Medicare 3% of GDP, Health Care 17% of GDP

[rdean]

Watching Morning Joe, those were the figures they announced.

Republicans want to go after old people, but leave Health Care companies sucking away our revenue? Why? Do their leaders need the money that bad?

Then the people who don't have health care fill the emergency rooms at 10 times the cost.

Insurance companies are "middle men". They make nothing except profit by skimming insurance policies. How can their CEO's have 100 million dollar paychecks? They make nothing.

The VA spends 94 cents of every dollar on the patients. A mere 6 cents on administration. Soon, health care companies will be doing the opposite. How is the in the best interests of anyone besides the Republican leadership? How does that leadership get their base to support such destructive policies? Can someone explain?

 

[Care4all]

they just have to say the "Evil Liberals" support medicare the way it is and their crowd will support the opposite....that's just the way it is, between the 2 sides of the aisle.

 

[rdean]

they just have to say the "Evil Liberals" support medicare the way it is and their crowd will support the opposite....that's just the way it is, between the 2 sides of the aisle.

Too bad that's true. Look at "Romneycare".

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Marxists need to lie about everything hence Medicare Reform = Death.

 

[Trajan]

they just have to say the "Evil Liberals" support medicare the way it is and their crowd will support the opposite....that's just the way it is, between the 2 sides of the aisle.

Care...I think you hit upon a salient point in all this; we have just started talking past each on the the details now, its not really about the details anymore..... its all part of an ideological divide thats has been growing for decades, thats the real " root cause" imho.......

Six of one……….this debate has become circular…..as it is now a battle of philosophies.

Every plan will always be unfair to someone. Getting the system to perform, to capture the best of what it has to offer and provide the greatest good to the greatest number of people is what this is supposedly all about.

Its an ideological bridge that is the issue; there are some who believe that the government can stamp out or 'control for' all and any vestiges of 'unfairness' in any medium and is first last and always the best arbiter of what is 'right'. They also believe they can protect anyone/everyone from their own intrinsic lack of self interest in this regard or context.

Conversely the other party feels that in the end; the gains via the above platform are marginal in that no one anywhere at anytime has ever been able to bend so complex a vehicle like health-care so as to deliver to everyone =everything, exactly equitably where in citizen *A gets exactly what citizen *B gets, no matter their status, ala earning power or station in life. There will always be unfairness. The key is they a) recognize that you cannot nor ever will reach or make fair everything to everyone and b) that in the end the greatest amount of folks receiving the best 'average' level of care across the board in wide a swath as possible is the target, if 70% of people receive above average care this is far better than 90% getting so so care....recognizing you can never ever NEVER reach 100% in ANY level at any extreme, be it horrid or excellent ....


Its central planning vs. competitive market forces. The ideology of one seeks to harness the herd, the other seeks to free it to roam and to make a more individual choice and let markets mesh and evolve.

Give me the voucher; let me shop and buy a plan I want, tailored exactly to my need with me handing over the payment, if I don’t want add ons or packages that some markets demand via government dictate so be it, I will spend it wisely, when folks have to absorb and face the cost of what they are buying at the end user point, they wake up and I believe will make better or more learned choices, if they don’t, well as I inferred, you simply cannot make everyone get/take everything you want them too, people are not blocks of wood, that’s not unfair, its just life……...


Until we recognize this, we’ll just roll along till the system blows up and the pain then will be infinitely worse effecting many many many more and the unfairness quotient will be many many many times larger.

 

[boedicca]

Medicare is understated. Due to price controls, doctors and hospitals are reimbursed at discounted levels. The losses are shifted to the private sector via higher premiums and fees.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Watching Morning Joe...

That's your first problem.

Republicans want to go after old people, but leave Health Care companies sucking away our revenue? Why? Do their leaders need the money that bad?

I won't accept that premise. Conservatives want people to have choices other than gov't, Democrats don't.

Then the people who don't have health care fill the emergency rooms at 10 times the cost.

Emergency rooms across the nation are closing because they are clogged with illegal aliens using them as their primary care facility. Why do they do that? Because illegal alien advocacy groups (La Raza, Mecha) tell them to. Get rid of illegal aliens, and you will have solved a majority of the problem.

Insurance companies are "middle men". They make nothing except profit by skimming insurance policies. How can their CEO's have 100 million dollar paychecks? They make nothing.

Bullshit, they provide a service; Insurance. Plus, I would rather have to deal with a private company than a massive, uncaring gov't bureaucracy.

The VA spends 94 cents of every dollar on the patients. A mere 6 cents on administration. Soon, health care companies will be doing the opposite. How is the in the best interests of anyone besides the Republican leadership? How does that leadership get their base to support such destructive policies? Can someone explain?

Just a few short years ago you Liberals held up the VA as an example of how NOT to treat our injured veterans. But now you hold it up as a shinning example of medical care. Why the change?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Dems in 2008 "These two entities—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—are not facing any kind of financial crisis,"

Dems in 2011 "These two entities—Medicare and Social Security—are not facing any kind of financial crisis"

 

[auditor0007]

they just have to say the "Evil Liberals" support medicare the way it is and their crowd will support the opposite....that's just the way it is, between the 2 sides of the aisle.

Care...I think you hit upon a salient point in all this; we have just started talking past each on the the details now, its not really about the details anymore..... its all part of an ideological divide thats has been growing for decades, thats the real " root cause" imho.......

Six of one……….this debate has become circular…..as it is now a battle of philosophies.

Every plan will always be unfair to someone. Getting the system to perform, to capture the best of what it has to offer and provide the greatest good to the greatest number of people is what this is supposedly all about.

Its an ideological bridge that is the issue; there are some who believe that the government can stamp out or 'control for' all and any vestiges of 'unfairness' in any medium and is first last and always the best arbiter of what is 'right'. They also believe they can protect anyone/everyone from their own intrinsic lack of self interest in this regard or context.

Conversely the other party feels that in the end; the gains via the above platform are marginal in that no one anywhere at anytime has ever been able to bend so complex a vehicle like health-care so as to deliver to everyone =everything, exactly equitably where in citizen *A gets exactly what citizen *B gets, no matter their status, ala earning power or station in life. There will always be unfairness. The key is they a) recognize that you cannot nor ever will reach or make fair everything to everyone and b) that in the end the greatest amount of folks receiving the best 'average' level of care across the board in wide a swath as possible is the target, if 70% of people receive above average care this is far better than 90% getting so so care....recognizing you can never ever NEVER reach 100% in ANY level at any extreme, be it horrid or excellent ....


Its central planning vs. competitive market forces. The ideology of one seeks to harness the herd, the other seeks to free it to roam and to make a more individual choice and let markets mesh and evolve.

Give me the voucher; let me shop and buy a plan I want, tailored exactly to my need with me handing over the payment, if I don’t want add ons or packages that some markets demand via government dictate so be it, I will spend it wisely, when folks have to absorb and face the cost of what they are buying at the end user point, they wake up and I believe will make better or more learned choices, if they don’t, well as I inferred, you simply cannot make everyone get/take everything you want them too, people are not blocks of wood, that’s not unfair, its just life……...


Until we recognize this, we’ll just roll along till the system blows up and the pain then will be infinitely worse effecting many many many more and the unfairness quotient will be many many many times larger.

There is a huge problem with the idea that, as a senior citizen, you can find a package of healthcare that is suitable to you. Here is the simple fact; all old people die, and most of them get sick before they die. This costs a lot of money. More money is spent in the last year of life for healthcare than any other year in the average person's life. So you are not going to have all these choices as to what you can purchase. You will be forced to purchase the most expensive policy because it will have to cover all these costs.

Keeping in mind that many people will not be able to afford a plan that gives them full coverage, I can easily envision people being forced into indemnity plans that have caps on how much healthcare an individual can receive. Then what? Or are we going to force insurers to cover everyone regardless of whether they can pay more than their government voucher?

The worst part about trying to privatize Medicare is that in the end, if we don't reduce costs, it will eventually fall right back on the government's shoulders, because when people begin dying due to not receiving care for lack of money or coverage, then the people will demand something be done. Medicare is a fantastic program, but we need to find ways to reduce costs, not just for Medicare, but for healthcare as a whole.

 

[GHook93]

You do realize that Obamacare seeked to cut medicare. It also forced everyone to purchased private healthcare.

Not to mention Paul Ryan's plan protected medicare for everyone over 55.

Watching Morning Joe, those were the figures they announced.

Republicans want to go after old people, but leave Health Care companies sucking away our revenue? Why? Do their leaders need the money that bad?

Then the people who don't have health care fill the emergency rooms at 10 times the cost.

Insurance companies are "middle men". They make nothing except profit by skimming insurance policies. How can their CEO's have 100 million dollar paychecks? They make nothing.

The VA spends 94 cents of every dollar on the patients. A mere 6 cents on administration. Soon, health care companies will be doing the opposite. How is the in the best interests of anyone besides the Republican leadership? How does that leadership get their base to support such destructive policies? Can someone explain?

 

[Sallow]

Watching Morning Joe...

That's your first problem.

Republicans want to go after old people, but leave Health Care companies sucking away our revenue? Why? Do their leaders need the money that bad?

I won't accept that premise. Conservatives want people to have choices other than gov't, Democrats don't.
Emergency rooms across the nation are closing because they are clogged with illegal aliens using them as their primary care facility. Why do they do that? Because illegal alien advocacy groups (La Raza, Mecha) tell them to. Get rid of illegal aliens, and you will have solved a majority of the problem.

Insurance companies are "middle men". They make nothing except profit by skimming insurance policies. How can their CEO's have 100 million dollar paychecks? They make nothing.

Bullshit, they provide a service; Insurance. Plus, I would rather have to deal with a private company than a massive, uncaring gov't bureaucracy.

The VA spends 94 cents of every dollar on the patients. A mere 6 cents on administration. Soon, health care companies will be doing the opposite. How is the in the best interests of anyone besides the Republican leadership? How does that leadership get their base to support such destructive policies? Can someone explain?

Just a few short years ago you Liberals held up the VA as an example of how NOT to treat our injured veterans. But now you hold it up as a shinning example of medical care. Why the change?

You have this upside down. Insurance..or private sector insurance..is an awful way to insure people get medical care. First off..it's not profitable to insure everyone. It's only profitable to insure people that will never need the insurance. And that's the bottom line.

 

[Sallow]

You do realize that Obamacare seeked to cut medicare. It also forced everyone to purchased private healthcare.

Not to mention Paul Ryan's plan protected medicare for everyone over 55.

Watching Morning Joe, those were the figures they announced.

Republicans want to go after old people, but leave Health Care companies sucking away our revenue? Why? Do their leaders need the money that bad?

Then the people who don't have health care fill the emergency rooms at 10 times the cost.

Insurance companies are "middle men". They make nothing except profit by skimming insurance policies. How can their CEO's have 100 million dollar paychecks? They make nothing.

The VA spends 94 cents of every dollar on the patients. A mere 6 cents on administration. Soon, health care companies will be doing the opposite. How is the in the best interests of anyone besides the Republican leadership? How does that leadership get their base to support such destructive policies? Can someone explain?

By cutting waste, fraud and inefficiency.

 

[GHook93]

Here is the reason healthcare won't get solved anytime soon. When any suggestion is made, they other side demonize the proposal with propaganda. What get left is the status quo and risk costs and premiums.

Look Nixon proposed and tried to push through UHC, Ted Kennedy was the biggest reason it was shot down. He did it solely because a Republican presented it. He then spend the rest of his career trying to get Nixon's plan passed.

A few years ago, I guarantee that if an individual healthcare mandate was proposed by a Republican candidate (as Newt is saying he supports) then the Republicans would be behind it in forced the Democrats would be trying to shoot it down.

We have become such a partisan/polarized society that even when the other side proposed what you want, you have to shoot it down because the other side proposed it.

I guarantee many many many Democrats are against Amnesty, want a border fence and are sick and tired of illegal immigration, but they won't do a things and demonize the Republicans on it simply because the Republicans are the champions at the moment for combating illegal immigration!

 

[auditor0007]

Watching Morning Joe...

That's your first problem.I won't accept that premise. Conservatives want people to have choices other than gov't, Democrats don't.
Emergency rooms across the nation are closing because they are clogged with illegal aliens using them as their primary care facility. Why do they do that? Because illegal alien advocacy groups (La Raza, Mecha) tell them to. Get rid of illegal aliens, and you will have solved a majority of the problem.

Bullshit, they provide a service; Insurance. Plus, I would rather have to deal with a private company than a massive, uncaring gov't bureaucracy.

The VA spends 94 cents of every dollar on the patients. A mere 6 cents on administration. Soon, health care companies will be doing the opposite. How is the in the best interests of anyone besides the Republican leadership? How does that leadership get their base to support such destructive policies? Can someone explain?

Just a few short years ago you Liberals held up the VA as an example of how NOT to treat our injured veterans. But now you hold it up as a shinning example of medical care. Why the change?

You have this upside down. Insurance..or private sector insurance..is an awful way to insure people get medical care. First off..it's not profitable to insure everyone. It's only profitable to insure people that will never need the insurance. And that's the bottom line.

A few die in accidents and a few die suddenly. As for everyone else, they get sick and need care and then die. The only way to offer insurance is to guess at the total cost to cover the sickness and death. You can't even say that some people will never collect, because everyone gets sick and dies.