap stuff will ever be shopped. Emergency and life saving care breaks the market.

Only because of inefficient market participation by the Poor. With more full employment of capital by solving simple poverty individuals rates in any given market can be lower and would be more market friendly since more people would be participating in that market.

A simple example is a market where the price of a good is one hundred dollars with only one participant but could be fifty dollars with two participants, etc; if the seller only needs to generate one hundred dollars to achieve a profit in that market.

Obamacare greatly increased the number of people with healthcare. The costs continued to increase. It's a monopoly, they increase prices as they please.

It wasn't as market friendly as it could have been.

While Obamacare promised affordable health insurance for every American, and even penalized those who refused to buy it, the law did nothing to control underlying costs. The very structure of the law which imposed billions of dollars in new, costly regulations also led to higher and higher insurance premiums.--https://www.cms.gov/blog/thank-obamacare-rise-uninsured#:~:text=While%20Obamacare%20promised%20affordable%20health,higher%20and%20higher%20insurance%20premiums.

What I described works in any market, ceteris paribus.

You have a lot of excuses, but the fact is many more were insured and healthcare still soared. Markets don't work with healthcare.

I prefer economics.

The very structure of the law which imposed billions of dollars in new, costly regulations also led to higher and higher insurance premiums.

I rather like economics also. And if you do it should be obvious that markets don't work in healthcare. The number of patients an emergency room gets is based on the number of accidents and sudden health problems. They can charge whatever they want because nobody is going to shop price.

 

[Brain357]

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You don’t understand markets?

PIss off.

Markets don’t work for healthcare. Once you figure that out you will see universal is only real option.

Listen, asswipe, I ask you above for clarification on what you mean by "work for healthcare" and you declined to answer, choosing instead to insult me. If want to continue the conversation, start with answering those questions. Until you do, the statement you keep chanting, "Markets don't work for healthcare", has no meaning.

Again:

Healthcare costs just go up, markets have no downward pressure on healthcare. The guy in an ambulance can’t shop a cheaper price so they just charge more and more...

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You are really slow. If there is no downward pressure on pricing, then markets aren’t working. It’s more of a monopoly situation and prices just increase. Competition is important in markets. Again the guy in an ambulance isn’t shopping around. What don’t you get?

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity.

But you're still ignoring my question. Is it that you don't understand it? Or that you just don't want to talk about it? What are you so afraid of? If you're going to claim that markets don't "work" for health care, you need to say what that means. What would it mean for a market to "work"? You seem to be assuming that the purpose of a market is provide everyone with their needs. You don't seem to want to admit that though. Why are you such a chickenshit about it? Can't you just have an honest conversation without all the evasion?

I’ve explained it several times. The number of emergency room patients in a day is dependent on the number of sudden illnesses and accidents. What they charge has no effect. So the price goes up and up. Markets don’t work for healthcare.

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity. But just ignore this and keep chanting. You're getting good at it.

Anyway, since you won't answer my question, I'll assume that you think the purpose of a market is to provide everyone with what they need, and that's where we disagree. A free market doesn't have a purpose, other than freedom. It allows people to pursue their own goals by trading and collaborating with others. It's really freedom that you're railing against. You want things to be controlled by the government. Why?

Being sick destroys all market dynamics. You need to figure that out.

I've already figured that out. I've been sick, without insurance. And I looked for medical service that I could afford. I avoided expensive ambulance service when I could. I negotiated for lower rates and asked about cheaper alternatives. Later, when I had insurance, I didn't give a shit about any of that. I went to the doctor that was close by and had the nicest office. I never asked about prices.

Anyway, none of your whinging about that has anything to do with whether markets "work" or not. Since you haven't specified what it means for a market to "work" there's no way to tell what the fuck you mean. But evasion seems to be your go to - so maybe that's intentional.

If you had figured that out you would know universal is the only way. Only the cheap stuff will ever be shopped. Emergency and life saving care breaks the market.

Only because of inefficient market participation by the Poor. With more full employment of capital by solving simple poverty individuals rates in any given market can be lower and would be more market friendly since more people would be participating in that market.

A simple example is a market where the price of a good is one hundred dollars with only one participant but could be fifty dollars with two participants, etc; if the seller only needs to generate one hundred dollars to achieve a profit in that market.

Obamacare greatly increased the number of people with healthcare. The costs continued to increase. It's a monopoly, they increase prices as they please.

It wasn't as market friendly as it could have been.

While Obamacare promised affordable health insurance for every American, and even penalized those who refused to buy it, the law did nothing to control underlying costs. The very structure of the law which imposed billions of dollars in new, costly regulations also led to higher and higher insurance premiums.--https://www.cms.gov/blog/thank-obamacare-rise-uninsured#:~:text=While%20Obamacare%20promised%20affordable%20health,higher%20and%20higher%20insurance%20premiums.

What I described works in any market, ceteris paribus.

You have a lot of excuses, but the fact is many more were insured and healthcare still soared. Markets don't work with healthcare.

I prefer economics.

The very structure of the law which imposed billions of dollars in new, costly regulations also led to higher and higher insurance premiums.

Markets don't work for health care - MarketWatch

 

[justinacolmena]

Markets don't work for health care - MarketWatch

>>> In fact, totally free markets are abysmally bad at delivering health care. That's why every advanced economy, to one degree or another, has given government a large role in providing health care to its citizens.​

>>> We've tried the market approach to health care and the result has always been the same: Poor health and poor people.​

>>> Poverty and disease go together, and the causation goes both ways. Show me a country that keeps the government out of health care and I'll show you a country that spends too much on death and not enough on life.​

>>> I'm not arguing that everything government does is good, or that everything the private sector does is bad. It's clear that government actions can have their own failures that make health care more expensive or less effective. All I'm arguing here is that relying on markets exclusively leaves us poorer and sicker.​

Straight from the spokesman of a Communist Party politburo.

If it's some kind of pill or medication, free markets are amazingly efficient at delivering it. If it's something to be forced on patients against their will, then of course there’s always a market for extortion, forced drugging, and involuntary hospitalization under the explicit blessing and protection of government.

The real healthcare market is precisely in the government intervention to enforce routine mayhem, involuntary vaccination, mass murder, and abortion-on-demand at the pleasure of street hookers for every patron of prostitutes and dead-beat dad on the block.

If healthcare is a “good” for individuals making their own decisions, then there is no reason why a free market cannot deliver it. It is when prostitutes have to be involuntarily committed for healthcare against their will and extorted and beaten for the payment of it that government must intervene.

 

[dblack]

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You don’t understand markets?

PIss off.

Markets don’t work for healthcare. Once you figure that out you will see universal is only real option.

Listen, asswipe, I ask you above for clarification on what you mean by "work for healthcare" and you declined to answer, choosing instead to insult me. If want to continue the conversation, start with answering those questions. Until you do, the statement you keep chanting, "Markets don't work for healthcare", has no meaning.

Again:

Healthcare costs just go up, markets have no downward pressure on healthcare. The guy in an ambulance can’t shop a cheaper price so they just charge more and more...

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You are really slow. If there is no downward pressure on pricing, then markets aren’t working. It’s more of a monopoly situation and prices just increase. Competition is important in markets. Again the guy in an ambulance isn’t shopping around. What don’t you get?

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity.

But you're still ignoring my question. Is it that you don't understand it? Or that you just don't want to talk about it? What are you so afraid of? If you're going to claim that markets don't "work" for health care, you need to say what that means. What would it mean for a market to "work"? You seem to be assuming that the purpose of a market is provide everyone with their needs. You don't seem to want to admit that though. Why are you such a chickenshit about it? Can't you just have an honest conversation without all the evasion?

I’ve explained it several times. The number of emergency room patients in a day is dependent on the number of sudden illnesses and accidents. What they charge has no effect. So the price goes up and up. Markets don’t work for healthcare.

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity. But just ignore this and keep chanting. You're getting good at it.

Anyway, since you won't answer my question, I'll assume that you think the purpose of a market is to provide everyone with what they need, and that's where we disagree. A free market doesn't have a purpose, other than freedom. It allows people to pursue their own goals by trading and collaborating with others. It's really freedom that you're railing against. You want things to be controlled by the government. Why?

Being sick destroys all market dynamics. You need to figure that out.

I've already figured that out. I've been sick, without insurance. And I looked for medical service that I could afford. I avoided expensive ambulance service when I could. I negotiated for lower rates and asked about cheaper alternatives. Later, when I had insurance, I didn't give a shit about any of that. I went to the doctor that was close by and had the nicest office. I never asked about prices.

Anyway, none of your whinging about that has anything to do with whether markets "work" or not. Since you haven't specified what it means for a market to "work" there's no way to tell what the fuck you mean. But evasion seems to be your go to - so maybe that's intentional.

If you had figured that out you would know universal is the only way.

The only way to what?

Bottom line, I don't want Donald Trump, or any other unscrupulous politician, in charge of my health care.

That's nice, but leaving it in the hands of greedy companies is quickly making it unaffordable. Universal is the only way to make it affordable and insure everyone has access to healthcare. You have no valid arguments against this.

Wanna bet? Your premise simply isn't true. We don't have to leave it in the hands of greedy companies. They have no power to force us to do business with them. The government does. The problem is that government is doing the bidding of these companies and pushing people into their pens - first with tax policies and regulation, then with mandates. Repeal these laws, and use the commerce clause to strike down anti-competitive state regulations. Then we can see whether the market "works" or not.

People should be free to pay for their health care however they want. There's no need for government to dictate. It's merely a power-grab.

Also, once again, you steered around my question (your pattern I guess). You said UHC "is the only way". The only way to what?

 

[justinacolmena]

You said UHC "is the only way". The only way to what?

To taxation without representation. Universal healthcare is something we are forced to pay for and forced to submit to for all the routine mayhem and butchery, government-mandated vaccinations and tooth extractions, genital mutilations and routine hysterectomies. Those doctors will amputate rather than set a simple broken bone without private pay.

 

[dblack]

You said UHC "is the only way". The only way to what?

To taxation without representation. Universal healthcare is something we are forced to pay for and forced to submit to for all the routine mayhem and butchery, government-mandated vaccinations and tooth extractions, genital mutilations and routine hysterectomies. Those doctors will amputate rather than set a simple broken bone without private pay.

That sounds whacky, but my question is legitimate. What problem is UHC supposed to solve? Health care price inflation? Or is the goal to provide health care for the poor. One the biggest problems with the health care reform effort is lack of clarity on this question, because different answers imply different solutions.

 

[Staidhup]

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You don’t understand markets?

PIss off.

Markets don’t work for healthcare. Once you figure that out you will see universal is only real option.

Listen, asswipe, I ask you above for clarification on what you mean by "work for healthcare" and you declined to answer, choosing instead to insult me. If want to continue the conversation, start with answering those questions. Until you do, the statement you keep chanting, "Markets don't work for healthcare", has no meaning.

Again:

Healthcare costs just go up, markets have no downward pressure on healthcare. The guy in an ambulance can’t shop a cheaper price so they just charge more and more...

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You are really slow. If there is no downward pressure on pricing, then markets aren’t working. It’s more of a monopoly situation and prices just increase. Competition is important in markets. Again the guy in an ambulance isn’t shopping around. What don’t you get?

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity.

But you're still ignoring my question. Is it that you don't understand it? Or that you just don't want to talk about it? What are you so afraid of? If you're going to claim that markets don't "work" for health care, you need to say what that means. What would it mean for a market to "work"? You seem to be assuming that the purpose of a market is provide everyone with their needs. You don't seem to want to admit that though. Why are you such a chickenshit about it? Can't you just have an honest conversation without all the evasion?

I’ve explained it several times. The number of emergency room patients in a day is dependent on the number of sudden illnesses and accidents. What they charge has no effect. So the price goes up and up. Markets don’t work for healthcare.

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity. But just ignore this and keep chanting. You're getting good at it.

Anyway, since you won't answer my question, I'll assume that you think the purpose of a market is to provide everyone with what they need, and that's where we disagree. A free market doesn't have a purpose, other than freedom. It allows people to pursue their own goals by trading and collaborating with others. It's really freedom that you're railing against. You want things to be controlled by the government. Why?

Being sick destroys all market dynamics. You need to figure that out.

I've already figured that out. I've been sick, without insurance. And I looked for medical service that I could afford. I avoided expensive ambulance service when I could. I negotiated for lower rates and asked about cheaper alternatives. Later, when I had insurance, I didn't give a shit about any of that. I went to the doctor that was close by and had the nicest office. I never asked about prices.

Anyway, none of your whinging about that has anything to do with whether markets "work" or not. Since you haven't specified what it means for a market to "work" there's no way to tell what the fuck you mean. But evasion seems to be your go to - so maybe that's intentional.

If you had figured that out you would know universal is the only way.

The only way to what?

Bottom line, I don't want Donald Trump, or any other unscrupulous politician, in charge of my health care.

That's nice, but leaving it in the hands of greedy companies is quickly making it unaffordable. Universal is the only way to make it affordable and insure everyone has access to healthcare. You have no valid arguments against this.

Why are health care costs so high, talk to an attorney.

 

[Norman]

Government can't make anything affordable.

It can make others, productive people, the hate group of democrats... pay. That is why the losers whine so much about it.

Of course, no republican state should accept such nonsense. It's unconstitutional and there is no need to accept that <50% of the nation deciding what they do through a stolen election.

Funny how Texas didn't have standing despite clearly being affected...

 

[Blues Man]

Something wrong with anyone who thinks we all shouldn’t have healthcare. Our current system is a super expensive mess.

there's also something wrong with the government forcing people to pay for things they don't need want and will never use

Like all the increased military spending?

yup.

but then again there really is no correlation between health care and the military.

Now if everyone was mandated to buy a rifle that would be a better comparison

We all need healthcare at some point.

but we don't all need the same health care.

I don't need drug counseling but I am forced to pay for it.

I don't need pediatric or obstetric health care because I don't have kids and I'm not a woman but I have to pay for it.

And if we have a universal healthcare system it is cheaper for all.

irrelevant

And I don't think that's true at all.

Our current system is by far the most expensive. That’s a well known fact,

tough too say when government health care costs are nearly impossible to track

I would say it is the opposite, in that government health care costs are very trivial to track, like with Medicare, VA hospitals, etc., and they are tiny compared to what you pay with private health care systems like private health insurance paying private hospitals for treatment the patient has already prepaid for and has no say then at all over quality or cost.
There can be nothing worse than prepaying through insurance premiums.
Worst possible system.

and you think the government can provide better health care?

you don't think that adding 335 million people to government health care will result in trivial costs?

 

[alpine]

You'll often see conservatives argue that any social program is socialism and then in the next breath they'll say the Scandinavian countries are capitalist and not socialist when people point to how well they do over there. Well they have universal healthcare and very expansive social safety nets. Are those things socialism or not in your world view? You hypocrites can't have your cake and eat it too. Either the Scandinavian countries are socialist in your view or things like universal healthcare are not actually socialism. There are no Democrats arguing for the government to completely take over the private sector. They want universal healthcare and government funded universities like in the Scandinavian nations. At least get your shit straight and make a consistent argument.

Your entire argument is predicated on conservatives not recognizing that Scandanavian countries are socialist. So we'll lay that to rest first. Scandanavia and Canada are socialist. That being said, conservatives believe in working hard, earning a living and enjoying the fruits of their labor. They donate to the charitable causes they believe in--that is a social safety net. They do not like to be FORCED to pay for lazy people who feel the world owes them a living. Also, if these socialist countries are so good, why do Canadian nurses come to the US in droves? Also, 27 years ago when I had by-pass surgery I was fortunate to have two of those extremely qualified nurses attending. I asked them if it was true that my surgery would be free in Canada to which they replied in the affirmative. They quickly added that instead of the five days that it took to get my surgery done, it would have been three months or longer in Canada. Socialism sucks. Get off of your lazy backside and earn a living.

so your whole argument relies on 2 canadian chicks...

and you didnt even care to question in your simple mind what might have caused the shortage of nurses in the country to begin with...

because it was simpler and comfier for you to dream a fantasy about canadians getting tired of their socialist regime and running away...

you dont even realize you are paying a premium as a result of failed education policies which you assume are saving you money...

you are that stupid...


and then you go on about "earning a living"...


the only good thing about this pandemic was to show what a bunch of liars and hypocrites some people are...

in your simple mind, if one falls, thats because he/she is a "lazy slacker" who is not trying hard enough...

nobody deserves a safety net just because in your comfortable lifetime you didnt need one...

so the richest nation in the universe shouldnt spend any dime nor time trying to create one...


so how does it feel like living in a country of "lazy slackers" now then...


look into the eyes of millions who lost their jobs as a result of an ignorant fool ignoring a deadly and fast spreading virus up until it was too late and had to shutdown the whole economy, and tell them they are just bunch of "lazy slackers" for not trying hard enough...

see how your fellow countrymen judge your deplorable ideas then...

what would have been a failed state that relies on your petty charities to support a whole nation if this was anything close to your fantasies, turned out to be not that bad, thanks to the smart people with conscience and love for their people that created some safety nets you are bitching about to take care of each other...

because thats the meaning of being a "country"...
which you clearly lack the understanding of...

 

[JustAGuy1]

Is universal healthcare socialism?

Are the Scandinavian countries socialist?

If you're not an idiot your answers to both of those questions will be the same.

So you posed a question that you have already determined what you believe the answers to it are and then call anyone who doesn't buy your conclusions idiots. Helluva debate tactic there butch.

 

[Mr Natural]

Here's how it works in binary thinking Conservatopia:

If you are not a flag waving, bible thumping, right wing conservative republican, then the only other choice you have is communism.

There is no middle ground in Conservatopia.

 

[dblack]

Here's how it works in binary thinking Conservatopia:

If you are not a flag waving, bible thumping, right wing conservative republican, then the only other choice you have is communism.

There is no middle ground in Conservatopia.

Whatever. I just don't want the likes of Donald Trump controlling our health care.

 

[DBA]

Here's how it works in binary thinking Conservatopia:

If you are not a flag waving, bible thumping, right wing conservative republican, then the only other choice you have is communism.

There is no middle ground in Conservatopia.

Whatever. I just don't want the likes of Donald Trump controlling our health care.

I like Donald Trump’s policies and voted for him, but I don’t want any politician controlling my healthcare. The problem for many on the left is they are able to think two steps ahead. “Free” stuff is enticiing..like candy for a baby. Never mind that the candy is dangling over a cliff. They go for it, without thinking first.

 

[Blues Man]

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You don’t understand markets?

PIss off.

Markets don’t work for healthcare. Once you figure that out you will see universal is only real option.

Listen, asswipe, I ask you above for clarification on what you mean by "work for healthcare" and you declined to answer, choosing instead to insult me. If want to continue the conversation, start with answering those questions. Until you do, the statement you keep chanting, "Markets don't work for healthcare", has no meaning.

Again:

Healthcare costs just go up, markets have no downward pressure on healthcare. The guy in an ambulance can’t shop a cheaper price so they just charge more and more...

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You are really slow. If there is no downward pressure on pricing, then markets aren’t working. It’s more of a monopoly situation and prices just increase. Competition is important in markets. Again the guy in an ambulance isn’t shopping around. What don’t you get?

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity.

But you're still ignoring my question. Is it that you don't understand it? Or that you just don't want to talk about it? What are you so afraid of? If you're going to claim that markets don't "work" for health care, you need to say what that means. What would it mean for a market to "work"? You seem to be assuming that the purpose of a market is provide everyone with their needs. You don't seem to want to admit that though. Why are you such a chickenshit about it? Can't you just have an honest conversation without all the evasion?

I’ve explained it several times. The number of emergency room patients in a day is dependent on the number of sudden illnesses and accidents. What they charge has no effect. So the price goes up and up. Markets don’t work for healthcare.

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity. But just ignore this and keep chanting. You're getting good at it.

Anyway, since you won't answer my question, I'll assume that you think the purpose of a market is to provide everyone with what they need, and that's where we disagree. A free market doesn't have a purpose, other than freedom. It allows people to pursue their own goals by trading and collaborating with others. It's really freedom that you're railing against. You want things to be controlled by the government. Why?

Being sick destroys all market dynamics. You need to figure that out.

I've already figured that out. I've been sick, without insurance. And I looked for medical service that I could afford. I avoided expensive ambulance service when I could. I negotiated for lower rates and asked about cheaper alternatives. Later, when I had insurance, I didn't give a shit about any of that. I went to the doctor that was close by and had the nicest office. I never asked about prices.

Anyway, none of your whinging about that has anything to do with whether markets "work" or not. Since you haven't specified what it means for a market to "work" there's no way to tell what the fuck you mean. But evasion seems to be your go to - so maybe that's intentional.

If you had figured that out you would know universal is the only way. Only the cheap stuff will ever be shopped. Emergency and life saving care breaks the market.

Only because of inefficient market participation by the Poor. With more full employment of capital by solving simple poverty individuals rates in any given market can be lower and would be more market friendly since more people would be participating in that market.

A simple example is a market where the price of a good is one hundred dollars with only one participant but could be fifty dollars with two participants, etc; if the seller only needs to generate one hundred dollars to achieve a profit in that market.

Obamacare greatly increased the number of people with healthcare. The costs continued to increase. It's a monopoly, they increase prices as they please.

It wasn't as market friendly as it could have been.

While Obamacare promised affordable health insurance for every American, and even penalized those who refused to buy it, the law did nothing to control underlying costs. The very structure of the law which imposed billions of dollars in new, costly regulations also led to higher and higher insurance premiums.--https://www.cms.gov/blog/thank-obamacare-rise-uninsured#:~:text=While%20Obamacare%20promised%20affordable%20health,higher%20and%20higher%20insurance%20premiums.

What I described works in any market, ceteris paribus.

You have a lot of excuses, but the fact is many more were insured and healthcare still soared. Markets don't work with healthcare.

since we have never let market forces work on health care you can't say markets don't work.

 

[danielpalos]

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You don’t understand markets?

PIss off.

Markets don’t work for healthcare. Once you figure that out you will see universal is only real option.

Listen, asswipe, I ask you above for clarification on what you mean by "work for healthcare" and you declined to answer, choosing instead to insult me. If want to continue the conversation, start with answering those questions. Until you do, the statement you keep chanting, "Markets don't work for healthcare", has no meaning.

Again:

Healthcare costs just go up, markets have no downward pressure on healthcare. The guy in an ambulance can’t shop a cheaper price so they just charge more and more...

Again, I don't know what you mean by "work". Are you presuming that the purpose of a free market is to provide people with their needs? And if someone can't get what they need the market has failed?

You are really slow. If there is no downward pressure on pricing, then markets aren’t working. It’s more of a monopoly situation and prices just increase. Competition is important in markets. Again the guy in an ambulance isn’t shopping around. What don’t you get?

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity.

But you're still ignoring my question. Is it that you don't understand it? Or that you just don't want to talk about it? What are you so afraid of? If you're going to claim that markets don't "work" for health care, you need to say what that means. What would it mean for a market to "work"? You seem to be assuming that the purpose of a market is provide everyone with their needs. You don't seem to want to admit that though. Why are you such a chickenshit about it? Can't you just have an honest conversation without all the evasion?

I’ve explained it several times. The number of emergency room patients in a day is dependent on the number of sudden illnesses and accidents. What they charge has no effect. So the price goes up and up. Markets don’t work for healthcare.

There's no downward pressure because no one is paying for their own health care. They've been herded, by government, into employer-provided, group health insurance that obliterates all normal market dynamics - actually turns them upside down so that health care consumers have incentive to choose the more expensive option at every opportunity. But just ignore this and keep chanting. You're getting good at it.

Anyway, since you won't answer my question, I'll assume that you think the purpose of a market is to provide everyone with what they need, and that's where we disagree. A free market doesn't have a purpose, other than freedom. It allows people to pursue their own goals by trading and collaborating with others. It's really freedom that you're railing against. You want things to be controlled by the government. Why?

Being sick destroys all market dynamics. You need to figure that out.

I've already figured that out. I've been sick, without insurance. And I looked for medical service that I could afford. I avoided expensive ambulance service when I could. I negotiated for lower rates and asked about cheaper alternatives. Later, when I had insurance, I didn't give a shit about any of that. I went to the doctor that was close by and had the nicest office. I never asked about prices.

Anyway, none of your whinging about that has anything to do with whether markets "work" or not. Since you haven't specified what it means for a market to "work" there's no way to tell what the fuck you mean. But evasion seems to be your go to - so maybe that's intentional.

If you had figured that out you would know universal is the only way. Only the cheap stuff will ever be shopped. Emergency and life saving care breaks the market.

Only because of inefficient market participation by the Poor. With more full employment of capital by solving simple poverty individuals rates in any given market can be lower and would be more market friendly since more people would be participating in that market.

A simple example is a market where the price of a good is one hundred dollars with only one participant but could be fifty dollars with two participants, etc; if the seller only needs to generate one hundred dollars to achieve a profit in that market.

Obamacare greatly increased the number of people with healthcare. The costs continued to increase. It's a monopoly, they increase prices as they please.

It wasn't as market friendly as it could have been.

While Obamacare promised affordable health insurance for every American, and even penalized those who refused to buy it, the law did nothing to control underlying costs. The very structure of the law which imposed billions of dollars in new, costly regulations also led to higher and higher insurance premiums.--https://www.cms.gov/blog/thank-obamacare-rise-uninsured#:~:text=While%20Obamacare%20promised%20affordable%20health,higher%20and%20higher%20insurance%20premiums.

What I described works in any market, ceteris paribus.

You have a lot of excuses, but the fact is many more were insured and healthcare still soared. Markets don't work with healthcare.

I prefer economics.

The very structure of the law which imposed billions of dollars in new, costly regulations also led to higher and higher insurance premiums.

Markets don't work for health care - MarketWatch

Did you actually read the article?

;;;
If we relied strictly on market forces to provide health care, we'd be sicker and poorer. As anyone who's lived in a Third World country knows, the market alone can't provide clean water or sewage systems. The market alone can't prevent epidemics....