Single payer system within 7 years

[Votto]

Texas became the 11th state to pass the Article V movement.

We only need 2/3 of the states and those in the Federal government can be sent packing, hopefully with an amendment for term limits in Congress.

http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-morris/

It's simple, if a cohort of conservative states try to force their backwards agenda on the entire nation and change the Constitution to fit their bizarre ideology, there will either be civil war or the country will break up. I think it should break up right now and avoid the bloodshed. A new civil war won't be two armies facing each other, it will be Iraq style revenge killings ad nauseum in perpetuity no matter who thinks they've got control of the country. It will go on for decades.

The thing is conservatives don't want to break the country up, not because of the country but because 2/3 to 3/4 of the revenue would leave with the blue states and the new Red Confederate States of Batshittia would become a 4th world economy and nation.

It is time to break the thing up and everyone go their own way. Any attempt by conservatives to seize control of the Constitution and revise it to mirror their own image will result in civil war. It is an absolute.

What we should do is divide the country right down the middle; conservatives on one side and liberals on the other. Anybody in between would have to choose a side to live on. That would solve most of our political problems.

All you need to do is amend the Constitution so that states will be able to govern themselves the way they originally did.

Again, support your Article V movement. Elect state representatives who will vote for it.

For example, there is no reason to force liberal states not to have socialized medicine, nor is there a reason to force conservative states to have it either.

Then step back and see which states fare better so that others may desire what works instead of trying to convince people that one system is best for all.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No one will be arguing with government to get treatment? Why not?

Mostly because you can vote the government out if they don't deliver. You see, the problem with private insurance is that you are the third priority after their shareholders and the employers. Maybe, maybe after they make them happy, they'll get around to paying for your cancer treatment, but more likely, they'll try to declare it a pre-existing condition and not pay for it.

Again, the rest of the world has figured this out.

Uh-Huh, so what you're proposing is that I pay more in taxes than I do now to get what less than what I already have, just so I can participate in increasing the federal debt and lining the pockets and increasing the power of politicians and bureaucrats?

Naw, you want to keep lining the pockets of guys like Ed Hanaway, who denied Nataline Sarkisyan's liver transplant operation and thousands of other procedures, and they rewarded him with a nine-figure retirement package.

Mostly because you can vote the government out if they don't deliver.

If the government doesn't deliver, I have to wait until I can vote out my Rep and maybe one or two of my US Senators?

Again, the rest of the world has figured this out.

Are you under the impression that citizens in other countries never argue about their coverage?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Texas became the 11th state to pass the Article V movement.

We only need 2/3 of the states and those in the Federal government can be sent packing, hopefully with an amendment for term limits in Congress.

http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-morris/

It's simple, if a cohort of conservative states try to force their backwards agenda on the entire nation and change the Constitution to fit their bizarre ideology, there will either be civil war or the country will break up. I think it should break up right now and avoid the bloodshed. A new civil war won't be two armies facing each other, it will be Iraq style revenge killings ad nauseum in perpetuity no matter who thinks they've got control of the country. It will go on for decades.

The thing is conservatives don't want to break the country up, not because of the country but because 2/3 to 3/4 of the revenue would leave with the blue states and the new Red Confederate States of Batshittia would become a 4th world economy and nation.

It is time to break the thing up and everyone go their own way. Any attempt by conservatives to seize control of the Constitution and revise it to mirror their own image will result in civil war. It is an absolute.

What we should do is divide the country right down the middle; conservatives on one side and liberals on the other. Anybody in between would have to choose a side to live on. That would solve most of our political problems.

All you need to do is amend the Constitution so that states will be able to govern themselves the way they originally did.

Again, support your Article V movement. Elect state representatives who will vote for it.

For example, there is no reason to force liberal states not to have socialized medicine, nor is there a reason to force conservative states to have it either.

Then step back and see which states fare better so that others may desire what works instead of trying to convince people that one system is best for all.

Agreed, but it's more than that. Imagine living in a state with not one liberal around trying to tell you how to live your life!

If we decided that my side of the country be the Republican side, my property value would double overnight. Our crime would be so low we would have to get rid of some or our police officers. Our taxes would be much lower too. Then all the manufacturing and corporations would move to the conservative side and we would have more jobs than people to work them.

What a wonderful country this would be with no liberals around.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Texas became the 11th state to pass the Article V movement.

We only need 2/3 of the states and those in the Federal government can be sent packing, hopefully with an amendment for term limits in Congress.

http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-morris/

It's simple, if a cohort of conservative states try to force their backwards agenda on the entire nation and change the Constitution to fit their bizarre ideology, there will either be civil war or the country will break up. I think it should break up right now and avoid the bloodshed. A new civil war won't be two armies facing each other, it will be Iraq style revenge killings ad nauseum in perpetuity no matter who thinks they've got control of the country. It will go on for decades.

The thing is conservatives don't want to break the country up, not because of the country but because 2/3 to 3/4 of the revenue would leave with the blue states and the new Red Confederate States of Batshittia would become a 4th world economy and nation.

It is time to break the thing up and everyone go their own way. Any attempt by conservatives to seize control of the Constitution and revise it to mirror their own image will result in civil war. It is an absolute.

What we should do is divide the country right down the middle; conservatives on one side and liberals on the other. Anybody in between would have to choose a side to live on. That would solve most of our political problems.

No it would be generally as it is now, blue states remain blue red states remain red, there would be some dividing up of North Dakota or the blue states would buy it so New America east and west could be connected. The red state country would be the south plus some territory in the Utah/Idaho area. Basically the Confederacy plus a few more. Many red states are just dirt with very few people. Population would have to decide in a number of areas which country they wanted to be part of.

But economically red America would be a poor nation as the red states are now. Likely the red America capital would be in Texas as that is the only red state with a large economy and they would lead the new red America.

And I say this with no malice or anger. Sometimes things end and our democracy has lasted a lot longer than democracies usually do. So let us cordially dissolve the union and everyone go be happy.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

But economically red America would be a poor nation as the red states are now.

Red states have a lot of people in them such as blue people. A better comparison would be those blue cities full of ghettos and crime. That's because blue cities have mostly blue people in them.

 

[basquebromance]

"Of course the Australians have better healthcare than we do --everybody does. ObamaCare is dead! But our healthcare will soon be great." - Trump

umm, Australia has single-payer, Mr President.

 

[JoeB131]

Are you under the impression that citizens in other countries never argue about their coverage?

Not in any significant way....

 

[JoeB131]

Yes, but just because you have insurance doesn't mean they will cover everything under the sun. You have to know what coverage you have, or in this case, the coverage his employer provided.

Battered housewife republicanism, everyone.

The insurance company didn't cover anything considered experimental or anything that doesn't have at least a 50% chance of success which the girl didn't have. They changed their policy because of her, but it was too late. They won't change it back, and now premiums will increase for everybody that uses Cigna insurance.

They changed it because there was a lynch mob marching on their offices.

But, no, what Cigna did here was pretty fucked up.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

They changed it because there was a lynch mob marching on their offices.

But, no, what Cigna did here was pretty fucked up.

No, what Cigna did was give the coverage they were paid for. And yes, it's because of people that can't get that through their heads that caused them to change the policy. If you have a flood and it ruins your basement, but you had no flood insurance, how can you blame the insurance company for not covering your flood losses?

 

[JoeB131]

No, what Cigna did was give the coverage they were paid for. And yes, it's because of people that can't get that through their heads that caused them to change the policy. If you have a flood and it ruins your basement, but you had no flood insurance, how can you blame the insurance company for not covering your flood losses?

The problem is, that's an awful analogy.

It would be like if I had flood insurance, and the insurance company came back and said, "Well, that water had shit in it, and we only cover water damage, not shit damage."

He paid for health insurance. Her doctors said, "This will save her life". That should be the end of the discussion.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, what Cigna did was give the coverage they were paid for. And yes, it's because of people that can't get that through their heads that caused them to change the policy. If you have a flood and it ruins your basement, but you had no flood insurance, how can you blame the insurance company for not covering your flood losses?

The problem is, that's an awful analogy.

It would be like if I had flood insurance, and the insurance company came back and said, "Well, that water had shit in it, and we only cover water damage, not shit damage."

He paid for health insurance. Her doctors said, "This will save her life". That should be the end of the discussion.

No, each insurance company gives you a contract stating what is and what is not covered. Cigna's insurance policy did not cover experimental surgeries that had less than a 50% survival rate. Considering her condition and the risk of surgery, statistics showed she didn't have much of a chance of survival.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

"Of course the Australians have better healthcare than we do --everybody does. ObamaCare is dead! But our healthcare will soon be great." - Trump

umm, Australia has single-payer, Mr President.

All doctors in Australia work for the government? All hospitals are governnent hospitals? No. Australia has a broad public option but it is not single payer.

 

[Rustic]

On Fox News, Charles Krauthammer predicts America will have single-payer health care within 7 years

The recent passage of a tweak on Obamacare by the GOP is viewed with disdain by pretty much everyone, just like when the Dims passed Obamacare and were rounded up and thrown out of office.

According to some, however, this will only lead to a single payer in a very short time.

The GOP acted like a bunch of Dims yesterday as they tweaked, not repealed, Obamacare. They were not even very sure what was in the bill, Nancy Pelosi style. They did not even wait for a CBO analysis of what exactly they were voting for. Then they all went to the White House to celebrate like a bunch of retards. Of course, the main objective in Washington is simply to "get things done" that work 100%, 100% of the time for 100% of the population. This is nothing short of a socialist mentality. And since socialism is nothing but a never ending quest for the unattainable, the drum beat will continue for a single payer system

People will die from a single-payer system, and everyone that disagrees with the federal government and their nanny state mentality and will lose 100% of their freedom… Fact
There's no need for individuality in a nanny state/socialist system… Exactly what the federal government wants

 

[JoeB131]

No, each insurance company gives you a contract stating what is and what is not covered. Cigna's insurance policy did not cover experimental surgeries that had less than a 50% survival rate. Considering her condition and the risk of surgery, statistics showed she didn't have much of a chance of survival.

Hey, Stupid, NONE of us get out of this life alive. If the insurance companies get away with denying us treatment because we are all going to die anyway, that's going to kind of suck.

Cigna just saw an expensive treatment they didn't want to pay for. It had nothing to do with whether it would work or not. They saw a poor family they could bully.

But unlike your pathetic ass rolling over when the Man takes your health coverage, they fought back.

 

[JoeB131]

People will die from a single-payer system, and everyone that disagrees with the federal government and their nanny state mentality and will lose 100% of their freedom… Fact
There's no need for individuality in a nanny state/socialist system… Exactly what the federal government wants

Hey, Stupid...

The other industrialized nations that have single payer have longer life expectancy, lower infant mortality rates and they spend half of what we spend.

The problem is that you are sooo fucking stupid from Koch Brother Brainwashing is that you think "Freedom" is the ability for the rich to abuse the rest of us.

 

[2aguy]

Medicare is a single payer system,

If it is good enough for people over 65, it should be good for all,

It's not good enough...in fact....trying to put everyone on it will crash the system faster than it is already crashing

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Cigna just saw an expensive treatment they didn't want to pay for. It had nothing to do with whether it would work or not. They saw a poor family they could bully.

Cigna HealthCare refused to pay for treatment by citing policy provisions which do not cover services considered experimental, investigational and/or unproven to be safe and/or effective for the patient.[4] Cigna noted that it had no financial stake in the decision because it only administered the insurance plan and would not bear the cost of any operation.

Death of Nataline Sarkisyan - Wikipedia

 

[JoeB131]

It's not good enough...in fact....trying to put everyone on it will crash the system faster than it is already crashing

NOt really.

Here's the thing. The US Spends 17% of it's GDP on healthcare. Most of those other countries, the ones you like to pretend don't exist because they don't need guns to compensate for their 'shortcomings', spend 8-11% of their GDP.

It's not that the money isn't being spent, it's how its being spent.. as in not wisely

 

[JoeB131]

Cigna HealthCare refused to pay for treatment by citing policy provisions which do not cover services considered experimental, investigational and/or unproven to be safe and/or effective for the patient.[4] Cigna noted that it had no financial stake in the decision because it only administered the insurance plan and would not bear the cost of any operation.

Cigna's position was repulsive. So bad even the their PR Guy quit and became an advocate for health care reform.

So of course, you stick up for them.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

People will die from a single-payer system, and everyone that disagrees with the federal government and their nanny state mentality and will lose 100% of their freedom… Fact
There's no need for individuality in a nanny state/socialist system… Exactly what the federal government wants

Hey, Stupid...

The other industrialized nations that have single payer have longer life expectancy, lower infant mortality rates and they spend half of what we spend.

The problem is that you are sooo fucking stupid from Koch Brother Brainwashing is that you think "Freedom" is the ability for the rich to abuse the rest of us.

If we didn't have immigration from the village people and gang murders we'd be doing well too. Look back in about five years after the muzz really kick in. See if those stats are the same.