You obviously aren't aware of the fact that Vermont dropped its single payer system because the taxpayers couldn't afford it.
No kidding. That's why they're now getting ready to implement the all-payer system referenced in the post above.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You obviously aren't aware of the fact that Vermont dropped its single payer system because the taxpayers couldn't afford it.
You obviously aren't aware of the fact that Vermont dropped its single payer system because the taxpayers couldn't afford it.
No kidding. That's why they're now getting ready to implement the all-payer system referenced in the post above.
Single payer was supposed to be cheaper and it turned out to be more expensive. How does "all-payer" save any money? It looks to have all the disadvantages of single-payer with none of the advantages.
No, we've learned from the success of single payer plans all over the world.
Ah single payer!
I recently had need for some serious eye surgery to head off a condition that would have left one eye blind without fast treatment. It was done within a couple of weeks.
A relative in Lancashire (England) had the same condition in both eyes about a year ago. He was put on a waiting list to have one eye repaired - in six months provided the doctors were not on strike. The other eye? They deemed the sight of one eye sufficient so no treatment was scheduled for the other.
Fortunately he was able to have both eyes saved by fleeing The National Health.
But if you like single payer....well.....can you keep your doctor? Can you keep your eyesight? Can you keep both hands?
Are you crazy? I have medicare and most of the time I still have to pay a private doctor. I may as well not even have it.Medicare is single payer and Americans love Medicare.
Are you disputing that Vermont's attempt at single payer was a failure?"Have Liberals Learned from the Failure of Vermont's Single-Payer Health Care Plan?"
Clearly conservatives haven't learned that their threads fail when predicated on a loaded question fallacy – this thread being one of many examples.
Single payer was supposed to be cheaper and it turned out to be more expensive. How does "all-payer" save any money? It looks to have all the disadvantages of single-payer with none of the advantages.
Single-payer isn't "more expensive," it requires substantially higher taxes because virtually all health services get paid for via tax revenue (not money collected via private insurance premiums). Raising taxes that much, even if the increase is offset by the complete lack of health insurance premiums, is a political non-starter.
Their all-payer system is based on what already exists. If you're in private coverage, you're still in private coverage. If you're on Medicaid or Medicare, you still are. The difference is that all of those payers start to pay health care providers the same way--a way that allows the state's hospitals and doctors to function more efficiently and deliver better care in a more sustainable way.
One of the advantages of a single-payer system is that health care providers get a consistent signal from the health insurance industry--because there's only one health insurer. In Vermont's all-payer system, providers will still get a consistent signal because all of the payers will be sending the same one.
What is this "same way" that all health care providers are supposed to pay? What's the "same" about it? That's so vague as to be absolutely meaningless.