Universal Healthcare in the US

[AzogtheDefiler]

People need to apply to become citizens in Switzerland cannot just be born there.

 

[Pete7469]

Take ten minutes out of your life and look into the Swiss Health Care system.

It is brilliant in its simplicity and even more brilliant in its application

Do you believe for one second the democrooks will create a system like that?

.

well, we certainly KNOW the Republicans will NOT

Trump, McConnell, Ryan, and the rest of the Nazis already proved that one

Retards use the word "Nazi' son. The moment you do you lose.

Tarddo Kid is a retard, that's why I ignore it.

If republicrats were National Socialists, hitlary would be one and have gotten her plan passed in 1993.

 

[Pete7469]

Switzerland : International Health Care System Profiles

It's easily googled.

For a fuller description of similarities and dissimilarliteis to US
Why Switzerland Has the World's Best Health Care System

It's not without flaws, and it's extremely expensive.

I'd sign on if our government was not absolutely corrupted by criminal sociopaths.

Since that is not an option I would love to return to an absolute free market system, but I don't see that happening either.

.

 

[caddo kid]

Take ten minutes out of your life and look into the Swiss Health Care system.

It is brilliant in its simplicity and even more brilliant in its application

Do you believe for one second the democrooks will create a system like that?

.

well, we certainly KNOW the Republicans will NOT

Trump, McConnell, Ryan, and the rest of the Nazis already proved that one

Retards use the word "Nazi' son. The moment you do you lose.

Tarddo Kid is a retard, that's why I ignore it.

If republicrats were National Socialists, hitlary would be one and have gotten her plan passed in 1993.

well, that has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the thread aka NO content jack ass but thanks for being a douche

 

[Rigby5]

Switzerland : International Health Care System Profiles

It's easily googled.

For a fuller description of similarities and dissimilarliteis to US
Why Switzerland Has the World's Best Health Care System

It's not without flaws, and it's extremely expensive.

I'd sign on if our government was not absolutely corrupted by criminal sociopaths.

Since that is not an option I would love to return to an absolute free market system, but I don't see that happening either.

.

Good points.

I prefer socialism when the people have control over government and it is not very corrupt.
But if the government is corrupt, the last thing anyone should want is to give the government more power or control over money.

We lost the free market system back in the 1950s when they allowed employer benefits to be tax exempt, and the health insurance industry took over.
Because it was tax free but only to wealthy employees, that essentially had the poor subsidizing health care for the wealthy.
And even worse than that, it made it a 4 party system, of the patient, doctor, employer, and insurance company.
Which totally prevents you from having any influence over costs or quality.
Worst thing we ever did.
You prepay insurance, and we all know how badly anything you prepay works out.

 

[bendog]

Switzerland : International Health Care System Profiles

It's easily googled.

For a fuller description of similarities and dissimilarliteis to US
Why Switzerland Has the World's Best Health Care System

It's not without flaws, and it's extremely expensive.

I'd sign on if our government was not absolutely corrupted by criminal sociopaths.

Since that is not an option I would love to return to an absolute free market system, but I don't see that happening either.

.

I'm not saying I think it'd work for the US, but we spend more. There are three realities at work that all have to be faced for any HC reform.

The system we have is by far the most expensive. We have really good outcomes at the top, and high infant mortality (compared to the EU whether its pure socialism or the Swiss). And we don't contain inflation as well as ANYBODY.

The right bitched and moaned about the individual mandate, and some erosion of freedom, even when in our present system if you catch cancer or something like a stroke without insurance, 1 or 2 or both things inevitably happen. You run up bills, then do bankruptcy and let those who did have insurance pay for your care, or you go on Medicaid with the same result. If taxpayers are going to subsidize everyone having care, everyone has to have care. The Gop's position (despite Trump promising something different) is just that some don't have HC insurance, and inevitably 1 or 2 above happens to them. That doesn't make them freeloaders when there's no option to provide coverage for them.

Politics make switching to a Swiss type system impossible. In trying to switch to some totally private system, like the Swiss, we are already starting from a system where the poor are covered by Medicaid with little or no payin by them, and the old are covered by Medicare. Our econ system is set up to make lower skill jobs pay as little as possible (which is why the livable wage movement gets trashed. We pay for their HC already). And 70% of those of us with private HC want the govt to not assimilate us.

So, given those realities and limitations, I think Obamacare's largest failing was there was an arbitrary cut off where on the poor side of line, Medicaid pays for all, and on the other side of the line people got subsidies and the HC exchanges and those "bronze" plans. It seemed unfair, and no doubt it made having less income in some instances preferable to more income. That violated the cardinal rule of Reaganomics. The govt doesn't decide winners. And for those who prefer Medicare for all, again there's the 70% of people who have insurance who don't want to be assimilated.

So, imo, the best we can do is some hybrid model like the Germans. 100% are covered by a basic set of services that are financed through general revenue, or taxes on docs and hospitals who get money for treating citizens. No braces, No wart removal, No allergy, No podiatrist, No glasses beyond cataracts and kids. What docs and hospitals can charge would be set at minimum rates, and the result would be the docs treating most people would make less, and we'd see more Phys Assts and Nurse Practitioners. Then, those of us with more job skills and bargaining power could negotiate with employers and HC providers for a higher level of care that would be funded by employers and workers bargaining together, and then against the HC providers.

 

[Claudette]

And most of those countries have Murica spending bazillions on their national defense.

Not to mention the billions that are spent discovering, testing and marketing new drugs.

Oh and those countries don't have nearly the population of America.

Universal HC in this country would be a disaster.

Having the Govt. responsible for the HC of over 300 million Americans??

It would turn into mountains of red tape, long waits and mountains of paperwork.

Hell you would probably die before you got an appointment to see a doctor.

 

[Rigby5]

And most of those countries have Murica spending bazillions on their national defense.

Not to mention the billions that are spent discovering, testing and marketing new drugs.

Oh and those countries don't have nearly the population of America.

Universal HC in this country would be a disaster.

Having the Govt. responsible for the HC of over 300 million Americans??

It would turn into mountains of red tape, long waits and mountains of paperwork.

Hell you would probably die before you got an appointment to see a doctor.

Not, the US does not defend anyone with its military spending.
Almost all the US defense spending is for remote application of force, like aircraft carriers, which are totally offensive and not at all defensive.
Nor does anyone need defending.
There is no one invading Poland or France, and the US has not been invaded since 1812.

Nor do the US pharmaceutical companies spend billions discovering or testing new drugs.
Almost all research and testing is either done for free at land grant universities, or in poor over seas countries like in Africa.

The US government is already responsible for a hundred million Americans with disabilities, elderly, below poverty, etc., and the US government has the LOWEST administration costs of any system. Medicare and Medicaid add only about 2% administration costs.
In contrast, the private health insurance companies have cause health care to be over 50% more expensive than it should be or that any other country pays. And US health care is no where near the best. It is one of the worst of the modern world.

Countries with socialized medicine have no longer waiting periods that in the US now.

 

[Oddball]

Not, the US does not defend anyone with its military spending.
Almost all the US defense spending is for remote application of force, like aircraft carriers, which are totally offensive and not at all defensive.
Nor does anyone need defending.
There is no one invading Poland or France, and the US has not been invaded since 1812.

So those hundreds of basses scattered throughout the globe are self-funding, huh?

Nor do the US pharmaceutical companies spend billions discovering or testing new drugs.
Almost all research and testing is either done for free at land grant universities, or in poor over seas countries like in Africa.

100% fantasy....It costs pharm companies $500 million and takes a decade to clear all the FDA hurdles, in order to bring new medications and devices to market.

The US government is already responsible for a hundred million Americans with disabilities, elderly, below poverty, etc., and the US government has the LOWEST administration costs of any system. Medicare and Medicaid add only about 2% administration costs.
In contrast, the private health insurance companies have cause health care to be over 50% more expensive than it should be or that any other country pays. And US health care is no where near the best. It is one of the worst of the modern world.

Countries with socialized medicine have no longer waiting periods that in the US now.

This stale chestnut again?...Administrative costs aren't the only ones incurred in delivering any given product...BTW, what are the prices of things like Lasik and cosmetic surgery, when compared to years ago?

 

[Rigby5]

Not, the US does not defend anyone with its military spending.
Almost all the US defense spending is for remote application of force, like aircraft carriers, which are totally offensive and not at all defensive.
Nor does anyone need defending.
There is no one invading Poland or France, and the US has not been invaded since 1812.

So those hundreds of basses scattered throughout the globe are self-funding, huh?

Nor do the US pharmaceutical companies spend billions discovering or testing new drugs.
Almost all research and testing is either done for free at land grant universities, or in poor over seas countries like in Africa.

100% fantasy....It costs pharm companies $500 million and takes a decade to clear all the FDA hurdles, in order to bring new medications and devices to market.

The US government is already responsible for a hundred million Americans with disabilities, elderly, below poverty, etc., and the US government has the LOWEST administration costs of any system. Medicare and Medicaid add only about 2% administration costs.
In contrast, the private health insurance companies have cause health care to be over 50% more expensive than it should be or that any other country pays. And US health care is no where near the best. It is one of the worst of the modern world.

Countries with socialized medicine have no longer waiting periods that in the US now.

This stale chestnut again?...Administrative costs aren't the only ones incurred in delivering any given product...BTW, what are the prices of things like Lasik and cosmetic surgery, when compared to years ago?

Those hundreds of US military bases scatter around the globe do NOT at all benefit the US or prevent violence. Instead they promote dictatorships that make more people angry with us. In fact, the current immigration crisis was created by the US military training and supporting the military dictatorship in Honduras.

I watch the pharmaceutical companies running research and testing at land grant universities. It costs them nothing. While they still have some costs, the return on profits are absurdly enormous. And they often just make minor changes just to get a new copyright time period.

Wrong.
Administrative cost are all that insurance companies add on.
They do not provide ANY service or deliver any product.

While Lasik and cosmetic surgery have come down in price, I do not see why that is relevant?
Since people are wealthier and techniques more perfected, the increase in volume and ease were bound to bring them down.
But they are still very expensive, and poor people who don't get health care access are helping to subsidize those reductions for the wealthy.

 

[Oddball]

Those hundreds of US military bases scatter around the globe do NOT at all benefit the US or prevent violence. Instead they promote dictatorships that make more people angry with us. In fact, the current immigration crisis was created by the US military training and supporting the military dictatorship in Honduras.

What they do is allow nations like Germany, Japan, and all those other medical Utopias that you so pine for is to spend far less on their military, which frees up a LOT of money for foolhardy medical care monopolies.

I watch the pharmaceutical companies running research and testing at land grant universities. It costs them nothing. While they still have some costs, the return on profits are absurdly enormous. And they often just make minor changes just to get a new copyright time period.

And?...How does that refute the well established fact that it still costs over $500 million and takes a decade to bring new products to market?

Administrative cost are all that insurance companies add on.
They do not provide ANY service or deliver any product.

Huh?....They don't pay out massive amounts of money on claims?....Advertising costs nothing?

While Lasik and cosmetic surgery have come down in price, I do not see why that is relevant?
Since people are wealthier and techniques more perfected, the increase in volume and ease were bound to bring them down.
But they are still very expensive, and poor people who don't get health care access are helping to subsidize those reductions for the wealthy.

It's relevant because insurance doesn't pay for them....They're entirely out-of-pocket services, and the prices for them has plummeted as they have become more widespread and competition kicks in.....Very much unlike your unweildly and expensive "free shit" model.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Those hundreds of US military bases scatter around the globe do NOT at all benefit the US or prevent violence. Instead they promote dictatorships that make more people angry with us. In fact, the current immigration crisis was created by the US military training and supporting the military dictatorship in Honduras.

What they do is allow nations like Germany, Japan, and all those other medical Utopias that you so pine for is to spend far less on their military, which frees up a LOT of money for foolhardy medical care monopolies.

I watch the pharmaceutical companies running research and testing at land grant universities. It costs them nothing. While they still have some costs, the return on profits are absurdly enormous. And they often just make minor changes just to get a new copyright time period.

And?...How does that refute the well established fact that it still costs over $500 million and takes a decade to bring new products to market?

Administrative cost are all that insurance companies add on.
They do not provide ANY service or deliver any product.

Huh?....They don't pay out massive amounts of money on claims?....Advertising costs nothing?

While Lasik and cosmetic surgery have come down in price, I do not see why that is relevant?
Since people are wealthier and techniques more perfected, the increase in volume and ease were bound to bring them down.
But they are still very expensive, and poor people who don't get health care access are helping to subsidize those reductions for the wealthy.

It's relevant because insurance doesn't pay for them....They're entirely out-of-pocket services, and the prices for them has plummeted as they become more widespread and competition kicks in.....Very much unlike your unweildly and expensive "free shit" model.

If you think health care is expensive now, just wait 'til it's free. P. J. O'Rourke
Read more at: P. J. O'Rourke Quotes

 

[Rigby5]

Those hundreds of US military bases scatter around the globe do NOT at all benefit the US or prevent violence. Instead they promote dictatorships that make more people angry with us. In fact, the current immigration crisis was created by the US military training and supporting the military dictatorship in Honduras.

What they do is allow nations like Germany, Japan, and all those other medical Utopias that you so pine for is to spend far less on their military, which frees up a LOT of money for foolhardy medical care monopolies.

I watch the pharmaceutical companies running research and testing at land grant universities. It costs them nothing. While they still have some costs, the return on profits are absurdly enormous. And they often just make minor changes just to get a new copyright time period.

And?...How does that refute the well established fact that it still costs over $500 million and takes a decade to bring new products to market?

Administrative cost are all that insurance companies add on.
They do not provide ANY service or deliver any product.

Huh?....They don't pay out massive amounts of money on claims?....Advertising costs nothing?

While Lasik and cosmetic surgery have come down in price, I do not see why that is relevant?
Since people are wealthier and techniques more perfected, the increase in volume and ease were bound to bring them down.
But they are still very expensive, and poor people who don't get health care access are helping to subsidize those reductions for the wealthy.

It's relevant because insurance doesn't pay for them....They're entirely out-of-pocket services, and the prices for them has plummeted as they have become more widespread and competition kicks in.....Very much unlike your unweildly and expensive "free shit" model.

No, the US spending trillion on military bases all over the world does not make anyone safer, especially not people in other countries. US forces over seas are not wanted there. The Koreans, Filipinos, Germans, Egyptians, Syrians, Japan, etc., do not want them there. They are there as a threat, not as defense.

And no, those socialized medicine implementations cost less than half what our for profit medical scheme costs, so they are not only saving money, but get better quality medical care. It is private US insurance companies that have a monopoly. Socialized medicine can't be a monopoly when you get to vote over how it decides things.

The claim that it cost $500 million to bring a new product to market does not mean there is any risk taking by big Pharma, because it is they who ensured it cost that much. They have created that huge wall in order to keep out competition from any newer or better company. It does not have to cost nearly anything, and should not cost nearly anything. Mostly what the FDA does is prevent better and cheaper competition, like foreign drugs.

No, insurance companies do not pay out massive amounts on claims because they have a better legal team due to economy of scale. They can tie up cases on court until the litigants die of old age. They also get to use the pay ins often a life time ahead of when people are likely to actually need health care, without paying any interest. I personally have paid in over half a million in health insurance premiums, never got a cent back out from them, and never will since I no longer work for the company I had been paying insurance with.

Sure they likely spend some money on advertising, but they shouldn't. People should not be intimidated or scared into buying what they do not really need or want. Insurance if a fraud that should be illegal. Risk pooling is exactly why governments are created, so should not be skimmed or extorted for huge profits.

However, I totally agree with your analysis of Lasik and cosmetic surgery. They are indicators that insurance companies deliberately greatly inflated the price of the services. They do that because the higher the provider prices, the more essential the insurance policies become.

And applying that to health care in general, I would agree with what you seem to be concluding, which is that before employer benefits became allowed as a tax exemption, almost no one had health insurance, you negotiated medical payments after the fact, and health care was much more affordable and better quality.

 

[Rigby5]

Those hundreds of US military bases scatter around the globe do NOT at all benefit the US or prevent violence. Instead they promote dictatorships that make more people angry with us. In fact, the current immigration crisis was created by the US military training and supporting the military dictatorship in Honduras.

What they do is allow nations like Germany, Japan, and all those other medical Utopias that you so pine for is to spend far less on their military, which frees up a LOT of money for foolhardy medical care monopolies.

I watch the pharmaceutical companies running research and testing at land grant universities. It costs them nothing. While they still have some costs, the return on profits are absurdly enormous. And they often just make minor changes just to get a new copyright time period.

And?...How does that refute the well established fact that it still costs over $500 million and takes a decade to bring new products to market?

Administrative cost are all that insurance companies add on.
They do not provide ANY service or deliver any product.

Huh?....They don't pay out massive amounts of money on claims?....Advertising costs nothing?

While Lasik and cosmetic surgery have come down in price, I do not see why that is relevant?
Since people are wealthier and techniques more perfected, the increase in volume and ease were bound to bring them down.
But they are still very expensive, and poor people who don't get health care access are helping to subsidize those reductions for the wealthy.

It's relevant because insurance doesn't pay for them....They're entirely out-of-pocket services, and the prices for them has plummeted as they become more widespread and competition kicks in.....Very much unlike your unweildly and expensive "free shit" model.

If you think health care is expensive now, just wait 'til it's free. P. J. O'Rourke
Read more at: P. J. O'Rourke Quotes

Wrong.
Health care is free in most of the world, and then it costs less than half as much even when you count all the tax money that goes into it.
The countries with free health care, (like all of Europe for example), have no fraud because there is no benefit for anyone to try to abuse free health care. They are not deliberately breaking bones in order to get them set for free.
There is no model for abuse of free health care.

 

[Oddball]

Wrong.
Health care is free in most of the world, and then it costs less than half as much even when you count all the tax money that goes into it.
The countries with free health care, (like all of Europe for example), have no fraud because there is no benefit for anyone to try to abuse free health care. They are not deliberately breaking bones in order to get them set for free.
There is no model for abuse of free health care.

Yeah, free....Al it costs you is $6+ gasoline, zero economic mobility, sky high taxes on everything....Totally free!

 

[Oddball]

Those hundreds of US military bases scatter around the globe do NOT at all benefit the US or prevent violence. Instead they promote dictatorships that make more people angry with us. In fact, the current immigration crisis was created by the US military training and supporting the military dictatorship in Honduras.

What they do is allow nations like Germany, Japan, and all those other medical Utopias that you so pine for is to spend far less on their military, which frees up a LOT of money for foolhardy medical care monopolies.

I watch the pharmaceutical companies running research and testing at land grant universities. It costs them nothing. While they still have some costs, the return on profits are absurdly enormous. And they often just make minor changes just to get a new copyright time period.

And?...How does that refute the well established fact that it still costs over $500 million and takes a decade to bring new products to market?

Administrative cost are all that insurance companies add on.
They do not provide ANY service or deliver any product.

Huh?....They don't pay out massive amounts of money on claims?....Advertising costs nothing?

While Lasik and cosmetic surgery have come down in price, I do not see why that is relevant?
Since people are wealthier and techniques more perfected, the increase in volume and ease were bound to bring them down.
But they are still very expensive, and poor people who don't get health care access are helping to subsidize those reductions for the wealthy.

It's relevant because insurance doesn't pay for them....They're entirely out-of-pocket services, and the prices for them has plummeted as they have become more widespread and competition kicks in.....Very much unlike your unweildly and expensive "free shit" model.

No, the US spending trillion on military bases all over the world does not make anyone safer, especially not people in other countries. US forces over seas are not wanted there. The Koreans, Filipinos, Germans, Egyptians, Syrians, Japan, etc., do not want them there. They are there as a threat, not as defense.

And no, those socialized medicine implementations cost less than half what our for profit medical scheme costs, so they are not only saving money, but get better quality medical care. It is private US insurance companies that have a monopoly. Socialized medicine can't be a monopoly when you get to vote over how it decides things.

The claim that it cost $500 million to bring a new product to market does not mean there is any risk taking by big Pharma, because it is they who ensured it cost that much. They have created that huge wall in order to keep out competition from any newer or better company. It does not have to cost nearly anything, and should not cost nearly anything. Mostly what the FDA does is prevent better and cheaper competition, like foreign drugs.

No, insurance companies do not pay out massive amounts on claims because they have a better legal team due to economy of scale. They can tie up cases on court until the litigants die of old age. They also get to use the pay ins often a life time ahead of when people are likely to actually need health care, without paying any interest. I personally have paid in over half a million in health insurance premiums, never got a cent back out from them, and never will since I no longer work for the company I had been paying insurance with.

Sure they likely spend some money on advertising, but they shouldn't. People should not be intimidated or scared into buying what they do not really need or want. Insurance if a fraud that should be illegal. Risk pooling is exactly why governments are created, so should not be skimmed or extorted for huge profits.

However, I totally agree with your analysis of Lasik and cosmetic surgery. They are indicators that insurance companies deliberately greatly inflated the price of the services. They do that because the higher the provider prices, the more essential the insurance policies become.

And applying that to health care in general, I would agree with what you seem to be concluding, which is that before employer benefits became allowed as a tax exemption, almost no one had health insurance, you negotiated medical payments after the fact, and health care was much more affordable and better quality.

Never said nor implied that Murican military bases all over the world make anyone safer....Jut that then the nations involved don't have to spend nearly as much on their national defense, and this frees up money for their silly pinko medical monopolies.

So you'll at least admit that the prohibitively high costs brought about by the FDA drives up costs and drives down competition....How do think that a full-blown monopoly run by the same mindset is going to end up?

And don't give me that "we'll do socialism better this time" shit....I'm smarter than that.