The New Political Definition of Healthcare

^That's not what single-payer means.

The VA isn't single payer? That is hard to believe.

That's not what I said. Single-payer coverage for all Americans would not be styled after the VA. Medical personnel would not, for example, be government employees.

I wonder which corporation would be put in charge of it... Aetna? Wellpoint? Some combination of all the "major players" in the industry?
 
^That's not what single-payer means.

The VA isn't single payer? That is hard to believe.

That's not what I said. Single-payer coverage for all Americans would not be styled after the VA. Medical personnel would not, for example, be government employees.

I wonder which corporation would be put in charge of it... Aetna? Wellpoint? Some combination of all the "major players" in the industry?

Single-payer healthcare - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
^That's not what single-payer means.

The VA isn't single payer? That is hard to believe.

That's not what I said. Single-payer coverage for all Americans would not be styled after the VA. Medical personnel would not, for example, be government employees.

I wonder which corporation would be put in charge of it... Aetna? Wellpoint? Some combination of all the "major players" in the industry?

Single-payer healthcare - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wonder which corporation would be put in charge of it...
 
^That's not what single-payer means.

The VA isn't single payer? That is hard to believe.

That's not what I said. Single-payer coverage for all Americans would not be styled after the VA. Medical personnel would not, for example, be government employees.

I wonder which corporation would be put in charge of it... Aetna? Wellpoint? Some combination of all the "major players" in the industry?

Single-payer healthcare - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wonder which corporation would be put in charge of it...

Which corporation is in charge of Medicare?
 
The VA isn't single payer? That is hard to believe.

That's not what I said. Single-payer coverage for all Americans would not be styled after the VA. Medical personnel would not, for example, be government employees.

I wonder which corporation would be put in charge of it... Aetna? Wellpoint? Some combination of all the "major players" in the industry?

Single-payer healthcare - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wonder which corporation would be put in charge of it...

Which corporation is in charge of Medicare?

Medicare was legislated a long time ago. Congress doesn't work like that any more. They'll find away to funnel it through their corporate sponsors. Bet on it.
 
That's not what I said. Single-payer coverage for all Americans would not be styled after the VA. Medical personnel would not, for example, be government employees.

I wonder which corporation would be put in charge of it... Aetna? Wellpoint? Some combination of all the "major players" in the industry?

Single-payer healthcare - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wonder which corporation would be put in charge of it...

Which corporation is in charge of Medicare?

Medicare was legislated a long time ago. Congress doesn't work like that any more. They'll find away to funnel it through their corporate sponsors. Bet on it.

You could have stopped at "Congress doesn't work" and been just as accurate. Think of how much time and your tax money they've spent on doing not much of anything...
 
^That's not what single-payer means.

The VA isn't single payer? That is hard to believe.

That's not what I said. Single-payer coverage for all Americans would not be styled after the VA. Medical personnel would not, for example, be government employees.

I stand corrected! Government employees would make the rules about who gets what care and when they get it.

If you prefer to misunderstand the topic, I can't help you.
 
^That's not what single-payer means.

The VA isn't single payer? That is hard to believe.

That's not what I said. Single-payer coverage for all Americans would not be styled after the VA. Medical personnel would not, for example, be government employees.

I stand corrected! Government employees would make the rules about who gets what care and when they get it.

If you prefer to misunderstand the topic, I can't help you.

I really don't need your help.

"Many nations worldwide have single-payer health insurance programs. These programs generally provide some form of universal healthcare, which are implemented in a variety of ways. In some cases doctors are employed, and hospitals run by, the government such as in the United Kingdom or Spain. Alternatively the government may purchase healthcare services from outside organizations, such as the approach taken in Canada."
 
^The U.S. would most likely emulate the Canadian system.

Best not vote for Trump, then.
 
^The U.S. would most likely emulate the Canadian system.

Best not vote for Trump, then.

^The U.S. would most likely emulate the Canadian system.

Best not vote for Trump, then.

Which plan would Hillary choose?

Hillary Clinton on health care

Obama on health care

Bet you won't be voting for him this time, either. Oh, wait.

On what?
 
^The U.S. would most likely emulate the Canadian system.

Best not vote for Trump, then.

^The U.S. would most likely emulate the Canadian system.

Best not vote for Trump, then.

Which plan would Hillary choose?

Hillary Clinton on health care

Obama on health care

Bet you won't be voting for him this time, either. Oh, wait.

On what?

Reelection.
 
^The U.S. would most likely emulate the Canadian system.

Best not vote for Trump, then.

^The U.S. would most likely emulate the Canadian system.

Best not vote for Trump, then.

Which plan would Hillary choose?

More of the same we now have with a Part D prescription plan for everyone and a few demands that will be laughed at.

You can look at this one of two ways - vote for the candidate whose proposal best suits what you want, or assume all politicians lie and vote for the opposite.
 
Yup..... in Politics, and not in 'Healthcare.' The reason will become clear.


1. Doctors regularly discuss situations in the lives of their patients that might be less than healthy....such as smoking, or the use of alcohol....and I've even fielded questions about gun ownership in my home.

Is this a problem?

Is the doctor being inquisitive, or is he/she performing the very function that we, as patients, and he, as guided by the Hippocratic Oath, is required to?


2. Well....it seems that that depends on who is in charge. If a Progressive, Liberal, secularist....then that role is ....muted......altered.

Here is one glaring example. The Obama regime wants doctors to base the care they give their patient on what the Bolsheviks of the Soviet Union called 'medical totalitarianism.' Rather than 'waste' time, care, medicine on you, the patient.....consider the collective, i.e., consider 'social justice.'

"True change, writes Dr. Emanuel [Obama's apparatchik in ObamaCare], must include reassessing the promise doctors make when they enter the profession, the Hippocratic Oath. Amazingly, Dr. Emanuel criticizes the Hippocratic Oath as partly to blame for the "overuse" of medical care: "Medical school education and post graduate education emphasize thoroughness," he wrote. Physicians take the "Hippocratic Oath's admonition to 'use my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment' as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others." (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008.)

Of course that is what patients hope their doctors will do. But Dr. Emanuel wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their own patient and consider social justice. They should think about whether the money being spent on their patient could be better spent elsewhere. Many doctors are horrified at this notion, and will tell you that a doctor's job is to achieve social justice one patient at a time. "
Defend Your Health - For a Fit Body and Mind

Downgrading American Medical Care




3. If you have any doubt as to what 'social justice' means, look at the atrocities of the Soviet system in the last century. The slaughter of millions was met with a shrug, and chalked up to "you have to break some eggs if you want to make an omelette."



In other words, your life means nothing if one endorses the collective, big government.

Welcome to the 'brave new world.'
You are the equivalent of a paint store with only a single color paint and a single wide brush for sale.

This is another failed TROLL thread!




Once again your ignorance is on display.....

I note that you have been unable to give a single example of anything.....anything....in the OP that is not accurate, correct, and undeniable.

Let's remind all: the view of Obama, Emanuel, Progressives,et al is that government is in charge of whatever medical care citizens get......deserve.....



And the care is based not on efficacy and saving lives, but on costs, as they so determine.


Any student of history....and I realize that you and scholarship have yet to be acquainted....
....notes the similarity in outlook of today's Liberals/Progressives/Democrats, with their earlier iteration.....
communists, Nazis, and fascists.


I have the sense that you see the similarity, too...and it embarrasses you.
Excellent.

The only thing Obama supporter ThoughtCrimes needed to see was a question about his master.
 

Forum List

Back
Top