Bernie Sanders: We Will Raise Taxes On Anyone Making Over $29,000 To Fund Government Health Care

[Flopper]

Even Leftard Fact-check says Canadian wait times are twice as long as Americans wait times.

Comparing Health Care in Canada to the U.S.

Incomplete answer is misleading.

{...
Q: Is health care better in Canada?

A: Wait times are longer in Canada, but health and doctor quality don’t seem to suffer.
...}

The reality is Canada is rated higher than the US for over all health care.
Things that can not wait are done faster and better in Canada.
Something should have a longer wait, so that more important things happen sooner.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-co...dians-increasingly-come-to-us-for-health-care

https://ctvnews.ca/mobile/health/63...reatment-last-year-fraser-institute-1.3486635

Why Canadians Are Increasingly Seeking Medical Treatment Abroad

Canadians Come to America for Better Care

We have some great care..........for those who can afford it.

Like the millions of illegals who get healthcare in America? They’re all RICH!

Illegals can only get ER care, which is terrible.
No ER will do any preventive health care or any sort of corrective procedure.
All an ER will do is what is necessary to prevent imminent death.

The law only requires the ER to stabilize your condition. However, good medical practice dictates that the ER physician take appropriate action to determine the problem before doing anything other making the patient comfortable. If the patient has a serve headache, the doctor can't send him home telling him to take some aspirin. That type of medicine is likely to result in a medical review and a possible lawsuit. So yes, the ER does do diagnosis and limited treatment and almost always a referral to a doctor for followup.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Medicare for All reminds me of the original Obamacare, "Health Care for America Plan" which contained a public option allowing people to transfer to a Medicare like system without age restriction. The public option was of course a major target of the insurance companies and was dropped almost immediately by congress.

I think there are some misconceptions about how the Medicare for All proposals would be implemented. Once congress gets hold of any of the current proposals, they would change radically.

• First, it would not be Medicare. It would be a healthcare plan similar to Medicare but would look more like an employer sponsored plan than Medicare.
• It would be phased in over many years opening up first to older Americans and gradually extended to all ages.
• Lastly, there would be supplemental insurance just as there is with Medicare.

Any national healthcare plan would be a series of compromises. We have to remember this is not 1965 when Medicare was passed where deals were made between democrats and republicans to pass major legislation and the influence of lobbyists was far less than today.

What would actually stand a chance at working is allow people with preexisting conditions to go on Medicare. That would remove all the high risk patients from private insurance, and that would cause a price decrease, or at the very least, a price freeze.

Next is Medicare and Medicaid needs to start paying the entire bill instead of only part of it.
In any case, nothing gets done the right way until we work on lowering the cost of medical care first. If we don't do that, we're just passing the buck around.

Putting people with serious pre-existing conditions on Medicare is a good idea but it needs to be serious prexisting conditions. Back before Obamacare when I applied for individual insurance, I had to complete a 26 page medical questions. I found I was ineligible for health insurance because I had asthma and hayfever. A goal of insurance companies was to eliminate anyone who might file a claim.

I think deductibles should be eliminated but not co-insurance and copays. People need to pay a small fee for services or they will over utilize the system.

I inquired about disability a few years back, and that's what they get after you are on the program for one year. And.....she stated the plans are more than reasonable; about 120 a month to 190, depending on what you can afford.

So if it's available to people on SS disability, why not make it available to others who are not on disability? The reason insurance companies don't want people like you or me is because we are high risk, just like an auto insurance company giving insurance to a documented drunk.

Remove those people from the private insurance rolls, and they can better manage prices. It would be a half-way point between what the Democrats want and what the Republicans want. And.....nobody can be accused of wanting to take healthcare away from people with preexisting conditions.

But if you remove all the patients who need medical care and only leave the insurance companies with the young and healthy who do not need any care, then why let the insurance companies have all that profit?
The whole point of insurance is supposed to be to pool risks so that the health help pay for the care needed by the few injured or sick. If the insurance does not do that, then it is worthless. The healthy do not need health care or insurance. It is only the sick or injured who do.

Just because one is unlikely to need healthcare doesn't mean they never will. Accidents, illness, diseases can happen to anybody. But the risk of that in a healthy pool is much, much less than insuring everybody.

Insurance companies base their premium on what they pay out compared to what they bring in. If they bring in more, and payout less, then they lower their rates to compete with other companies.

That would make private insurance affordable, and at the same time, give coverage to those who can't get or afford private insurance. Again, not free, you would still have to purchase a plan, but it would be a mid-way point between what Democrats and Republicans want. And everybody would actually get coverage they could afford.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-co...dians-increasingly-come-to-us-for-health-care

https://ctvnews.ca/mobile/health/63...reatment-last-year-fraser-institute-1.3486635

Why Canadians Are Increasingly Seeking Medical Treatment Abroad

Canadians Come to America for Better Care

We have some great care..........for those who can afford it.

Like the millions of illegals who get healthcare in America? They’re all RICH!

They do not get healthcare. I do not know why you want to continue with something you know is false. They can access emergency care.

Their kids get it through Medicaid. Those who have a job with healthcare benefits get it as well, as long as they have a stolen identification and SS number.

No, the kids of illegals do not get any more than the ER care any tourist gets.
And those using an illegal SS card to get a job with health insurance, can not get health care either.
First of all, the jobs illegals can get most likely do not come with health insurance, and no illegal could risk getting caught by getting into an health insurance database. For example, if the blood type did not match, it would throw a red flag. Insurance databases are far more detailed than the SS database.

Health facilities generally do not share their findings with the government. Don't let these Democrats tell you that the only jobs illegals get are picking lettuce. They are in every work sector of our country. They are in construction, hospitality, transportation, warehousing, lawn care, and yes, these industries generally do offer healthcare for their employees, especially when they are considered legal.

 

[The Purge]

TRUMP: I have a beautiful plan which will make healthcare so cheap!

RUBES: Show us that plan! Yay!

TRUMP: Those commies on the Left have a plan on the table for UHC!

RUBES: Those damned commies!

TRUMP: Let's go with my plan which is actually nothing!

RUBES: Yay!

Does a raving moron like G500 realize he opens himself up constantly to the embarrassment of demonstrating how low his IQ really is?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Thanks for making my point. Your rankings are BS, nobody goes to Cuba for healthcare.

BTW, 2 second search.

So These the "Bad Hombres" Trump Wants to Get Rid Of?

You can put the money in my PayPal.

No idea anyone claimed anyone does.

Every Leftist, including you, claim Cuban healthcare is better.

Yet no one in the world goes there for treatment.

Quit saying that.
It is totally wrong.
Lots of people, including from the US, go to Cuba for medical care, every single year.

Medical Tourism in Cuba - Cuba Health Care System | myMEDholiday

{...
Cuba has catapulted into the public imagination since the beginning of the 21st century with its nascent, but rapidly developing medical tourism industry. The country has already established a reputation for medical treatments that include drug and alcohol rehabilitation, eye surgery, orthopedics, heart surgeries, dermatology, neurology and cosmetic surgeries. Medical institutions like Cira Garcia Clinic, Gonzalez Coro and Hermanos Ameijeiras in Cuba have the provision of separate rooms and facilities for medical tourists. The excellent quality of the doctors and the supporting staff in the country is a big advantage and is one of the most significant contributing factors to the growth of the economy through medical tourism. Medical services work out to be approximately 60 percent cheaper as compared to North American countries, without compromising on the quality and efficacy of the treatments involved.
...}

Slave labor for hard currency.

Gotta make money for the nomenklatura somehow.

Natives need not attempt to receive treatment at these clinics.

That is a silly and false claim.
Cuba has one of the highest rated state of health of all its citizens.
The health care system in Cuba is not centralized.
The medical teams travel constantly across the whole country, to ensure everyone is at top health.

Cuba has one of the highest rated state of health of all its citizens.

Yes, I'm sure Cuban citizens are very happy with their healthcare. Because if they complain...…...

The medical teams travel constantly across the whole country, to ensure everyone is at top health.

Or else.

 

[WEATHER53]

Can’t win elections plus want to take peoples money

 

[Flopper]

Like the millions of illegals who get healthcare in America? They’re all RICH!

They do not get healthcare. I do not know why you want to continue with something you know is false. They can access emergency care.

Illegals don’t get healthcare in America?

Youre a friggen troll

The ER is not at all sufficient health care.
It is just for stitches, setting fractures, etc.

From personal experience, I've found it's lot more. The ER is often the fastest and surest way to get a diagnosis. Go to you your GP and you get some pills, maybe a few tests and suggestions and if the pain isn't better in two weeks you come back. He goes over test results and if the pain is still there you see a specialist in few weeks. The specialist then orders more blood tests an EKG, and an MRI which takes about two weeks get appointments and results back to your doctor. Hopefully then you will get a diagnosis and treatment plan.

In the ER, the blood tests, EKG, and MRI are all ordered and results are back in a few hours. Your attending physician discusses your case with a specialist and you have diagnosis. A treatment plan is created and you are sent home with medication or to the hospital. What took 6 weeks out of the ER is accomplished in few hour in the ER.

This is one of the reason we over utilize the ER.

My experience is that the ER will not perform tests like that, and will still just refer to you a specialist.
The ER staff does not have the training or the time.
But I suppose it would depend on things like the size of the hospital?

If you go to the ER and claim you have unexplained severe head pain, chest pain, etc. They have to run tests to determine if have really serious life threaten stuff like a stroke, heart attack, aneurysm, or dozens of other things. That usually means they have to do things like MRIs, CT Scans, EKGs, angiogram, etc. Of course it all depends on your medical history, age, etc. A healthy 22 year old would not get the same attention as 78 year with numerous health problems. Those that are homeless, destitute, illegal immigrants, and mentally disturbed are likely to get above average diagnostic services because of lack medical history and their life style.

In many hospitals, admission through the ER is very common, about 20%.

 

[Flopper]

Medicare for All reminds me of the original Obamacare, "Health Care for America Plan" which contained a public option allowing people to transfer to a Medicare like system without age restriction. The public option was of course a major target of the insurance companies and was dropped almost immediately by congress.

I think there are some misconceptions about how the Medicare for All proposals would be implemented. Once congress gets hold of any of the current proposals, they would change radically.

• First, it would not be Medicare. It would be a healthcare plan similar to Medicare but would look more like an employer sponsored plan than Medicare.
• It would be phased in over many years opening up first to older Americans and gradually extended to all ages.
• Lastly, there would be supplemental insurance just as there is with Medicare.

Any national healthcare plan would be a series of compromises. We have to remember this is not 1965 when Medicare was passed where deals were made between democrats and republicans to pass major legislation and the influence of lobbyists was far less than today.

What would actually stand a chance at working is allow people with preexisting conditions to go on Medicare. That would remove all the high risk patients from private insurance, and that would cause a price decrease, or at the very least, a price freeze.

Next is Medicare and Medicaid needs to start paying the entire bill instead of only part of it.
In any case, nothing gets done the right way until we work on lowering the cost of medical care first. If we don't do that, we're just passing the buck around.

Putting people with serious pre-existing conditions on Medicare is a good idea but it needs to be serious prexisting conditions. Back before Obamacare when I applied for individual insurance, I had to complete a 26 page medical questions. I found I was ineligible for health insurance because I had asthma and hayfever. A goal of insurance companies was to eliminate anyone who might file a claim.

I think deductibles should be eliminated but not co-insurance and copays. People need to pay a small fee for services or they will over utilize the system.

I inquired about disability a few years back, and that's what they get after you are on the program for one year. And.....she stated the plans are more than reasonable; about 120 a month to 190, depending on what you can afford.

So if it's available to people on SS disability, why not make it available to others who are not on disability? The reason insurance companies don't want people like you or me is because we are high risk, just like an auto insurance company giving insurance to a documented drunk.

Remove those people from the private insurance rolls, and they can better manage prices. It would be a half-way point between what the Democrats want and what the Republicans want. And.....nobody can be accused of wanting to take healthcare away from people with preexisting conditions.

But if you remove all the patients who need medical care and only leave the insurance companies with the young and healthy who do not need any care, then why let the insurance companies have all that profit?
The whole point of insurance is supposed to be to pool risks so that the health help pay for the care needed by the few injured or sick. If the insurance does not do that, then it is worthless. The healthy do not need health care or insurance. It is only the sick or injured who do.

Just because one is unlikely to need healthcare doesn't mean they never will. Accidents, illness, diseases can happen to anybody. But the risk of that in a healthy pool is much, much less than insuring everybody.

Insurance companies base their premium on what they pay out compared to what they bring in. If they bring in more, and payout less, then they lower their rates to compete with other companies.

That would make private insurance affordable, and at the same time, give coverage to those who can't get or afford private insurance. Again, not free, you would still have to purchase a plan, but it would be a mid-way point between what Democrats and Republicans want. And everybody would actually get coverage they could afford.

Yes, that would make healthcare more affordable but keep in mind that most of our healthcare costs goes to people with pre-existing conditions. one every 4 adults under 65 has prexisting conditions. So if you transfer them to a government funded plan then you are transferring most of the healthcare cost.

 

[White 6]

They do not get healthcare. I do not know why you want to continue with something you know is false. They can access emergency care.

Illegals don’t get healthcare in America?

Youre a friggen troll

The ER is not at all sufficient health care.
It is just for stitches, setting fractures, etc.

From personal experience, I've found it's lot more. The ER is often the fastest and surest way to get a diagnosis. Go to you your GP and you get some pills, maybe a few tests and suggestions and if the pain isn't better in two weeks you come back. He goes over test results and if the pain is still there you see a specialist in few weeks. The specialist then orders more blood tests an EKG, and an MRI which takes about two weeks get appointments and results back to your doctor. Hopefully then you will get a diagnosis and treatment plan.

In the ER, the blood tests, EKG, and MRI are all ordered and results are back in a few hours. Your attending physician discusses your case with a specialist and you have diagnosis. A treatment plan is created and you are sent home with medication or to the hospital. What took 6 weeks out of the ER is accomplished in few hour in the ER.

This is one of the reason we over utilize the ER.

My experience is that the ER will not perform tests like that, and will still just refer to you a specialist.
The ER staff does not have the training or the time.
But I suppose it would depend on things like the size of the hospital?

If you go to the ER and claim you have severe head pain, chest pain, etc. They have to run tests to determine if have really serious life threaten stuff like a stroke, heart attack, aneurysm, or dozens of other things. That usually means they have to do things like MRIs, CT Scans, EKGs, angiogram, etc. Of course it all depends on your medical history, age, etc. A healthy 22 year old would not get the same attention as 78 year with numerous health problems. Those that are homeless, destitute, illegal immigrants, and mentally disturbed are likely to get above average diagnostic services because of lack medical history and their life style.

In many hospitals, admission through the ER is very common, about 20%.

Bernie is not going to raise taxes on anyone. He won't be around at election time. It is people my age that vote most consistently and he is polling about 3% in my group. Republicans can quit worrying about the country going full socialist. It is stawman bullshit and ain't gonna happen. On the other hand, I am not a Democrat, and still wouldn't vote for Trump even with your vote or six of your dead relatives on absentee.

 

[Grumblenuts]

You can "access" health care just fine with money.

You don't get out much. Different world these days. Without a card or insurance info many have no idea what to do with you and point you to the door. "Legal tender" or no

I think there is a point where the profit motive is destructive.

Of course, but it has limited utility generally as well. Can't discuss it without heads exploding, but just imagine for example if all teachers, fire fighters, and mail carriers were self-employed and all demanded compensation packages (20 page contracts) from all seeking their services based upon their self-assessments of merit alone.. There are always ranges of reasonableness which are of vital importance to assess and consider.

 

[Grumblenuts]

What would actually stand a chance at working is allow people with preexisting conditions to go on Medicare. That would remove all the high risk patients from private insurance, and that would cause a price decrease, or at the very least, a price freeze.

Next is Medicare and Medicaid needs to start paying the entire bill instead of only part of it.
In any case, nothing gets done the right way until we work on lowering the cost of medical care first. If we don't do that, we're just passing the buck around.

Putting people with serious pre-existing conditions on Medicare is a good idea but it needs to be serious prexisting conditions. Back before Obamacare when I applied for individual insurance, I had to complete a 26 page medical questions. I found I was ineligible for health insurance because I had asthma and hayfever. A goal of insurance companies was to eliminate anyone who might file a claim.

I think deductibles should be eliminated but not co-insurance and copays. People need to pay a small fee for services or they will over utilize the system.

I inquired about disability a few years back, and that's what they get after you are on the program for one year. And.....she stated the plans are more than reasonable; about 120 a month to 190, depending on what you can afford.

So if it's available to people on SS disability, why not make it available to others who are not on disability? The reason insurance companies don't want people like you or me is because we are high risk, just like an auto insurance company giving insurance to a documented drunk.

Remove those people from the private insurance rolls, and they can better manage prices. It would be a half-way point between what the Democrats want and what the Republicans want. And.....nobody can be accused of wanting to take healthcare away from people with preexisting conditions.

But if you remove all the patients who need medical care and only leave the insurance companies with the young and healthy who do not need any care, then why let the insurance companies have all that profit?
The whole point of insurance is supposed to be to pool risks so that the health help pay for the care needed by the few injured or sick. If the insurance does not do that, then it is worthless. The healthy do not need health care or insurance. It is only the sick or injured who do.

Just because one is unlikely to need healthcare doesn't mean they never will. Accidents, illness, diseases can happen to anybody. But the risk of that in a healthy pool is much, much less than insuring everybody.

Insurance companies base their premium on what they pay out compared to what they bring in. If they bring in more, and payout less, then they lower their rates to compete with other companies.

That would make private insurance affordable, and at the same time, give coverage to those who can't get or afford private insurance. Again, not free, you would still have to purchase a plan, but it would be a mid-way point between what Democrats and Republicans want. And everybody would actually get coverage they could afford.

Yes, that would make healthcare more affordable but keep in mind that most of our healthcare costs goes to people with pre-existing conditions. one every 4 adults under 65 has prexisting conditions. So if you transfer them to a government funded plan then you are transferring most of the healthcare cost.

That's what the rich demand.. the lowest tax rates and cheapest insurance, i.e. "free stuff!" Impersonal insurance always best serves those who don't need it at the expense of everyone who does. Because we let them get away with it.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Illegals don’t get healthcare in America?

Youre a friggen troll

The ER is not at all sufficient health care.
It is just for stitches, setting fractures, etc.

From personal experience, I've found it's lot more. The ER is often the fastest and surest way to get a diagnosis. Go to you your GP and you get some pills, maybe a few tests and suggestions and if the pain isn't better in two weeks you come back. He goes over test results and if the pain is still there you see a specialist in few weeks. The specialist then orders more blood tests an EKG, and an MRI which takes about two weeks get appointments and results back to your doctor. Hopefully then you will get a diagnosis and treatment plan.

In the ER, the blood tests, EKG, and MRI are all ordered and results are back in a few hours. Your attending physician discusses your case with a specialist and you have diagnosis. A treatment plan is created and you are sent home with medication or to the hospital. What took 6 weeks out of the ER is accomplished in few hour in the ER.

This is one of the reason we over utilize the ER.

My experience is that the ER will not perform tests like that, and will still just refer to you a specialist.
The ER staff does not have the training or the time.
But I suppose it would depend on things like the size of the hospital?

If you go to the ER and claim you have severe head pain, chest pain, etc. They have to run tests to determine if have really serious life threaten stuff like a stroke, heart attack, aneurysm, or dozens of other things. That usually means they have to do things like MRIs, CT Scans, EKGs, angiogram, etc. Of course it all depends on your medical history, age, etc. A healthy 22 year old would not get the same attention as 78 year with numerous health problems. Those that are homeless, destitute, illegal immigrants, and mentally disturbed are likely to get above average diagnostic services because of lack medical history and their life style.

In many hospitals, admission through the ER is very common, about 20%.

Bernie is not going to raise taxes on anyone. He won't be around at election time. It is people my age that vote most consistently and he is polling about 3% in my group. Republicans can quit worrying about the country going full socialist. It is stawman bullshit and ain't gonna happen. On the other hand, I am not a Democrat, and still wouldn't vote for Trump even with your vote or six of your dead relatives on absentee.

Sorry, not dead yet..

 

[pknopp]

Incomplete answer is misleading.

{...
Q: Is health care better in Canada?

A: Wait times are longer in Canada, but health and doctor quality don’t seem to suffer.
...}

The reality is Canada is rated higher than the US for over all health care.
Things that can not wait are done faster and better in Canada.
Something should have a longer wait, so that more important things happen sooner.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-co...dians-increasingly-come-to-us-for-health-care

https://ctvnews.ca/mobile/health/63...reatment-last-year-fraser-institute-1.3486635

Why Canadians Are Increasingly Seeking Medical Treatment Abroad

Canadians Come to America for Better Care

We have some great care..........for those who can afford it.

Like the millions of illegals who get healthcare in America? They’re all RICH!

They do not get healthcare. I do not know why you want to continue with something you know is false. They can access emergency care.

Their kids get it through Medicaid. Those who have a job with healthcare benefits get it as well, as long as they have a stolen identification and SS number.

You are full of fairy tales.

 

[pknopp]

I see no one demanding higher taxes to pay down the 23 Trillion.

I am. Have been for years. I think taxes should automatically go up (across the board, not the usual "targeted" bullshit - the increase needs to hit everyone) until we reach a balanced budget. It's the only way we'll get a true read on how much government people actually want. As it is, with no one paying for it, people will vote for every "free shit" program that is proposed.

I have better idea.

Why don't we for the time being keep the taxes where they are and cut back on spending? The money we cut back on we could use to pay the debt.

We could easily cut back a couple of trillion a year on Federal spending and still spend more money on the cost of government than almost any other country on earth.

When everything is paid off then we can reduce taxes by the amount we had been spending on the debt. Win win for everybody except the filthy welfare queens that suck on the teat of big government.

Walter E Williams put it best.

"I'm going to run for a federal office. My platforms will be I'm not bringing back any money to my state. I'm voting down all spending. Would you vote for me?"

And he never won or even ran for public office. In a recent poll, 84% believed a major function of government was to provide services to the people.

That's the point he was making. In other words, we blame the politicians for putting us in so much debt, but if they don't spend money on the things we want, we vote them out. So is it their fault or ours?

The great society ruined our nation. It's what I call the Ray from Cleveland's raccoon theory:

You catch a raccoon digging inside of your garbage can, in sympathy, you go into the house and get that leftover ham on the bone you were going to throw out at the end of the week anyway. The animal eats in delight. Now give it about 30 seconds, and try to take that ham bone back, and see what happens to you.

Politicians, particularly on the left, are well aware of my raccoon theory. Once government gives people something, like the raccoon, they rightfully claim it theirs. Then the Republicans get in charge, and they don't do anything about the runaway social programs. How can they? If they try to take it back, they will get their hand chewed up.

Like the money Trump is giving farmers over his failing trade war?

 

[pknopp]

Medicare for All reminds me of the original Obamacare, "Health Care for America Plan" which contained a public option allowing people to transfer to a Medicare like system without age restriction. The public option was of course a major target of the insurance companies and was dropped almost immediately by congress.

I think there are some misconceptions about how the Medicare for All proposals would be implemented. Once congress gets hold of any of the current proposals, they would change radically.

• First, it would not be Medicare. It would be a healthcare plan similar to Medicare but would look more like an employer sponsored plan than Medicare.
• It would be phased in over many years opening up first to older Americans and gradually extended to all ages.
• Lastly, there would be supplemental insurance just as there is with Medicare.

Any national healthcare plan would be a series of compromises. We have to remember this is not 1965 when Medicare was passed where deals were made between democrats and republicans to pass major legislation and the influence of lobbyists was far less than today.

What would actually stand a chance at working is allow people with preexisting conditions to go on Medicare. That would remove all the high risk patients from private insurance, and that would cause a price decrease, or at the very least, a price freeze.

Next is Medicare and Medicaid needs to start paying the entire bill instead of only part of it.
In any case, nothing gets done the right way until we work on lowering the cost of medical care first. If we don't do that, we're just passing the buck around.

No, Medicare and Medicaid is paying the only valid portion of the bill.
What we have to do is stop the insurance companies from paying more of the bill than Medicare does.
The current bills are incredibly fake and inflated.
That is the whole problem of 3rd party payer, they LIKE inflated bills because then everyone absolutely needs to have insurance even more.
The whole problem is 3rd party payer, who does not care about quality or cost.
The patient can do nothing because they already prepaid.
It is like prepaid legal service, can not possibly ever work.

It's worked very well for generations. Handing it over to government is the stupidest thing we could possibly do. Government is a huge reason why our healthcare is so expensive to begin with.

For generations the cost to deliver a baby was around $100.

There have also been major enhancements in maternity care, prenatal, and postnatal care. The result has been a decrease in infant mortality of 80% since the mid 20th century. Not sure how you put a price tag on that.

A simple delivery was $100. Now it's $16,000. A woman stayed in the hospital for days before also. Now they are out within two days tops. Infant mortality had fallen during the $100 days from earlier also.

 

[pknopp]

And free healthcare. It's a great deal actually but you brainwashed functional morons are so fear mongered I think we have to go with the public option like Obama wanted. He also did not want to mandate. Scary how total garbage propaganda is so powerful....

And free healthcare! Just like Canada so we can wait 19 months for a pacemaker!

The life expectancy on average in Canada is 82.8.

In the U.S. it's 78.5.

We have more minorities with more drugs and more violence.

I figured this would be the reply while missing the larger point. If things were so bad in Canada they would not have the 7th highest life expectancy rate.

Life expectancy depends on a lot of things, not just healthcare. After all, when do most of our people die? When they're on government healthcare.

Being a multi-cultured society, we have cultures that are much more violent than others, and therefore bring down our life expectancy rate. We are the fattest country in the world, and we probably get the least exercise. We also lose a lot of people due to narcotics, 68,000 a year and growing. Plus we lose about 40,000 Americans a year in road accidents.

So don't be fooled by believing that life expectancy is the sole indicator of good healthcare.

This kind of shit happens all the time in our city.

No arrests after 11-year-old killed at Cleveland birthday party

Every single country at the top of the list has Universal Health care. If it was so bad that would not be the case.

 

[pknopp]

We have some great care..........for those who can afford it.

Like the millions of illegals who get healthcare in America? They’re all RICH!

They do not get healthcare. I do not know why you want to continue with something you know is false. They can access emergency care.

Illegals don’t get healthcare in America?

Youre a friggen troll

The ER is not at all sufficient health care.
It is just for stitches, setting fractures, etc.

From personal experience, I've found it's a lot more. The ER is often the fastest and surest way to get a diagnosis. Of course a lot depends on your health history and age.

Get an appointment with your GP and you get some pills, maybe a few tests and suggestions and if the pain isn't better in two weeks you come back. He goes over test results and if the pain is still there you see a specialist in a few weeks. The specialist then orders more blood tests an EKG, and an MRI which takes about two weeks more to get all the appointments and results back to your doctor. Hopefully then you will get a diagnosis and treatment plan.

In the ER, the blood tests, EKG, and MRI are all ordered and results are back in a few hours. Your attending physician discusses your case with a specialist and you have a diagnosis. A tentative treatment plan is created and you are sent home with medication or to the hospital. What took 6 weeks out of the ER is often accomplished in a few hour in the ER.

This is one of the reason we over utilize the ER.

We over utilize the E.R. because that is the only way thousands of people can afford treatment. That is, they don't have to pay up front. When all of these people get treated at an E.R. they do not pay the bill. Those with insurance pay their bill.

Why would you be against a system that would make them contribute to the system?

I've asked this 4-5 times now and no one answered.

 

[pknopp]

They do not get healthcare. I do not know why you want to continue with something you know is false. They can access emergency care.

Illegals don’t get healthcare in America?

Youre a friggen troll

The ER is not at all sufficient health care.
It is just for stitches, setting fractures, etc.

From personal experience, I've found it's lot more. The ER is often the fastest and surest way to get a diagnosis. Go to you your GP and you get some pills, maybe a few tests and suggestions and if the pain isn't better in two weeks you come back. He goes over test results and if the pain is still there you see a specialist in few weeks. The specialist then orders more blood tests an EKG, and an MRI which takes about two weeks get appointments and results back to your doctor. Hopefully then you will get a diagnosis and treatment plan.

In the ER, the blood tests, EKG, and MRI are all ordered and results are back in a few hours. Your attending physician discusses your case with a specialist and you have diagnosis. A treatment plan is created and you are sent home with medication or to the hospital. What took 6 weeks out of the ER is accomplished in few hour in the ER.

This is one of the reason we over utilize the ER.

My experience is that the ER will not perform tests like that, and will still just refer to you a specialist.
The ER staff does not have the training or the time.
But I suppose it would depend on things like the size of the hospital?

Actually they do, because they face the same liability as your family doctor. They make sure all their bases are covered in the event of a lawsuit.

My grandson broke his collarbone the other day. The E.R. diagnosed the break and gave them a cheap sling BUT then they had to go to a specialist. One that will ask for your method of payment up front.

 

[pknopp]

We have some great care..........for those who can afford it.

Like the millions of illegals who get healthcare in America? They’re all RICH!

They do not get healthcare. I do not know why you want to continue with something you know is false. They can access emergency care.

Their kids get it through Medicaid. Those who have a job with healthcare benefits get it as well, as long as they have a stolen identification and SS number.

No, the kids of illegals do not get any more than the ER care any tourist gets.
And those using an illegal SS card to get a job with health insurance, can not get health care either.
First of all, the jobs illegals can get most likely do not come with health insurance, and no illegal could risk getting caught by getting into an health insurance database. For example, if the blood type did not match, it would throw a red flag. Insurance databases are far more detailed than the SS database.

Health facilities generally do not share their findings with the government. Don't let these Democrats tell you that the only jobs illegals get are picking lettuce. They are in every work sector of our country. They are in construction, hospitality, transportation, warehousing, lawn care, and yes, these industries generally do offer healthcare for their employees, especially when they are considered legal.

More fairy tales.

 

[pknopp]

Illegals don’t get healthcare in America?

Youre a friggen troll

The ER is not at all sufficient health care.
It is just for stitches, setting fractures, etc.

From personal experience, I've found it's lot more. The ER is often the fastest and surest way to get a diagnosis. Go to you your GP and you get some pills, maybe a few tests and suggestions and if the pain isn't better in two weeks you come back. He goes over test results and if the pain is still there you see a specialist in few weeks. The specialist then orders more blood tests an EKG, and an MRI which takes about two weeks get appointments and results back to your doctor. Hopefully then you will get a diagnosis and treatment plan.

In the ER, the blood tests, EKG, and MRI are all ordered and results are back in a few hours. Your attending physician discusses your case with a specialist and you have diagnosis. A treatment plan is created and you are sent home with medication or to the hospital. What took 6 weeks out of the ER is accomplished in few hour in the ER.

This is one of the reason we over utilize the ER.

My experience is that the ER will not perform tests like that, and will still just refer to you a specialist.
The ER staff does not have the training or the time.
But I suppose it would depend on things like the size of the hospital?

If you go to the ER and claim you have severe head pain, chest pain, etc. They have to run tests to determine if have really serious life threaten stuff like a stroke, heart attack, aneurysm, or dozens of other things. That usually means they have to do things like MRIs, CT Scans, EKGs, angiogram, etc. Of course it all depends on your medical history, age, etc. A healthy 22 year old would not get the same attention as 78 year with numerous health problems. Those that are homeless, destitute, illegal immigrants, and mentally disturbed are likely to get above average diagnostic services because of lack medical history and their life style.

In many hospitals, admission through the ER is very common, about 20%.

Bernie is not going to raise taxes on anyone. He won't be around at election time. It is people my age that vote most consistently and he is polling about 3% in my group. Republicans can quit worrying about the country going full socialist. It is stawman bullshit and ain't gonna happen. On the other hand, I am not a Democrat, and still wouldn't vote for Trump even with your vote or six of your dead relatives on absentee.

It isn't going to happen because no one is running on "full socialism" so your claim is easy to make. Bernie is running on expanding the system we already have in place. A system that those who are on support.