🌟 Exclusive 2024 Prime Day Deals! 🌟

Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁

Sanders: Universal Healthcare and Free College Aren’t Radical Ideas, They Are ‘Human Rights’

Single Payer could be accomplished very easily and quickly by extending Medicare to everyone. It's already set up and covers a large group of people.

Well yes it does. The problem is they only pay part of the bill for their patients.

Doctors and hospitals raise their fees to cover the losses for government patients. That's why when you see health facilities close, they are usually in lower income areas where there are not enough private pay and private insured patients to make up those losses.

So if we all went on Medicare, where would providers make up the losses at?
 
Single Payer could be accomplished very easily and quickly by extending Medicare to everyone. It's already set up and covers a large group of people.

yes and we should have single payer in most industries so all Americans would get the products that it is their right to have!!
 
Single Payer could be accomplished very easily and quickly by extending Medicare to everyone. It's already set up and covers a large group of people.
Medicare is projected to go bankrupt in a few years. Yeah, sounds like a great idea. Not.
The Right has been saying that Medicare is going bankrupt for many years and will as long as its representatives receive large contributions.
 
And you're basing this assertion on what?
Which assertion ? That healthcare in the US is not the best in the world ? Just look at the OCED stats.
That insurance dampens competition ? Well, just tell me how many insured people you know before or after obamacare did medical shopping ?

Hey, if you think another country will provide you with better-quality healthcare, head on over there. None of us will stop you.
I do have one such arrangement. I go south to get medical attention ( which is not very often), just as nearly 90,000 US retirees do.
Mexico's health care lures Americans - USATODAY.com

Most of our northern border hospitals are loaded with Canadian patients. They come here to get help they can't get in Canada. Last I read (which was some time ago) Canada spends over a billion dollars a year in the US to take care of citizens they can't care for.

As a patient at the world famous Cleveland Clinic, I can tell you that when you walk into the place, you're the one that feels like a foreigner. It's like going to the UN.

My sister is a long time employee at the clinic. She can tell you stories of VIP's from all over the world that come here for our outstanding care and technology. They don't go to Mexico and they don't go to Cuba. We have some of the most advanced medical care in the world.

She told us of stories where a middle-east VIP's would rent an entire hospital floor. It's closed off to everybody due to security reasons. Whatever services the clinic provided, they would pay cash daily. They used to have a scheduled Brink's truck come in every day to transfer the funds.

Socialized medical care is great for a broken arm, the flu, X-rays and so forth. But in situations that are life and death, you don't want to be treated in a country with socialized medicine.
You've certainly bought into the Right's arguments.
Why is it that most of Europe has longer life expectancy than in the US. They also have lower infant mortality than we do.
They drink more wine. ANd they have no inner city ghetto blacks or Hispanics.

In france 15% of the population are from Africa or Asia.
France - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And? That is meaningless and unresponsive to my post.
It does , they have immigrants and they are able to make them part of their society without creating ghettos.
 
And you're basing this assertion on what?
Which assertion ? That healthcare in the US is not the best in the world ? Just look at the OCED stats.
That insurance dampens competition ? Well, just tell me how many insured people you know before or after obamacare did medical shopping ?

Hey, if you think another country will provide you with better-quality healthcare, head on over there. None of us will stop you.
I do have one such arrangement. I go south to get medical attention ( which is not very often), just as nearly 90,000 US retirees do.
Mexico's health care lures Americans - USATODAY.com

People aren't allowed by law to "shop around" for medical insurance. The regulations on medical insurance were ridiculous even before Obamacare.
I am talking about shopping for medical attention not for medical insurance.
One of the few points I do like about Obamacera is that insurance must cover pre-existing conditions.

Who, precisely, do you think is going to manage healthcare payment other than health insurance companies?
If insurances worked as a "saving account" people would do medical shopping, and that would encourage competition.
Of course it is not as easy as that, what about someone who gets cancer at an early age? In that case the government should step in and pay part of the fee ( never all the fee, because it would discourage competition ).

Another alternative would be to have community owned hospitals ( gather , 10,000 people to invest in a hospital and make them the owners ). That way you take out the middle man out of the way.
Oy.
The OECD stats are misleading and biased. This has been shown over and over again.

You dont get better healthcare in Mexico. You get cheaper healthcare. That's typucally why people do what you do.
Why would people invest in hospitals without getting any kind of return? In any case, every example of "non-profit" medical insurance/medical care has failed to deliver lower prices. Profit is a positive in healthcare, as elsewhere, not a negative. Profit drives lower costs and better outcomes. Socialism does the opposite.

The OECD stats are misleading and biased. This has been shown over and over again.
Well then , which stats do you want to use to compare different countries ? WHO ?
It is very easy to disregard stats, but then you should provide a better source.
Other sources point towards the same direction.
Once again, U.S. has most expensive, least effective health care system in survey

You dont get better healthcare in Mexico. You get cheaper healthcare.
Indeed. I've never said the opposite. A Beetle is far cheaper than a BMW, but hey , if the Beetle suits your needs ..

Why would people invest in hospitals without getting any kind of return?
Those were different alternatives. In community owned hospitals you would get a return AND if the hospital charges you sky high prices you also get a return .

In any case, every example of "non-profit" medical insurance/medical care has failed to deliver lower prices.
No , not really
bar-chart.png

Profit drives lower costs and better outcomes.
Indeed , but you need profit AND competition , and current insurance schemes damp competition.
The correct metric has been supplied. If you get sick in America your ability to get seen early is greater and your health outcome is greater. This is a fact.

So the fact that you go to Mexico, like many others, is not proof the US system delivers worse care, which is what you contended. Point refuted.
Your point about communty hospitals is incoherent. If the purpose of them is to reduce medical costs then you've already admitted it wont do that.
Medicare dictates payments, private insurance negotiates payments. Thus the difference. In any case you are citing payments for medical services, not medical insurance premiums. Surely you know the difference.

The correct metric has been supplied. If you get sick in America your ability to get seen early is greater and your health outcome is greater. This is a fact.
Well , post the link.
If you are refering to Andylusion's post , then that is not valid. It's 25 years old.

So the fact that you go to Mexico, like many others, is not proof the US system delivers worse care, which is what you contended. Point refuted.
No point proven or disproven. Cecile stated :
Hey, if you think another country will provide you with better-quality healthcare, head on over there. None of us will stop you.
I simply gave an answer.

Your point about communty hospitals is incoherent. If the purpose of them is to reduce medical costs then you've already admitted it wont do that.
No , it is not. If the hospitals get a profit, you as an owner get a profit.
If the hospital gets no profit you get no profit , but you get healthcare at the lowest price available.

Medicare dictates payments, private insurance negotiates payments. Thus the difference. In any case you are citing payments for medical services, not medical insurance premiums. Surely you know the difference

The post was unrelated to medicare, I was simply giving ideas for the available options. There are many more. For example in Japan the patient covers only 30% of the cost , the government pays the rest. Then you have to do some shopping.

Yes, Japan. And now that they control healthcare, they can also control you:

Japan, Seeking Trim Waists, Measures Millions
By NORIMITSU ONISHI
Published: June 13, 2008

AMAGASAKI, Japan — Japan, a country not known for its overweight people, has undertaken one of the most ambitious campaigns ever by a nation to slim down its citizenry.

Summoned by the city of Amagasaki one recent morning, Minoru Nogiri, 45, a flower shop owner, found himself lining up to have his waistline measured. With no visible paunch, he seemed to run little risk of being classified as overweight, or metabo, the preferred word in Japan these days.

But because the new state-prescribed limit for male waistlines is a strict 33.5 inches, he had anxiously measured himself at home a couple of days earlier. “I’m on the border,” he said.

Under a national law that came into effect two months ago, companies and local governments must now measure the waistlines of Japanese people between the ages of 40 and 74 as part of their annual checkups. That represents more than 56 million waistlines, or about 44 percent of the entire population.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/world/asia/13fat.html?_r=0

I don't know if I'd be that thrilled with Mrs. Obama coming out to measure my waist line.
So , the NSA can access you e-mail , credit record , phone calls , web content , contact list ... ahh but they don't mess with my waistline. No sir !!!
 
Most of our northern border hospitals are loaded with Canadian patients. They come here to get help they can't get in Canada. Last I read (which was some time ago) Canada spends over a billion dollars a year in the US to take care of citizens they can't care for.

As a patient at the world famous Cleveland Clinic, I can tell you that when you walk into the place, you're the one that feels like a foreigner. It's like going to the UN.

My sister is a long time employee at the clinic. She can tell you stories of VIP's from all over the world that come here for our outstanding care and technology. They don't go to Mexico and they don't go to Cuba. We have some of the most advanced medical care in the world.

She told us of stories where a middle-east VIP's would rent an entire hospital floor. It's closed off to everybody due to security reasons. Whatever services the clinic provided, they would pay cash daily. They used to have a scheduled Brink's truck come in every day to transfer the funds.

Socialized medical care is great for a broken arm, the flu, X-rays and so forth. But in situations that are life and death, you don't want to be treated in a country with socialized medicine.
You've certainly bought into the Right's arguments.
Why is it that most of Europe has longer life expectancy than in the US. They also have lower infant mortality than we do.
They drink more wine. ANd they have no inner city ghetto blacks or Hispanics.

In france 15% of the population are from Africa or Asia.
France - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And? That is meaningless and unresponsive to my post.
It does , they have immigrants and they are able to make them part of their society without creating ghettos.


Civil Unrest in the French Suburbs, November 2005
 
You've certainly bought into the Right's arguments.
Why is it that most of Europe has longer life expectancy than in the US. They also have lower infant mortality than we do.
They drink more wine. ANd they have no inner city ghetto blacks or Hispanics.

In france 15% of the population are from Africa or Asia.
France - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And? That is meaningless and unresponsive to my post.
It does , they have immigrants and they are able to make them part of their society without creating ghettos.


Civil Unrest in the French Suburbs, November 2005

Well then, they have ghettos and their helthcare system simply works better
No further arguments need to be presented.
 
They drink more wine. ANd they have no inner city ghetto blacks or Hispanics.

In france 15% of the population are from Africa or Asia.
France - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And? That is meaningless and unresponsive to my post.
It does , they have immigrants and they are able to make them part of their society without creating ghettos.


Civil Unrest in the French Suburbs, November 2005

Well then, they have ghettos and their helthcare system simply works better
No further arguments need to be presented.

Well then, they have ghettos and their helthcare system simply works better

You're half right. Which is more than usual. :^)
 
Oy.
The OECD stats are misleading and biased. This has been shown over and over again.

You dont get better healthcare in Mexico. You get cheaper healthcare. That's typucally why people do what you do.
Why would people invest in hospitals without getting any kind of return? In any case, every example of "non-profit" medical insurance/medical care has failed to deliver lower prices. Profit is a positive in healthcare, as elsewhere, not a negative. Profit drives lower costs and better outcomes. Socialism does the opposite.

The OECD stats are misleading and biased. This has been shown over and over again.
Well then , which stats do you want to use to compare different countries ? WHO ?
It is very easy to disregard stats, but then you should provide a better source.
Other sources point towards the same direction.
Once again, U.S. has most expensive, least effective health care system in survey

You dont get better healthcare in Mexico. You get cheaper healthcare.
Indeed. I've never said the opposite. A Beetle is far cheaper than a BMW, but hey , if the Beetle suits your needs ..

Why would people invest in hospitals without getting any kind of return?
Those were different alternatives. In community owned hospitals you would get a return AND if the hospital charges you sky high prices you also get a return .

In any case, every example of "non-profit" medical insurance/medical care has failed to deliver lower prices.
No , not really
bar-chart.png

Profit drives lower costs and better outcomes.
Indeed , but you need profit AND competition , and current insurance schemes damp competition.
The correct metric has been supplied. If you get sick in America your ability to get seen early is greater and your health outcome is greater. This is a fact.

So the fact that you go to Mexico, like many others, is not proof the US system delivers worse care, which is what you contended. Point refuted.
Your point about communty hospitals is incoherent. If the purpose of them is to reduce medical costs then you've already admitted it wont do that.
Medicare dictates payments, private insurance negotiates payments. Thus the difference. In any case you are citing payments for medical services, not medical insurance premiums. Surely you know the difference.

The correct metric has been supplied. If you get sick in America your ability to get seen early is greater and your health outcome is greater. This is a fact.
Well , post the link.
If you are refering to Andylusion's post , then that is not valid. It's 25 years old.

So the fact that you go to Mexico, like many others, is not proof the US system delivers worse care, which is what you contended. Point refuted.
No point proven or disproven. Cecile stated :
Hey, if you think another country will provide you with better-quality healthcare, head on over there. None of us will stop you.
I simply gave an answer.

Your point about communty hospitals is incoherent. If the purpose of them is to reduce medical costs then you've already admitted it wont do that.
No , it is not. If the hospitals get a profit, you as an owner get a profit.
If the hospital gets no profit you get no profit , but you get healthcare at the lowest price available.

Medicare dictates payments, private insurance negotiates payments. Thus the difference. In any case you are citing payments for medical services, not medical insurance premiums. Surely you know the difference

The post was unrelated to medicare, I was simply giving ideas for the available options. There are many more. For example in Japan the patient covers only 30% of the cost , the government pays the rest. Then you have to do some shopping.

Yes, Japan. And now that they control healthcare, they can also control you:

Japan, Seeking Trim Waists, Measures Millions
By NORIMITSU ONISHI
Published: June 13, 2008

AMAGASAKI, Japan — Japan, a country not known for its overweight people, has undertaken one of the most ambitious campaigns ever by a nation to slim down its citizenry.

Summoned by the city of Amagasaki one recent morning, Minoru Nogiri, 45, a flower shop owner, found himself lining up to have his waistline measured. With no visible paunch, he seemed to run little risk of being classified as overweight, or metabo, the preferred word in Japan these days.

But because the new state-prescribed limit for male waistlines is a strict 33.5 inches, he had anxiously measured himself at home a couple of days earlier. “I’m on the border,” he said.

Under a national law that came into effect two months ago, companies and local governments must now measure the waistlines of Japanese people between the ages of 40 and 74 as part of their annual checkups. That represents more than 56 million waistlines, or about 44 percent of the entire population.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/world/asia/13fat.html?_r=0

I don't know if I'd be that thrilled with Mrs. Obama coming out to measure my waist line.
So , the NSA can access you e-mail , credit record , phone calls , web content , contact list ... ahh but they don't mess with my waistline. No sir !!!

It's just one example.

After all, what do we do in life that doesn't involve our health?

What we eat, how much television we watch, what kind of exercise we do, what kind of exercise we are not doing, what we drink, what we smoke if we do smoke, what kind of risky activities we involve ourselves in, how many hours we work and so on and so on.

Once government takes over healthcare, they will be able to dictate to us how we live our lives. Hell, they only partially took over healthcare and Moochelle is running around schools trying to dictate what kids eat. See all those calorie listings next to each item of food at your restaurant? Yep, government forced those places to post calorie counts.

I don't want government telling me what to eat or measuring my waistline. I want government as far out of my life as possible.
 
Single Payer could be accomplished very easily and quickly by extending Medicare to everyone. It's already set up and covers a large group of people.
Medicare is projected to go bankrupt in a few years. Yeah, sounds like a great idea. Not.
The Right has been saying that Medicare is going bankrupt for many years and will as long as its representatives receive large contributions.
Medicare's own trustees say that, dunce. You really are a ninny.
Trustees: Medicare Will Go Broke in 2016, If You Exclude Obamacare's Double-Counting
 
Most of our northern border hospitals are loaded with Canadian patients. They come here to get help they can't get in Canada. Last I read (which was some time ago) Canada spends over a billion dollars a year in the US to take care of citizens they can't care for.

As a patient at the world famous Cleveland Clinic, I can tell you that when you walk into the place, you're the one that feels like a foreigner. It's like going to the UN.

My sister is a long time employee at the clinic. She can tell you stories of VIP's from all over the world that come here for our outstanding care and technology. They don't go to Mexico and they don't go to Cuba. We have some of the most advanced medical care in the world.

She told us of stories where a middle-east VIP's would rent an entire hospital floor. It's closed off to everybody due to security reasons. Whatever services the clinic provided, they would pay cash daily. They used to have a scheduled Brink's truck come in every day to transfer the funds.

Socialized medical care is great for a broken arm, the flu, X-rays and so forth. But in situations that are life and death, you don't want to be treated in a country with socialized medicine.
You've certainly bought into the Right's arguments.
Why is it that most of Europe has longer life expectancy than in the US. They also have lower infant mortality than we do.
They drink more wine. ANd they have no inner city ghetto blacks or Hispanics.

In france 15% of the population are from Africa or Asia.
France - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And? That is meaningless and unresponsive to my post.
It does , they have immigrants and they are able to make them part of their society without creating ghettos.
You've never been to France, obviously. We can add "France" to the list of things you know nothing about.
 

The US has the most expensive healthcare system in the world. It is 2 times more expensive on a per capita basis than that of Sweeden or U.K developed country.So yea, Bernie is actually right.

HealthSpendingByCountry2.jpg

We have the best health care system in the world. That's why it's the most expensive.

We spend more money on preventative care. Which is why it's the most expensive.

We have the most availability of care. Which is why it's the most expensive.

If all you care about is cutting cost, we can do the same as all those other countries. Cut preventative care. Cut availability. Cut quality. The cost will go down.

Problem solved. Of course more people will die. But.... it'll be cheaper.
Best health care system in the world. Nope,
It might be the best for some very specialized procedures, but not for general medicine required by the 99% of the population.

We spend more money on preventive care.
??? WTF? If it was so the US would have the highest life expenctancy in the world. It doesn't.
Just look at the chart and how the US costs started to take-off after the 80's.

The general increase in cost is in part due to better procedures and an aging population, but going as far as telling it is two times better than Sweeden's makes no sense.

Insurance companies are damping competition. People don't do medical shopping ( unless they are uninsured or live abroad). You either make healthcare a public service or take insurance companies out of the equation.

And you're basing this assertion on what?

Hey, if you think another country will provide you with better-quality healthcare, head on over there. None of us will stop you.

People aren't allowed by law to "shop around" for medical insurance. The regulations on medical insurance were ridiculous even before Obamacare.

Who, precisely, do you think is going to manage healthcare payment other than health insurance companies? You think the government is going to set up a separate department to handle that, and that it would be cheaper and more efficient if they did? Hell no. They'd be more likely to farm it out to some private entity who specialized in that field. And then there'd be no competition at all to bring down prices.

And you're basing this assertion on what?
Which assertion ? That healthcare in the US is not the best in the world ? Just look at the OCED stats.
That insurance dampens competition ? Well, just tell me how many insured people you know before or after obamacare did medical shopping ?

Hey, if you think another country will provide you with better-quality healthcare, head on over there. None of us will stop you.
I do have one such arrangement. I go south to get medical attention ( which is not very often), just as nearly 90,000 US retirees do.
Mexico's health care lures Americans - USATODAY.com

People aren't allowed by law to "shop around" for medical insurance. The regulations on medical insurance were ridiculous even before Obamacare.
I am talking about shopping for medical attention not for medical insurance.
One of the few points I do like about Obamacera is that insurance must cover pre-existing conditions.

Who, precisely, do you think is going to manage healthcare payment other than health insurance companies?
If insurances worked as a "saving account" people would do medical shopping, and that would encourage competition.
Of course it is not as easy as that, what about someone who gets cancer at an early age? In that case the government should step in and pay part of the fee ( never all the fee, because it would discourage competition ).

Another alternative would be to have community owned hospitals ( gather , 10,000 people to invest in a hospital and make them the owners ). That way you take out the middle man out of the way.

So many false premises and fake debate parameters, I don't even know where to start.
 
The US has the most expensive healthcare system in the world. It is 2 times more expensive on a per capita basis than that of Sweeden or U.K developed country.So yea, Bernie is actually right.

HealthSpendingByCountry2.jpg

We have the best health care system in the world. That's why it's the most expensive.

We spend more money on preventative care. Which is why it's the most expensive.

We have the most availability of care. Which is why it's the most expensive.

If all you care about is cutting cost, we can do the same as all those other countries. Cut preventative care. Cut availability. Cut quality. The cost will go down.

Problem solved. Of course more people will die. But.... it'll be cheaper.
Best health care system in the world. Nope,
It might be the best for some very specialized procedures, but not for general medicine required by the 99% of the population.

We spend more money on preventive care.
??? WTF? If it was so the US would have the highest life expenctancy in the world. It doesn't.
Just look at the chart and how the US costs started to take-off after the 80's.

The general increase in cost is in part due to better procedures and an aging population, but going as far as telling it is two times better than Sweeden's makes no sense.

Insurance companies are damping competition. People don't do medical shopping ( unless they are uninsured or live abroad). You either make healthcare a public service or take insurance companies out of the equation.

And you're basing this assertion on what?

Hey, if you think another country will provide you with better-quality healthcare, head on over there. None of us will stop you.

People aren't allowed by law to "shop around" for medical insurance. The regulations on medical insurance were ridiculous even before Obamacare.

Who, precisely, do you think is going to manage healthcare payment other than health insurance companies? You think the government is going to set up a separate department to handle that, and that it would be cheaper and more efficient if they did? Hell no. They'd be more likely to farm it out to some private entity who specialized in that field. And then there'd be no competition at all to bring down prices.

And you're basing this assertion on what?
Which assertion ? That healthcare in the US is not the best in the world ? Just look at the OCED stats.
That insurance dampens competition ? Well, just tell me how many insured people you know before or after obamacare did medical shopping ?

Hey, if you think another country will provide you with better-quality healthcare, head on over there. None of us will stop you.
I do have one such arrangement. I go south to get medical attention ( which is not very often), just as nearly 90,000 US retirees do.
Mexico's health care lures Americans - USATODAY.com

People aren't allowed by law to "shop around" for medical insurance. The regulations on medical insurance were ridiculous even before Obamacare.
I am talking about shopping for medical attention not for medical insurance.
One of the few points I do like about Obamacera is that insurance must cover pre-existing conditions.

Who, precisely, do you think is going to manage healthcare payment other than health insurance companies?
If insurances worked as a "saving account" people would do medical shopping, and that would encourage competition.
Of course it is not as easy as that, what about someone who gets cancer at an early age? In that case the government should step in and pay part of the fee ( never all the fee, because it would discourage competition ).

Another alternative would be to have community owned hospitals ( gather , 10,000 people to invest in a hospital and make them the owners ). That way you take out the middle man out of the way.

So many false premises and fake debate parameters, I don't even know where to start.
Like most libs he operates from false premises using made up facts.
 
We have the best health care system in the world. That's why it's the most expensive.

We spend more money on preventative care. Which is why it's the most expensive.

We have the most availability of care. Which is why it's the most expensive.

If all you care about is cutting cost, we can do the same as all those other countries. Cut preventative care. Cut availability. Cut quality. The cost will go down.

Problem solved. Of course more people will die. But.... it'll be cheaper.
Best health care system in the world. Nope,
It might be the best for some very specialized procedures, but not for general medicine required by the 99% of the population.

We spend more money on preventive care.
??? WTF? If it was so the US would have the highest life expenctancy in the world. It doesn't.
Just look at the chart and how the US costs started to take-off after the 80's.

The general increase in cost is in part due to better procedures and an aging population, but going as far as telling it is two times better than Sweeden's makes no sense.

Insurance companies are damping competition. People don't do medical shopping ( unless they are uninsured or live abroad). You either make healthcare a public service or take insurance companies out of the equation.

And you're basing this assertion on what?

Hey, if you think another country will provide you with better-quality healthcare, head on over there. None of us will stop you.

People aren't allowed by law to "shop around" for medical insurance. The regulations on medical insurance were ridiculous even before Obamacare.

Who, precisely, do you think is going to manage healthcare payment other than health insurance companies? You think the government is going to set up a separate department to handle that, and that it would be cheaper and more efficient if they did? Hell no. They'd be more likely to farm it out to some private entity who specialized in that field. And then there'd be no competition at all to bring down prices.

And you're basing this assertion on what?
Which assertion ? That healthcare in the US is not the best in the world ? Just look at the OCED stats.
That insurance dampens competition ? Well, just tell me how many insured people you know before or after obamacare did medical shopping ?

Hey, if you think another country will provide you with better-quality healthcare, head on over there. None of us will stop you.
I do have one such arrangement. I go south to get medical attention ( which is not very often), just as nearly 90,000 US retirees do.
Mexico's health care lures Americans - USATODAY.com

People aren't allowed by law to "shop around" for medical insurance. The regulations on medical insurance were ridiculous even before Obamacare.
I am talking about shopping for medical attention not for medical insurance.
One of the few points I do like about Obamacera is that insurance must cover pre-existing conditions.

Who, precisely, do you think is going to manage healthcare payment other than health insurance companies?
If insurances worked as a "saving account" people would do medical shopping, and that would encourage competition.
Of course it is not as easy as that, what about someone who gets cancer at an early age? In that case the government should step in and pay part of the fee ( never all the fee, because it would discourage competition ).

Another alternative would be to have community owned hospitals ( gather , 10,000 people to invest in a hospital and make them the owners ). That way you take out the middle man out of the way.

So many false premises and fake debate parameters, I don't even know where to start.
Like most libs he operates from false premises using made up facts.

ACA and free college are socialist, something that has the distinction of slowly starving to death 120 million souls. Capitalism just saved another 60 million from starving to death in China. Liberals are so stupid and anti science that they understand all that to mean we should switch to liberal socialism.
 

The US has the most expensive healthcare system in the world. It is 2 times more expensive on a per capita basis than that of Sweeden or U.K developed country.So yea, Bernie is actually right.

HealthSpendingByCountry2.jpg

You might want to investigate the difference between "expensive" and "spending". See, expensive is how much each procedure costs. Spending, on the other hand, is how much is spent in total on anything healthcare-related. This includes all the non-essential spending on things like Lasik, hearing aids, cosmetic surgery, frequent diagnostics by hypochondriacs, orthodontia, vitamins . . .

Part of the reason that the US spends so much on health care every year is because we can. We are a wealthy nation, with people who are more than willing to use their discretionary funds to improve their quality of life. That's not a bad thing.
That still makes US hospitals the most expensive in the world.

And so you simply assume it's because what? People arbitrarily decided to jack up the prices for the fun of it? Gotta love simplistic "logic". I guess it saves time over the messy, complicated reality.

Forbes magazine, for example, provides a number of reasons why medical prices in the US are high. Heading the list is government healthcare: Medicare and Medicaid, which sets its compensation rates higher than other countries, which in turn raises the prices charged to private insurers, since doctors certainly can't charge patients differently for the same procedure based on payment method.

Next on the list is the lack of insurance competition, which is NOT the fault of insurance companies. There's not a for-profit company in this country that wouldn't love to increase their market share by cutting into the market share of comparable companies, but insurance companies have been prohibited by law from competing across state lines for some time, decreasing the competition pool.

Next is what I've already said: Americans have the money to spend, and are willing to do so. Coupled with the fact that individual consumers are divorced from the full costs of healthcare procedures by the layers of third-party payers, this drives prices up by reducing the natural drag on prices normally caused by consumer thriftiness.

Americans also apparently overutilize specialists, also attributable to both overregulation and the separation of consumers from the consequence of prices.

And then, of course, we have pharmaceutical prices and medical lawsuits. The former is the result of excessive government price controls in other countries. Pharmaceutical companies are required to sell their medications in those countries at prices arbitrarily set by the governments, regardless of the actual costs of production and R&D, usually resulting in the fact that those medications are sold at a loss. The United States basically ends up subsidizing those countries' healthcare systems by having the difference shifted into our pharmaceutical prices. Yes, this is unfair. However, if the United States follows suit and clamps down on pharmaceutical prices, those companies will simply stop putting in the time and money to produce many medications, or to create new ones.

The latter, of course, leads to the aforementioned overuse of specialists and expensive diagnostics.

The problems aren't caused by the capitalism that's present in our medical system. They're caused by too little capitalism, both here and abroad.
 
Capitalism couldn't survive without government as it's partner. Who do you think all those lobbyists in D.C. represent, the poor and the downtrodden?

shows how totally 100% stupid a liberal is. 80% of the federal budget goes to the poor, SS, Medicare, Medicaid. The top 1% pay 40% of all Federal taxes!!
Medicare goes to elderly who paid
into it for many years, not necessarily poor.
Do you have a link?

Yeah, whether they want it or not. Let's not forget that, unless you have the money to pay for medical expenses out of pocket, you're forced onto Medicare when you qualify, will you or nill you.
How many do you know on the Right have refused Medicare? It's great.

Most people can't afford to, given the way the left and its policies have jacked up medical prices. Congratulations. You've trapped people in a bad system, and now you're castigating them for being unable to escape you. You have achieved Douche Weasel Status: Expert.
 
We have the best health care system in the world. That's why it's the most expensive.

We spend more money on preventative care. Which is why it's the most expensive.

We have the most availability of care. Which is why it's the most expensive.

If all you care about is cutting cost, we can do the same as all those other countries. Cut preventative care. Cut availability. Cut quality. The cost will go down.

Problem solved. Of course more people will die. But.... it'll be cheaper.
Best health care system in the world. Nope,
It might be the best for some very specialized procedures, but not for general medicine required by the 99% of the population.

We spend more money on preventive care.
??? WTF? If it was so the US would have the highest life expenctancy in the world. It doesn't.
Just look at the chart and how the US costs started to take-off after the 80's.

The general increase in cost is in part due to better procedures and an aging population, but going as far as telling it is two times better than Sweeden's makes no sense.

Insurance companies are damping competition. People don't do medical shopping ( unless they are uninsured or live abroad). You either make healthcare a public service or take insurance companies out of the equation.

And you're basing this assertion on what?

Hey, if you think another country will provide you with better-quality healthcare, head on over there. None of us will stop you.

People aren't allowed by law to "shop around" for medical insurance. The regulations on medical insurance were ridiculous even before Obamacare.

Who, precisely, do you think is going to manage healthcare payment other than health insurance companies? You think the government is going to set up a separate department to handle that, and that it would be cheaper and more efficient if they did? Hell no. They'd be more likely to farm it out to some private entity who specialized in that field. And then there'd be no competition at all to bring down prices.

And you're basing this assertion on what?
Which assertion ? That healthcare in the US is not the best in the world ? Just look at the OCED stats.
That insurance dampens competition ? Well, just tell me how many insured people you know before or after obamacare did medical shopping ?

Hey, if you think another country will provide you with better-quality healthcare, head on over there. None of us will stop you.
I do have one such arrangement. I go south to get medical attention ( which is not very often), just as nearly 90,000 US retirees do.
Mexico's health care lures Americans - USATODAY.com

Most of our northern border hospitals are loaded with Canadian patients. They come here to get help they can't get in Canada. Last I read (which was some time ago) Canada spends over a billion dollars a year in the US to take care of citizens they can't care for.

As a patient at the world famous Cleveland Clinic, I can tell you that when you walk into the place, you're the one that feels like a foreigner. It's like going to the UN.

My sister is a long time employee at the clinic. She can tell you stories of VIP's from all over the world that come here for our outstanding care and technology. They don't go to Mexico and they don't go to Cuba. We have some of the most advanced medical care in the world.

She told us of stories where a middle-east VIP's would rent an entire hospital floor. It's closed off to everybody due to security reasons. Whatever services the clinic provided, they would pay cash daily. They used to have a scheduled Brink's truck come in every day to transfer the funds.

Socialized medical care is great for a broken arm, the flu, X-rays and so forth. But in situations that are life and death, you don't want to be treated in a country with socialized medicine.
You've certainly bought into the Right's arguments.
Why is it that most of Europe has longer life expectancy than in the US. They also have lower infant mortality than we do.

1) Life expectancy - mostly because they have vastly more homogenous populations than we do.

2) Infant mortality - partially due to homogenous populations, and largely due to cooking the books.
 

The US has the most expensive healthcare system in the world. It is 2 times more expensive on a per capita basis than that of Sweeden or U.K developed country.So yea, Bernie is actually right.

HealthSpendingByCountry2.jpg

You might want to investigate the difference between "expensive" and "spending". See, expensive is how much each procedure costs. Spending, on the other hand, is how much is spent in total on anything healthcare-related. This includes all the non-essential spending on things like Lasik, hearing aids, cosmetic surgery, frequent diagnostics by hypochondriacs, orthodontia, vitamins . . .

Part of the reason that the US spends so much on health care every year is because we can. We are a wealthy nation, with people who are more than willing to use their discretionary funds to improve their quality of life. That's not a bad thing.
That still makes US hospitals the most expensive in the world.

And so you simply assume it's because what? People arbitrarily decided to jack up the prices for the fun of it? Gotta love simplistic "logic". I guess it saves time over the messy, complicated reality.

Forbes magazine, for example, provides a number of reasons why medical prices in the US are high. Heading the list is government healthcare: Medicare and Medicaid, which sets its compensation rates higher than other countries, which in turn raises the prices charged to private insurers, since doctors certainly can't charge patients differently for the same procedure based on payment method.

.
Didnt you mean to say the opposite here? Medicaid/Medicare have low reimbursements, often below cost. Hospitals and doctors can only make it up by charging private insured patients more.
 
Best health care system in the world. Nope,
It might be the best for some very specialized procedures, but not for general medicine required by the 99% of the population.

We spend more money on preventive care.
??? WTF? If it was so the US would have the highest life expenctancy in the world. It doesn't.
Just look at the chart and how the US costs started to take-off after the 80's.

The general increase in cost is in part due to better procedures and an aging population, but going as far as telling it is two times better than Sweeden's makes no sense.

Insurance companies are damping competition. People don't do medical shopping ( unless they are uninsured or live abroad). You either make healthcare a public service or take insurance companies out of the equation.

And you're basing this assertion on what?

Hey, if you think another country will provide you with better-quality healthcare, head on over there. None of us will stop you.

People aren't allowed by law to "shop around" for medical insurance. The regulations on medical insurance were ridiculous even before Obamacare.

Who, precisely, do you think is going to manage healthcare payment other than health insurance companies? You think the government is going to set up a separate department to handle that, and that it would be cheaper and more efficient if they did? Hell no. They'd be more likely to farm it out to some private entity who specialized in that field. And then there'd be no competition at all to bring down prices.

And you're basing this assertion on what?
Which assertion ? That healthcare in the US is not the best in the world ? Just look at the OCED stats.
That insurance dampens competition ? Well, just tell me how many insured people you know before or after obamacare did medical shopping ?

Hey, if you think another country will provide you with better-quality healthcare, head on over there. None of us will stop you.
I do have one such arrangement. I go south to get medical attention ( which is not very often), just as nearly 90,000 US retirees do.
Mexico's health care lures Americans - USATODAY.com

People aren't allowed by law to "shop around" for medical insurance. The regulations on medical insurance were ridiculous even before Obamacare.
I am talking about shopping for medical attention not for medical insurance.
One of the few points I do like about Obamacera is that insurance must cover pre-existing conditions.

Who, precisely, do you think is going to manage healthcare payment other than health insurance companies?
If insurances worked as a "saving account" people would do medical shopping, and that would encourage competition.
Of course it is not as easy as that, what about someone who gets cancer at an early age? In that case the government should step in and pay part of the fee ( never all the fee, because it would discourage competition ).

Another alternative would be to have community owned hospitals ( gather , 10,000 people to invest in a hospital and make them the owners ). That way you take out the middle man out of the way.
Oy.
The OECD stats are misleading and biased. This has been shown over and over again.

You dont get better healthcare in Mexico. You get cheaper healthcare. That's typucally why people do what you do.
Why would people invest in hospitals without getting any kind of return? In any case, every example of "non-profit" medical insurance/medical care has failed to deliver lower prices. Profit is a positive in healthcare, as elsewhere, not a negative. Profit drives lower costs and better outcomes. Socialism does the opposite.

The OECD stats are misleading and biased. This has been shown over and over again.
Well then , which stats do you want to use to compare different countries ? WHO ?
It is very easy to disregard stats, but then you should provide a better source.
Other sources point towards the same direction.
Once again, U.S. has most expensive, least effective health care system in survey

You dont get better healthcare in Mexico. You get cheaper healthcare.
Indeed. I've never said the opposite. A Beetle is far cheaper than a BMW, but hey , if the Beetle suits your needs ..

Why would people invest in hospitals without getting any kind of return?
Those were different alternatives. In community owned hospitals you would get a return AND if the hospital charges you sky high prices you also get a return .

In any case, every example of "non-profit" medical insurance/medical care has failed to deliver lower prices.
No , not really
bar-chart.png

Profit drives lower costs and better outcomes.
Indeed , but you need profit AND competition , and current insurance schemes damp competition.
The correct metric has been supplied. If you get sick in America your ability to get seen early is greater and your health outcome is greater. This is a fact.
So the fact that you go to Mexico, like many others, is not proof the US system delivers worse care, which is what you contended. Point refuted.
Your point about communty hospitals is incoherent. If the purpose of them is to reduce medical costs then you've already admitted it wont do that.
Medicare dictates payments, private insurance negotiates payments. Thus the difference. In any case you are citing payments for medical services, not medical insurance premiums. Surely you know the difference.

I've been to Mexico. Sure, they can provide quality care . . . to rich foreigners and their own wealthy elite. If you think the vast majority of Mexicans are getting that care, you're delusional. I wouldn't take my dog to the kind of medical care most Mexican citizens get.
 

Forum List

Back
Top