Vermont Going To Single Payer By 2017. Kicking Health Insurance Companies Out

[CowboyTed]

How did the guy who got Ebola fair when he was diagnosed the first time.

"
Duncan's illness in Dallas[edit]

Texas Presbyterian Hospital, where Duncan was treated
Duncan began experiencing symptoms on September 24, 2014, and arrived at the Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital emergency room at 10:37 p.m. on September 25.[26] At 11:36 p.m., a triage nurse asked Duncan about his symptoms, and Duncan reported feeling "abdominal pain, dizziness, nausea and headache (new onset)."[26] The nurse recorded a fever of 100.1 °F (37.8 °C), but did not inquire as to his travel history as this was not triage protocol at the time.[26] At 12:05 a.m., Duncan was admitted into a treatment area room where the on-duty physician accessed the electronic health record (EHR). The physician noted nasal congestion, a runny nose, and abdominal tenderness. Duncan was given Extra Strength Tylenol at 1:24 a.m.[26] CT scan results came back noting "no acute disease" for the abdominal and pelvic areas and "unremarkable" for the head.[26] Lab results returned showing slightly lowwhite blood cells, low platelets, increased creatinine, and elevated levels of the liver enzyme AST.[26][27] His temperature was noted at 103.0 °F (39.4 °C) at3:02 a.m. and 101.2 °F (38.4 °C) at 3:32 a.m. Duncan was diagnosed with sinusitis and abdominal pain and sent home at 3:37 a.m. with a prescription forantibiotics, which are not effective for treating viral diseases.[26][28]"

No Insurance,....

And yet he was treated anyway, for free. Despite not being a US citizen.
Yes, US healthcare is the best in the world. Thanks for demonstrating it.

He was given a fucking aspirin for Ebola...
Lets just say that is not the best healthcare it the world, you might think it is, so we know your standards and the height of the bar you need to clear to be the best.

If anything happens you in UK you get full treatment the same as any UK citizen...
Feeling embarrassed yet.

He didnt get an aspirin for Ebola. You're a fucking moron and a half wit.

Oh sorry...
What do you call " Duncan was given Extra Strength Tylenol at 1:24 a.m." and then sent home...

So you gave "Extra Strength Tylenol" for Ebola. Maybe you're right aspirin can't cure Ebola but Extra Strength Tylenol can...

You are one stupid disingenuous shit for sure.
He was intially misdiagnosed, which of course never happens in Europe, and given something for fever.
Please stop lying and stick to actual facts instead of lib talking points.

Fact: Western European Countries have better healthcare for all its people than US. As I stated before if you are allowed to take the high risk people out then healthcare is easy, especially when you spend twice the amount. Do you want the list of organisations who have produced reports on this: WHO, Commonwealth fund, OCED......

Fact: Europe didn't send people with Ebola home with a Tylenol.

If I was you I would stay away from facts, you are having real trouble with them...

 

[thereisnospoon]

Every person should have access to good care no matter what their economic standing. So if the ACA doesn't work, then present something better. Just endure that a poor person has the same exact access to the best doctors as a billionaire does. That should be a guarantee.

Why ?

Because economics is a man made entity. We invented money, some people are saying because you have more of this man made entity you deserve to life more than someone else.

The Christian Right are believing in a false god no more better than the golden calf.

Why is it right that a single stockbroker deserves life more than a guy hold two jobs supporting his family of three kids.

I am sorry but while our capitalist model has advantages don't confuse it as being perfect in a god like way.

So while you complain society can be fair and equitable, some believe that society that look after each other are more advanced than ones that don't. Look at human rights, pollution....

Universal Healthcare is a hallmark of higher functioning society.

Hhhhmmmm.....

So which is the tail and which is the dog ?

And let's address this question. If you were to look at two systems, one with equal access and one with unequal access....stay with me.....and the worst care in the unequal system was still better than the best care in the equal system.....

Which would be better ?

Just answer the question. Don't deflect.

Yeah, just answer the question, because you know that your question is biased.

The United States might have had some of the best care, but only the very rich could access that best care.....so your analogy falls flat on its face. The poor people had to settle for going to the ER in order to get help....most of the time too late, but I know, you don't care about the poor people. There's your answer.

I live in a community with a lot of Canadian snowbirds. And yeah....only the rich can avoid the best care in Canada as well.

They have a two tier health system, just like the U.S. Their basic care is like Medicaid in the States. Folks with any kind of money buy private insurance and go to different (and better) hospitals and doctors. My understanding is the same system exists in the UK.

Please don't be fooled. Universal healthcare....wherever it exists....basically sucks.

Universal is rationed care. Period.
These systems are based on actuarial tables and bureaucracy.
Older people instead of receiving treatment that may prolong their lives and improve their health are told to get their affairs in order.
Anything beyond basic care we receive from our family MD takes MONTHS to receive.
Government regulations decide wages of medical professionals.

 

[The Rabbi]

And yet he was treated anyway, for free. Despite not being a US citizen.
Yes, US healthcare is the best in the world. Thanks for demonstrating it.

He was given a fucking aspirin for Ebola...
Lets just say that is not the best healthcare it the world, you might think it is, so we know your standards and the height of the bar you need to clear to be the best.

If anything happens you in UK you get full treatment the same as any UK citizen...
Feeling embarrassed yet.

He didnt get an aspirin for Ebola. You're a fucking moron and a half wit.

Oh sorry...
What do you call " Duncan was given Extra Strength Tylenol at 1:24 a.m." and then sent home...

So you gave "Extra Strength Tylenol" for Ebola. Maybe you're right aspirin can't cure Ebola but Extra Strength Tylenol can...

You are one stupid disingenuous shit for sure.
He was intially misdiagnosed, which of course never happens in Europe, and given something for fever.
Please stop lying and stick to actual facts instead of lib talking points.

Fact: Western European Countries have better healthcare for all its people than US. As I stated before if you are allowed to take the high risk people out then healthcare is easy, especially when you spend twice the amount. Do you want the list of organisations who have produced reports on this: WHO, Commonwealth fund, OCED......

Fact: Europe didn't send people with Ebola home with a Tylenol.

If I was you I would stay away from facts, you are having real trouble with them...

Fact: You dont have a fucking clue what you are talking about.
Fact: When people actually get sick the US delivers the best health care results.
Fact: The populations of Europe are not in any way comparable to the US
Fact: Misdiagnosis occurs and in the case of the guy with Ebola he was treated free of charge.
Fact: Facts are not your friends here.

 

[CowboyTed]

Obviously they haven't lived under a Single Payer system, as without private hospitals and insurers there is no way for people to escape waiting lists or for the government to fund private clinics (when there is not enough capacity nearby)
Not true, in fact the reverse as usually there are health services unions. Also general bureaucracy and regulations add costs to the system. But all in all you don't see it as it collectively paid through income taxes, payroll taxes or levies - and no government is going to advertise government waste if I wants another term.

Not true? Have you been living in a cave?

There is a growing trend among doctors and other healthcare providers to stop accepting medicaid/medicare because they pay well below common acceptable scale.

In a state where everyone is on the single payer, a lower scale than the rest of the private sector, healthcare professionals will flee for better environments.

Medicare/Medicaid ≠ complete UHC system.

Also OECD stats disagree. The quality of American healthcare ranks well below nations with UHC: http://www.oecd.org/unitedstates/Briefing-Note-UNITED-STATES-2014.pdf

Health profiles are not the same as health care.
Geez, can we stop with these fallacies once and for all? WHo cares that people in France live longer or are less obese? This isnt France. This isnt Germany. Our populations, histories, culture and lifestyles are completely different. We might as well compare ourselves to Bolivia, Indonesia and Guinea.

It isn't a 'fallacy' but a statistical tool.

You're the one arguing here that a system can't work that doesn't exist, whilst stating that UHC doesn't work or is less efficient even though it works quite effectively in other countries - and with much better results.

That's the real fallacy, your ideologically driven assumptions about a system you know nothing about - as it doesn't exist yet.

You keep missing the point here: Vermont studied the possibilities and determined it wouldnt work. There's your system right there.
You havent shown UHC works anywhere. You post fallacious data points tht proves nothing mroe than different populations have different health profiles. In addition all the European sytems are hemorrhaging money and desperately making changes to accomodate it.

The European systems are far cheaper than the present US system.

So your answer is we are different. You actually want to be compared to third world countries like Boliva....

You should run on that manifesto, Let me help you with your speech : 'I can see it now, our country will have a health system like Boliva's'

 

[The Rabbi]

Not true? Have you been living in a cave?

There is a growing trend among doctors and other healthcare providers to stop accepting medicaid/medicare because they pay well below common acceptable scale.

In a state where everyone is on the single payer, a lower scale than the rest of the private sector, healthcare professionals will flee for better environments.

Medicare/Medicaid ≠ complete UHC system.

Also OECD stats disagree. The quality of American healthcare ranks well below nations with UHC: http://www.oecd.org/unitedstates/Briefing-Note-UNITED-STATES-2014.pdf

Health profiles are not the same as health care.
Geez, can we stop with these fallacies once and for all? WHo cares that people in France live longer or are less obese? This isnt France. This isnt Germany. Our populations, histories, culture and lifestyles are completely different. We might as well compare ourselves to Bolivia, Indonesia and Guinea.

It isn't a 'fallacy' but a statistical tool.

You're the one arguing here that a system can't work that doesn't exist, whilst stating that UHC doesn't work or is less efficient even though it works quite effectively in other countries - and with much better results.

That's the real fallacy, your ideologically driven assumptions about a system you know nothing about - as it doesn't exist yet.

You keep missing the point here: Vermont studied the possibilities and determined it wouldnt work. There's your system right there.
You havent shown UHC works anywhere. You post fallacious data points tht proves nothing mroe than different populations have different health profiles. In addition all the European sytems are hemorrhaging money and desperately making changes to accomodate it.

The European systems are far cheaper than the present US system.

So your answer is we are different. You actually want to be compared to third world countries like Boliva....

You should run on that manifesto, Let me help you with your speech : 'I can see it now, our country will have a health system like Boliva's'

Fact: Your comparisons are spurious. US health care costs more because people in the US are sicker. People in the US also subsidize drug costs in other countries.
You can keep slinging shit but you look like an idiot with every post because you dont know what the fuck you're talking about.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Under a single-payer system, there is no role for health insurance companies such as Aetna and Cigna as the government pays all the medical bills. Many hope that the United States will implement a single-payer system.

Obviously they haven't lived under a Single Payer system, as without private hospitals and insurers there is no way for people to escape waiting lists or for the government to fund private clinics (when there is not enough capacity nearby)

And they will experience delays in treatment and more needless deaths, just like European countries and the VA.
Why anyone thinks this is an advance is beyond me.

The bordering states around Vermont are going to get an influx of medical professionals.

Single payer systems always pay below the market value for services. What doctor, nurse, or other professional will willingly take a 50% or more cut in compensation?

Not true, in fact the reverse as usually there are health services unions. Also general bureaucracy and regulations add costs to the system. But all in all you don't see it as it collectively paid through income taxes, payroll taxes or levies - and no government is going to advertise government waste if I wants another term.

Not true? Have you been living in a cave?

There is a growing trend among doctors and other healthcare providers to stop accepting medicaid/medicare because they pay well below common acceptable scale.

In a state where everyone is on the single payer, a lower scale than the rest of the private sector, healthcare professionals will flee for better environments.

And next comes the flood of doctors from all over the world as Americans will find the education and training to become doctors so expensive and the payoff so slow to return, that just like Canadians, Americans will forego medicine as a career.
I would be in mortal dread of Single payer

 

[CowboyTed]

U.S. Healthcare Ranked Dead Last Compared To 10 Other Countries - Forbes

If you want another source, most studies say about the same thing. I'm aware the WHO methodology is flawed, but surely a flawed source is better than none at all.
The US might have the best health care in the world for millionaires, but overall we do not at all- and we do spend the most of any country, even Forbes (a right-wing publication if ever there was one) says that is universally accepted.

Again, the ratings are low simply because "universal health care coverage" is a major factor.
Look at how well people fare once they've been diagnosed, the only meaningful measure, and the US is far and away the best healthcare system.

The reason for the universal thing, is that the US had a very effective way of removing the high risk patients from getting insurance.

It is easy for you to say 95% of all people are happy with our health system, the other 5% are sick

WTF does insurance have to do with health care? Do you not understand the difference? Do we or do we not have health care for the poor in the form of medicaid and chips? This is a YES OR NO question.

You have healthcare but it is not universal. It is also not comprehensive...

Actually your question is so poorly put I would recommend that you study a little on the topic and comapre health systems worldwode before you enter a subject like this which goes a bit above your head.

Liar. No Americans go without health care.. thus is "universal." Still further our health care is "more" comprehensive than euro weenie health care. WTF do universal and comprehensive mean to you, ya dipshit?

Nothing goes above my head, my reflexes are too quick.

Except it not.

By the way, I would suggest you learn about how European model works before you actually talk about it.

 

[The Rabbi]

Under a single-payer system, there is no role for health insurance companies such as Aetna and Cigna as the government pays all the medical bills. Many hope that the United States will implement a single-payer system.

Obviously they haven't lived under a Single Payer system, as without private hospitals and insurers there is no way for people to escape waiting lists or for the government to fund private clinics (when there is not enough capacity nearby)

And they will experience delays in treatment and more needless deaths, just like European countries and the VA.
Why anyone thinks this is an advance is beyond me.

The bordering states around Vermont are going to get an influx of medical professionals.

Single payer systems always pay below the market value for services. What doctor, nurse, or other professional will willingly take a 50% or more cut in compensation?

Not true, in fact the reverse as usually there are health services unions. Also general bureaucracy and regulations add costs to the system. But all in all you don't see it as it collectively paid through income taxes, payroll taxes or levies - and no government is going to advertise government waste if I wants another term.

Not true? Have you been living in a cave?

There is a growing trend among doctors and other healthcare providers to stop accepting medicaid/medicare because they pay well below common acceptable scale.

In a state where everyone is on the single payer, a lower scale than the rest of the private sector, healthcare professionals will flee for better environments.

And next comes the flood of doctors from all over the world as Americans will find the education and training to become doctors so expensive and the payoff so slow to return, that just like Canadians, Americans will forego medicine as a career.
I would be in mortal dread of Single payer

Government control of anything results in poverty, misallocation of resources, misery and death. Why does anyone think next time will be different?

 

[The Rabbi]

Again, the ratings are low simply because "universal health care coverage" is a major factor.
Look at how well people fare once they've been diagnosed, the only meaningful measure, and the US is far and away the best healthcare system.

The reason for the universal thing, is that the US had a very effective way of removing the high risk patients from getting insurance.

It is easy for you to say 95% of all people are happy with our health system, the other 5% are sick

WTF does insurance have to do with health care? Do you not understand the difference? Do we or do we not have health care for the poor in the form of medicaid and chips? This is a YES OR NO question.

You have healthcare but it is not universal. It is also not comprehensive...

Actually your question is so poorly put I would recommend that you study a little on the topic and comapre health systems worldwode before you enter a subject like this which goes a bit above your head.

Liar. No Americans go without health care.. thus is "universal." Still further our health care is "more" comprehensive than euro weenie health care. WTF do universal and comprehensive mean to you, ya dipshit?

Nothing goes above my head, my reflexes are too quick.

Except it not.

By the way, I would suggest you learn about how European model works before you actually talk about it.

Hmm let's check:
Nope, still not a valid comparison.
Call me back when you get a clue.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Not true? Have you been living in a cave?

There is a growing trend among doctors and other healthcare providers to stop accepting medicaid/medicare because they pay well below common acceptable scale.

In a state where everyone is on the single payer, a lower scale than the rest of the private sector, healthcare professionals will flee for better environments.

Medicare/Medicaid ≠ complete UHC system.

Also OECD stats disagree. The quality of American healthcare ranks well below nations with UHC: http://www.oecd.org/unitedstates/Briefing-Note-UNITED-STATES-2014.pdf

Health profiles are not the same as health care.
Geez, can we stop with these fallacies once and for all? WHo cares that people in France live longer or are less obese? This isnt France. This isnt Germany. Our populations, histories, culture and lifestyles are completely different. We might as well compare ourselves to Bolivia, Indonesia and Guinea.

It isn't a 'fallacy' but a statistical tool.

You're the one arguing here that a system can't work that doesn't exist, whilst stating that UHC doesn't work or is less efficient even though it works quite effectively in other countries - and with much better results.

That's the real fallacy, your ideologically driven assumptions about a system you know nothing about - as it doesn't exist yet.

You keep missing the point here: Vermont studied the possibilities and determined it wouldnt work. There's your system right there.
You havent shown UHC works anywhere. You post fallacious data points tht proves nothing mroe than different populations have different health profiles. In addition all the European sytems are hemorrhaging money and desperately making changes to accomodate it.

The European systems are far cheaper than the present US system.

So your answer is we are different. You actually want to be compared to third world countries like Boliva....

You should run on that manifesto, Let me help you with your speech : 'I can see it now, our country will have a health system like Boliva's'

These charts conveniently leave out tax burden. They exclude advanced care. Wait times for said care. Etc.....

 

[CowboyTed]

He was given a fucking aspirin for Ebola...
Lets just say that is not the best healthcare it the world, you might think it is, so we know your standards and the height of the bar you need to clear to be the best.

If anything happens you in UK you get full treatment the same as any UK citizen...
Feeling embarrassed yet.

He didnt get an aspirin for Ebola. You're a fucking moron and a half wit.

Oh sorry...
What do you call " Duncan was given Extra Strength Tylenol at 1:24 a.m." and then sent home...

So you gave "Extra Strength Tylenol" for Ebola. Maybe you're right aspirin can't cure Ebola but Extra Strength Tylenol can...

You are one stupid disingenuous shit for sure.
He was intially misdiagnosed, which of course never happens in Europe, and given something for fever.
Please stop lying and stick to actual facts instead of lib talking points.

Fact: Western European Countries have better healthcare for all its people than US. As I stated before if you are allowed to take the high risk people out then healthcare is easy, especially when you spend twice the amount. Do you want the list of organisations who have produced reports on this: WHO, Commonwealth fund, OCED......

Fact: Europe didn't send people with Ebola home with a Tylenol.

If I was you I would stay away from facts, you are having real trouble with them...

Fact: You dont have a fucking clue what you are talking about.
Fact: When people actually get sick the US delivers the best health care results.
Fact: The populations of Europe are not in any way comparable to the US
Fact: Misdiagnosis occurs and in the case of the guy with Ebola he was treated free of charge.
Fact: Facts are not your friends here.

Putting 'Fact' before something doesn't make it an actual Fact.

By the way the Western Europe has a population larger than the US by about 50 million... So pretty comparative...

 

[The Rabbi]

Medicare/Medicaid ≠ complete UHC system.

Also OECD stats disagree. The quality of American healthcare ranks well below nations with UHC: http://www.oecd.org/unitedstates/Briefing-Note-UNITED-STATES-2014.pdf

Health profiles are not the same as health care.
Geez, can we stop with these fallacies once and for all? WHo cares that people in France live longer or are less obese? This isnt France. This isnt Germany. Our populations, histories, culture and lifestyles are completely different. We might as well compare ourselves to Bolivia, Indonesia and Guinea.

It isn't a 'fallacy' but a statistical tool.

You're the one arguing here that a system can't work that doesn't exist, whilst stating that UHC doesn't work or is less efficient even though it works quite effectively in other countries - and with much better results.

That's the real fallacy, your ideologically driven assumptions about a system you know nothing about - as it doesn't exist yet.

You keep missing the point here: Vermont studied the possibilities and determined it wouldnt work. There's your system right there.
You havent shown UHC works anywhere. You post fallacious data points tht proves nothing mroe than different populations have different health profiles. In addition all the European sytems are hemorrhaging money and desperately making changes to accomodate it.

The European systems are far cheaper than the present US system.

So your answer is we are different. You actually want to be compared to third world countries like Boliva....

You should run on that manifesto, Let me help you with your speech : 'I can see it now, our country will have a health system like Boliva's'

These charts conveniently leave out tax burden. They exclude advanced care. Wait times for said care. Etc.....

The whole exercise is absurd. Europeans are not AMericans. We have a different population and a different lifestyle. Ergo our medical expenses are going to be different too.
What's a vital difference is what happens when people actually suffer heart attacks, strokes, or develop cancer. And then you want to be in the US because outcomes are far better here.

 

[The Rabbi]

He didnt get an aspirin for Ebola. You're a fucking moron and a half wit.

Oh sorry...
What do you call " Duncan was given Extra Strength Tylenol at 1:24 a.m." and then sent home...

So you gave "Extra Strength Tylenol" for Ebola. Maybe you're right aspirin can't cure Ebola but Extra Strength Tylenol can...

You are one stupid disingenuous shit for sure.
He was intially misdiagnosed, which of course never happens in Europe, and given something for fever.
Please stop lying and stick to actual facts instead of lib talking points.

Fact: Western European Countries have better healthcare for all its people than US. As I stated before if you are allowed to take the high risk people out then healthcare is easy, especially when you spend twice the amount. Do you want the list of organisations who have produced reports on this: WHO, Commonwealth fund, OCED......

Fact: Europe didn't send people with Ebola home with a Tylenol.

If I was you I would stay away from facts, you are having real trouble with them...

Fact: You dont have a fucking clue what you are talking about.
Fact: When people actually get sick the US delivers the best health care results.
Fact: The populations of Europe are not in any way comparable to the US
Fact: Misdiagnosis occurs and in the case of the guy with Ebola he was treated free of charge.
Fact: Facts are not your friends here.

Putting 'Fact' before something doesn't make it an actual Fact.

By the way the Western Europe has a population larger than the US by about 50 million... So pretty comparative...

LOL.
You really don't get it, do you? It wouldnt matter if Western Europe's population was a million times bigger. It is still not comparable on a qualittative basis.

 

[CowboyTed]

Medicare/Medicaid ≠ complete UHC system.

Also OECD stats disagree. The quality of American healthcare ranks well below nations with UHC: http://www.oecd.org/unitedstates/Briefing-Note-UNITED-STATES-2014.pdf

Health profiles are not the same as health care.
Geez, can we stop with these fallacies once and for all? WHo cares that people in France live longer or are less obese? This isnt France. This isnt Germany. Our populations, histories, culture and lifestyles are completely different. We might as well compare ourselves to Bolivia, Indonesia and Guinea.

It isn't a 'fallacy' but a statistical tool.

You're the one arguing here that a system can't work that doesn't exist, whilst stating that UHC doesn't work or is less efficient even though it works quite effectively in other countries - and with much better results.

That's the real fallacy, your ideologically driven assumptions about a system you know nothing about - as it doesn't exist yet.

You keep missing the point here: Vermont studied the possibilities and determined it wouldnt work. There's your system right there.
You havent shown UHC works anywhere. You post fallacious data points tht proves nothing mroe than different populations have different health profiles. In addition all the European sytems are hemorrhaging money and desperately making changes to accomodate it.

The European systems are far cheaper than the present US system.

So your answer is we are different. You actually want to be compared to third world countries like Boliva....

You should run on that manifesto, Let me help you with your speech : 'I can see it now, our country will have a health system like Boliva's'

These charts conveniently leave out tax burden. They exclude advanced care. Wait times for said care. Etc.....

Prove it.

 

[CowboyTed]

Oh sorry...
What do you call " Duncan was given Extra Strength Tylenol at 1:24 a.m." and then sent home...

So you gave "Extra Strength Tylenol" for Ebola. Maybe you're right aspirin can't cure Ebola but Extra Strength Tylenol can...

You are one stupid disingenuous shit for sure.
He was intially misdiagnosed, which of course never happens in Europe, and given something for fever.
Please stop lying and stick to actual facts instead of lib talking points.

Fact: Western European Countries have better healthcare for all its people than US. As I stated before if you are allowed to take the high risk people out then healthcare is easy, especially when you spend twice the amount. Do you want the list of organisations who have produced reports on this: WHO, Commonwealth fund, OCED......

Fact: Europe didn't send people with Ebola home with a Tylenol.

If I was you I would stay away from facts, you are having real trouble with them...

Fact: You dont have a fucking clue what you are talking about.
Fact: When people actually get sick the US delivers the best health care results.
Fact: The populations of Europe are not in any way comparable to the US
Fact: Misdiagnosis occurs and in the case of the guy with Ebola he was treated free of charge.
Fact: Facts are not your friends here.

Putting 'Fact' before something doesn't make it an actual Fact.

By the way the Western Europe has a population larger than the US by about 50 million... So pretty comparative...

LOL.
You really don't get it, do you? It wouldnt matter if Western Europe's population was a million times bigger. It is still not comparable on a qualittative basis.

I know we have higher quality, but I am still willing to come down to your level.

 

[The Rabbi]

You are one stupid disingenuous shit for sure.
He was intially misdiagnosed, which of course never happens in Europe, and given something for fever.
Please stop lying and stick to actual facts instead of lib talking points.

Fact: Western European Countries have better healthcare for all its people than US. As I stated before if you are allowed to take the high risk people out then healthcare is easy, especially when you spend twice the amount. Do you want the list of organisations who have produced reports on this: WHO, Commonwealth fund, OCED......

Fact: Europe didn't send people with Ebola home with a Tylenol.

If I was you I would stay away from facts, you are having real trouble with them...

Fact: You dont have a fucking clue what you are talking about.
Fact: When people actually get sick the US delivers the best health care results.
Fact: The populations of Europe are not in any way comparable to the US
Fact: Misdiagnosis occurs and in the case of the guy with Ebola he was treated free of charge.
Fact: Facts are not your friends here.

Putting 'Fact' before something doesn't make it an actual Fact.

By the way the Western Europe has a population larger than the US by about 50 million... So pretty comparative...

LOL.
You really don't get it, do you? It wouldnt matter if Western Europe's population was a million times bigger. It is still not comparable on a qualittative basis.

I know we have higher quality, but I am still willing to come down to your level.

I accept your admission of defeat in this discussion.
Next.

 

[CowboyTed]

Medicare/Medicaid ≠ complete UHC system.

Also OECD stats disagree. The quality of American healthcare ranks well below nations with UHC: http://www.oecd.org/unitedstates/Briefing-Note-UNITED-STATES-2014.pdf

Health profiles are not the same as health care.
Geez, can we stop with these fallacies once and for all? WHo cares that people in France live longer or are less obese? This isnt France. This isnt Germany. Our populations, histories, culture and lifestyles are completely different. We might as well compare ourselves to Bolivia, Indonesia and Guinea.

It isn't a 'fallacy' but a statistical tool.

You're the one arguing here that a system can't work that doesn't exist, whilst stating that UHC doesn't work or is less efficient even though it works quite effectively in other countries - and with much better results.

That's the real fallacy, your ideologically driven assumptions about a system you know nothing about - as it doesn't exist yet.

You keep missing the point here: Vermont studied the possibilities and determined it wouldnt work. There's your system right there.
You havent shown UHC works anywhere. You post fallacious data points tht proves nothing mroe than different populations have different health profiles. In addition all the European sytems are hemorrhaging money and desperately making changes to accomodate it.

An attempt at UHC wasn't ever implemented in Vermont, and the jury is still out over whether it won't be implemented in 2017.

It isn't 'fallacious' as it is OECD data on OECD countries, which is usually derived from official stats of OECD nations. It just happens that the best performers have some form of UHC, and it isn't just OECD stats pointing that out: U.S. Healthcare Ranked Dead Last Compared To 10 Other Countries - Forbes

1. United Kingdom
2. Switzerland
3. Sweden
4. Australia
5. Germany & Netherlands (tied)
7. New Zealand & Norway (tied)
9. France
10. Canada
11. United States

The most notable way the U.S. differs from other industrialized countries is the absence of universal health insurance coverage. Other nations ensure the accessibility of care through universal health systems and through better ties between patients and the physician practices that serve as their medical homes. The Commonwealth Fund “Mirror, Mirror On The Wall — 2014 Update”

So what is more likely? A grand international 'socialist' conspiracy to create fake data on the US, or that the US healthcare system is worse performing on a per capita basis?

Edit: I wonder if you have ever used the healthcare system of another country. I have personal experience in using two UHC systems and the US healthcare system, and thus can compare them from personal experience as well.

Still heavily weighted on Universal access.

Not much different from the WHO.

It kind of has to be universal otherwise everyone could just get rid of sick people. Are you telling me that certain Americans Citizens don't count... 'All men created equal..' must be fortune cookies...

I think your argument is the US has the best healthcare system in the world as long as you don't get sick.

Are you Newt Gingrich divorce lawyer?

 

[CowboyTed]

Health profiles are not the same as health care.
Geez, can we stop with these fallacies once and for all? WHo cares that people in France live longer or are less obese? This isnt France. This isnt Germany. Our populations, histories, culture and lifestyles are completely different. We might as well compare ourselves to Bolivia, Indonesia and Guinea.

It isn't a 'fallacy' but a statistical tool.

You're the one arguing here that a system can't work that doesn't exist, whilst stating that UHC doesn't work or is less efficient even though it works quite effectively in other countries - and with much better results.

That's the real fallacy, your ideologically driven assumptions about a system you know nothing about - as it doesn't exist yet.

You keep missing the point here: Vermont studied the possibilities and determined it wouldnt work. There's your system right there.
You havent shown UHC works anywhere. You post fallacious data points tht proves nothing mroe than different populations have different health profiles. In addition all the European sytems are hemorrhaging money and desperately making changes to accomodate it.

An attempt at UHC wasn't ever implemented in Vermont, and the jury is still out over whether it won't be implemented in 2017.

It isn't 'fallacious' as it is OECD data on OECD countries, which is usually derived from official stats of OECD nations. It just happens that the best performers have some form of UHC, and it isn't just OECD stats pointing that out: U.S. Healthcare Ranked Dead Last Compared To 10 Other Countries - Forbes

1. United Kingdom
2. Switzerland
3. Sweden
4. Australia
5. Germany & Netherlands (tied)
7. New Zealand & Norway (tied)
9. France
10. Canada
11. United States

The most notable way the U.S. differs from other industrialized countries is the absence of universal health insurance coverage. Other nations ensure the accessibility of care through universal health systems and through better ties between patients and the physician practices that serve as their medical homes. The Commonwealth Fund “Mirror, Mirror On The Wall — 2014 Update”

So what is more likely? A grand international 'socialist' conspiracy to create fake data on the US, or that the US healthcare system is worse performing on a per capita basis?

Edit: I wonder if you have ever used the healthcare system of another country. I have personal experience in using two UHC systems and the US healthcare system, and thus can compare them from personal experience as well.

Still heavily weighted on Universal access.

Not much different from the WHO.

Probably because minimum cover effects the overall health of the country, and how fast disease spreads in a population.

Preventive care also weighs into how expensive a healthcare system is to run, if people have regular check ups it is more likely that health issues will be treated at their early stages rather than develop to the point people need expensive surgery.

Hipster,
You are showing where real saving can be made. Another one is education of medical staff, in UK a GP doctor makes about $120k a year but has very little student debt. You don't become a doctor to become a millionaire but you will have a comfortable life.

So they are starting earlier, medicine is still very sort after and the caliber of students are still to the highest.

 

[thereisnospoon]

And they will experience delays in treatment and more needless deaths, just like European countries and the VA.
Why anyone thinks this is an advance is beyond me.

The 20 countries with the highest 20 life expectancies have something in common: Universal health care. The wait time thing is largely a myth. They exist, sure, but for emergency procedures it is generally not an issue.

And for all the people talking about cost, Americans pay more for health care per capita than ANY other country. EIGHTEEN percent of our GDP. The next highest is twelve.

Privatization of a health care system is inherently bad. When your life is in the hand of a company for which denying you care is in their best interest, no one ever worries about corporate tax rates. A shame that Shumlin is caving to political pressure.

Do they offer this as a tatoo for morons who actually believe it ?

I mean, all this bullshit has been dispelled time and time again...but somehow people have to keep spouting it.

They're slow learners, is all I can say.
Every Euro system is overwhelmed with exploding costs from their aging populations. They aer all tryng to reform their systems before they run out of money entirely.
In any case, Europe is not the US. You cant compare the two.
VT, which is the US, tried single payer and abandoned it because it was too expensive.
Hint: Single payer is still a failure.

Single payer has been an enormous success in Europe. For all the tales of terror about the NHS from the media, the British public loves it even after it encountered problems the last couple of years. In a Gallup poll, 72% of Americans were dissatisfied with the lack of affordable health care, compared to 41% of Canadians and 52% of Britons. Maybe taxes will have to be raised, but so what? As the American population ages, our government-controlled systems will have to do the same, and insurance costs will probably rise as well. That's not a problem with the system, that's just adjusting to people living longer, which thankfully is happening everywhere.

yeah....And their tax burden STARTS at 50% and moves up from there. Gas starts $6 per gallon. There are taxes on the fucking air. And it STILL isn't enough.

 

[CowboyTed]

Fact: Western European Countries have better healthcare for all its people than US. As I stated before if you are allowed to take the high risk people out then healthcare is easy, especially when you spend twice the amount. Do you want the list of organisations who have produced reports on this: WHO, Commonwealth fund, OCED......

Fact: Europe didn't send people with Ebola home with a Tylenol.

If I was you I would stay away from facts, you are having real trouble with them...

Fact: You dont have a fucking clue what you are talking about.
Fact: When people actually get sick the US delivers the best health care results.
Fact: The populations of Europe are not in any way comparable to the US
Fact: Misdiagnosis occurs and in the case of the guy with Ebola he was treated free of charge.
Fact: Facts are not your friends here.

Putting 'Fact' before something doesn't make it an actual Fact.

By the way the Western Europe has a population larger than the US by about 50 million... So pretty comparative...

LOL.
You really don't get it, do you? It wouldnt matter if Western Europe's population was a million times bigger. It is still not comparable on a qualittative basis.

I know we have higher quality, but I am still willing to come down to your level.

I accept your admission of defeat in this discussion.
Next.

No facts... No evidence... Intellectually bankrupt...