I am not understanding why single payer would be bad

[antagon]

A single payer system does not involve the Government running hospitals. Hospitals would still be privately controlled.

it would have to require control over costs of procedures and limitations or standardization of practices, even if the government were to let private hospitals handle the consumer end of the operation. the consequence will be similar to a directly-operated facility, except for the lame-duck middle man.

if we are going to abandon what we have going, why would we leave private hospitals to squeeze out a living in competition with public facilities? better we nationalize them in this misguided, backward-thinking scenario.

There are no public facilities in a single payer system. That's what you don't seem to be getting.

if you have got some ideal as to what a single payer system is, you'll have to explain that. your claim that a single payer system will entail privately operated hospitals is not how the vast majority of hospitals in the world's functioning single-payer systems are chartered. that you claim there will be no publicly run hospitals really blows your concept out of the water. i argue that for budget care which makes healthcare accessible to millions of americans today, publicly owned hospitals are the way to go.

your single-payer, private sourced proposal is not an improvement to any system i could think of. worst of both worlds the way i see it.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

it would have to require control over costs of procedures and limitations or standardization of practices, even if the government were to let private hospitals handle the consumer end of the operation. the consequence will be similar to a directly-operated facility, except for the lame-duck middle man.

if we are going to abandon what we have going, why would we leave private hospitals to squeeze out a living in competition with public facilities? better we nationalize them in this misguided, backward-thinking scenario.

There are no public facilities in a single payer system. That's what you don't seem to be getting.

if you have got some ideal as to what a single payer system is, you'll have to explain that. your claim that a single payer system will entail privately operated hospitals is not how the vast majority of hospitals in the world's functioning single-payer systems. that you claim there will be no publicly run hospitals really blows your concept out of the water. i argue that for budget care which makes healthcare accessible to millions of americans today, publicly owned hospitals are the way to go.

your single-payer, private sourced proposal is not an improvement to any system i could think of. worst of both worlds the way i see it.

A single-payer system essentially works as the government providing health insurance to every citizen of this country, similar to how Medicare works now. Medicare is a single-payer system.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

There is no reason to allow the government to control all our health care. That is nothing more than more big government. Besides Government health care isn't all that great, I've been under their thumb most of my adult life. Problems on top of problems.

VA hospitals rank higher than private hospitals in terms of patient satisfaction.

 

[Zander]

ObamaCare is going to be repealed or overturned. It is not the governments job to take care of your health- it is yours. You are responsible for your own life. It is time for Big Government Democrats to put your pants on and grow the fuck up

 

[antagon]

the US healthcare system is not a single-payer system. medicare is a component of that system, and is not accepted by many if not most private facilities. extending medicare across the system will not constitute a single-payer, private hospital network.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

ObamaCare is going to be repealed or overturned. It is not the governments job to take care of your health- it is yours. You are responsible for your own life. It is time for Big Government Democrats to put your pants on and grow the fuck up

ObamaCare will NOT be overturned or repealed. Insurance companies paid too much money to get it passed.

ObamaCare is NOT a single-payer system, which is the topic of this thread.

Continue as you were.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

the US healthcare system is not a single-payer system. medicare is a component of that system, and is not accepted by many if not most private facilities. extending medicare across the system will not constitute a single-payer, private hospital network.

Yes, it would. That's what single payer is.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think a single payer system is feasible right now - private insurance companies own too many of our politicians.

Claims of how bad it is in Europe and Canada are dumb though - they have it better than us, when it comes to healthcare. There's no denying that.

 

[antagon]

ObamaCare is going to be repealed or overturned. It is not the governments job to take care of your health- it is yours. You are responsible for your own life. It is time for Big Government Democrats to put your pants on and grow the fuck up

i doubt your fantasy will come to fruition, zander. anyhow, obamacare is just another step in the state empowerment of HMOs which set the system on its feet in the first place.

there's not a lot of oxygen up in those clouds of partisan delusion you're in, and it looks like you could use a breath of objective information.

 

[xotoxi]

I am not understanding why single payer would be bad

It's the death panels that make it bad.

Remember...

DEATH PANELS.

 

[Zander]

ObamaCare is going to be repealed or overturned. It is not the governments job to take care of your health- it is yours. You are responsible for your own life. It is time for Big Government Democrats to put your pants on and grow the fuck up

i doubt your fantasy will come to fruition, zander. anyhow, obamacare is just another step in the state empowerment of HMOs which set the system on its feet in the first place.

there's not a lot of oxygen up in those clouds of partisan delusion you're in, and it looks like you could use a breath of objective information.

We'll see what happens when ObamaCare goes before the SCOTUS.

The Administration will have to show where in the enumerated powers they have the power to take over "Health Care". Good luck with that one, it ain't in there.....the commerce clause craptrap they sold it on is not going to hold up.

If the American People want government run Health Care they will need to Amend the Constitution.

 

[antagon]

the US healthcare system is not a single-payer system. medicare is a component of that system, and is not accepted by many if not most private facilities. extending medicare across the system will not constitute a single-payer, private hospital network.

Yes, it would. That's what single payer is.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think a single payer system is feasible right now - private insurance companies own too many of our politicians.

Claims of how bad it is in Europe and Canada are dumb though - they have it better than us, when it comes to healthcare. There's no denying that.

i think that america, to include politicians, have made an investment in HMOs going on 40 years and there's no reason to abandon that for other nation's model. certainly not for a medicare expansion.

this medicare for all deal of yours is ridiculous, as is your idea that european public health services are undeniably better than those available in the US. you clearly haven't been inside a fair share of european hospitals or had any comparative experience between them and private care in the US.

the top systems in europe among which i'm sure holland is included employ private health care insurers at the center of the system. because we've got a massive population and land mass, i feel that it is astute that we have our public/private system. your proposal simply doesnt fit with reality at the basis of its presumptions and doesnt fit with the resources, economy and demands of the US.

it wont matter who owns our politicians.

 

[Zander]

the US healthcare system is not a single-payer system. medicare is a component of that system, and is not accepted by many if not most private facilities. extending medicare across the system will not constitute a single-payer, private hospital network.

Yes, it would. That's what single payer is.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think a single payer system is feasible right now - private insurance companies own too many of our politicians.

Claims of how bad it is in Europe and Canada are dumb though - they have it better than us, when it comes to healthcare. There's no denying that.

Then move there. Or try to amend the Constitution.

 

[antagon]

ObamaCare is going to be repealed or overturned. It is not the governments job to take care of your health- it is yours. You are responsible for your own life. It is time for Big Government Democrats to put your pants on and grow the fuck up

i doubt your fantasy will come to fruition, zander. anyhow, obamacare is just another step in the state empowerment of HMOs which set the system on its feet in the first place.

there's not a lot of oxygen up in those clouds of partisan delusion you're in, and it looks like you could use a breath of objective information.

We'll see what happens when ObamaCare goes before the SCOTUS.

The Administration will have to show where in the enumerated powers they have the power to take over "Health Care". Good luck with that one, it ain't in there.....the commerce clause craptrap they sold it on is not going to hold up.

If the American People want government run Health Care they will need to Amend the Constitution.

there's already been mandates for HMOs together with federal legislation as to how they provide service. if the zanders want the SCOTUS to block obamacare, they will need to amend history.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

the US healthcare system is not a single-payer system. medicare is a component of that system, and is not accepted by many if not most private facilities. extending medicare across the system will not constitute a single-payer, private hospital network.

Yes, it would. That's what single payer is.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think a single payer system is feasible right now - private insurance companies own too many of our politicians.

Claims of how bad it is in Europe and Canada are dumb though - they have it better than us, when it comes to healthcare. There's no denying that.

Then move there. Or try to amend the Constitution.

No, I think I'll stay here.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

ObamaCare is going to be repealed or overturned. It is not the governments job to take care of your health- it is yours. You are responsible for your own life. It is time for Big Government Democrats to put your pants on and grow the fuck up

i doubt your fantasy will come to fruition, zander. anyhow, obamacare is just another step in the state empowerment of HMOs which set the system on its feet in the first place.

there's not a lot of oxygen up in those clouds of partisan delusion you're in, and it looks like you could use a breath of objective information.

We'll see what happens when ObamaCare goes before the SCOTUS.

The Administration will have to show where in the enumerated powers they have the power to take over "Health Care". Good luck with that one, it ain't in there.....the commerce clause craptrap they sold it on is not going to hold up.

If the American People want government run Health Care they will need to Amend the Constitution.

How exactly does ObamaCare "take over Health Care"? All the legislation did was require people to buy healthcare, and add regulations to the industry. All the scary-sounding "government takeover" rhetoric is bullshit.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

the US healthcare system is not a single-payer system. medicare is a component of that system, and is not accepted by many if not most private facilities. extending medicare across the system will not constitute a single-payer, private hospital network.

Yes, it would. That's what single payer is.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think a single payer system is feasible right now - private insurance companies own too many of our politicians.

Claims of how bad it is in Europe and Canada are dumb though - they have it better than us, when it comes to healthcare. There's no denying that.

i think that america, to include politicians, have made an investment in HMOs going on 40 years and there's no reason to abandon that for other nation's model. certainly not for a medicare expansion.

this medicare for all deal of yours is ridiculous, as is your idea that european public health services are undeniably better than those available in the US. you clearly haven't been inside a fair share of european hospitals or had any comparative experience between them and private care in the US.

the top systems in europe among which i'm sure holland is included employ private health care insurers at the center of the system. because we've got a massive population and land mass, i feel that it is astute that we have our public/private system. your proposal simply doesnt fit with reality at the basis of its presumptions and doesnt fit with the resources, economy and demands of the US.

it wont matter who owns our politicians.

It's not my idea.

And in terms of which system is better, you're right, I can't judge it for myself, the only time I was in a European hospital, I was 6 years old. But all quantifiable metrics say that European healthcare is better than ours.

Have you spent much time in a national healthcare system? Where do you get your claims that ours is better from?

 

[logical4u]

If you eliminate competition and allow the government a monopoly you're inevitably inviting fraud, waste, and abuse. You're also likely to see, as in the UK's NHS, a larger amount of bureaucrats than actual doctors and nurses. Also, once you create this monstrosity it will be nearly impossible to get rid of or even attempt to reform in any way shape or form. Look at Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. If you even mention that those three programs are in need of some amount of reform the propagandists begin to attack.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

so besides the fact that governments' can't seem to manage it correctly, it is in theory a good idea?

Monopolies are always a good idea, right?

BTW, how do you like your cable company?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Really? They all seem to like it there.

Healthcare System Ratings: U.S., Great Britain, Canada

Except for the dead ones.

The US ranks behind all those European countries in terms of life span, infant mortality, and nearly every other statistic as well.

Statistics are really misleading.

For instance, infant mortality in the US includes any premie who survives outside the womb for even a few minutes. Most European countries do not count births before an arbitrary cutoff point, even if that child lives for weeks.

Since the US has a higher accidental death rate, and murder rate, than most countries in Europe that makes our life span lower, do you think that adopting a less efficient health care system will change that? If so, how?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Except for the dead ones.

The US ranks behind all those European countries in terms of life span, infant mortality, and nearly every other statistic as well.

Statistics are really misleading.

For instance, infant mortality in the US includes any premie who survives outside the womb for even a few minutes. Most European countries do not count births before an arbitrary cutoff point, even if that child lives for weeks.

Since the US has a higher accidental death rate, and murder rate, than most countries in Europe that makes our life span lower, do you think that adopting a less efficient health care system will change that? If so, how?

What evidence do you have that any European model system is less efficient than ours?