What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

CDZ Could (actual) Conservatives support this kind of single payer?

YoursTruly

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2019
Messages
1,431
Reaction score
626
Points
200
I don't understand why republicans and most conservatives can't support a single payer system, ran by medical professionals. Although I do understand them not wanting it ran by our government. That's understandable. For the simple fact that the government can't run most things that benefit most of "we the people." A good example of this is the USD value. Now, $10hr is a poverty wage. Where as just south of the border, $10hr is an upper class wage.
But I digress. Fighting against a single payer system is nothing more than fighting in favor of health insurance companies. Who constantly screw the medical professionals out of a lot of money.
Healthcare has to be paid for, no matter who you are. Everyone is going to need medical help. And those that help you, will have to get paid. Insurance companies get paid by us. And they pay the MP (Medical professionals). But where they screw the MP's, is how much they pay the MPs for your care.
Example: When I was with Blue Cross Blue shield, I had an osteotomy on my knee. The hospital and doctor billed the insurance company over $100,000. That included all the doctor visits, surgeon visits, physical therapy & drugs. Blue Cross paid a little less than $3,000 in total. My doctor said that Medicare pays them better than Blue Cross. How sick is that?
Counting my premiums, the insurance company got paid a LOT more than the MP's that actually fixed my knee problem. Thousands more.
Let's be honest about this. Health insurance companies (or all of them) are nothing more than money brokers. We pay them and they pay the MP's what they want to pay them. Then they keep the rest for profits.
As a conservative, I'm always in support of cutting out the middle man.
I think the BEST way to solve this problem, is the MP's starting their own nationwide health insurance company. That way, they can own and operate within their own guidelines, with minimum government oversight. Of course, because there's trillions of dollars and millions of Americans involved, there'd have to be some oversight and regulations. But the ultimate decisions, providing there's no fraud or corruption involved, would remain with the MP's.
But in the end, the MP's (medical professionals) would be able to set their own rules, regs and policies. No more running tests that aren't actually necessary. No more endless doctor visits, being treated for something the doctors knows isn't going to be effective. (so they can get more money) No more fighting with the insurance companies as to why the doctor can't run a certain test.
Example: When my gaul stones were causing a lot of pain, the ER doctor wasn't allowed to do a sonogram because I didn't have fever. A simple test to see for sure that I had gaul stones, was not allowed by the insurance company. Not only would the test confirm the doctors suspicions. But would also show the size and scope of the stones. Which would determine if emergency surgery was needed. Or if I could wait to have the surgery.

Bottom line to this, IMO, health insurance companies are nothing more than money brokers and do nothing to help, treat or cure patients. So the ones getting 100% of the money, should be the MP's. If a single payer system is the only way to abolish insurance companies, then so be it.
 

Oddball

Unobtanium Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
Messages
76,364
Reaction score
48,237
Points
2,615
Location
Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
I don't understand why republicans and most conservatives can't support a single payer system, ran by medical professionals. Although I do understand them not wanting it ran by our government. That's understandable. For the simple fact that the government can't run most things that benefit most of "we the people." A good example of this is the USD value. Now, $10hr is a poverty wage. Where as just south of the border, $10hr is an upper class wage.
But I digress. Fighting against a single payer system is nothing more than fighting in favor of health insurance companies. Who constantly screw the medical professionals out of a lot of money.
Healthcare has to be paid for, no matter who you are. Everyone is going to need medical help. And those that help you, will have to get paid. Insurance companies get paid by us. And they pay the MP (Medical professionals). But where they screw the MP's, is how much they pay the MPs for your care.
Example: When I was with Blue Cross Blue shield, I had an osteotomy on my knee. The hospital and doctor billed the insurance company over $100,000. That included all the doctor visits, surgeon visits, physical therapy & drugs. Blue Cross paid a little less than $3,000 in total. My doctor said that Medicare pays them better than Blue Cross. How sick is that?
Counting my premiums, the insurance company got paid a LOT more than the MP's that actually fixed my knee problem. Thousands more.
Let's be honest about this. Health insurance companies (or all of them) are nothing more than money brokers. We pay them and they pay the MP's what they want to pay them. Then they keep the rest for profits.
As a conservative, I'm always in support of cutting out the middle man.
I think the BEST way to solve this problem, is the MP's starting their own nationwide health insurance company. That way, they can own and operate within their own guidelines, with minimum government oversight. Of course, because there's trillions of dollars and millions of Americans involved, there'd have to be some oversight and regulations. But the ultimate decisions, providing there's no fraud or corruption involved, would remain with the MP's.
But in the end, the MP's (medical professionals) would be able to set their own rules, regs and policies. No more running tests that aren't actually necessary. No more endless doctor visits, being treated for something the doctors knows isn't going to be effective. (so they can get more money) No more fighting with the insurance companies as to why the doctor can't run a certain test.
Example: When my gaul stones were causing a lot of pain, the ER doctor wasn't allowed to do a sonogram because I didn't have fever. A simple test to see for sure that I had gaul stones, was not allowed by the insurance company. Not only would the test confirm the doctors suspicions. But would also show the size and scope of the stones. Which would determine if emergency surgery was needed. Or if I could wait to have the surgery.

Bottom line to this, IMO, health insurance companies are nothing more than money brokers and do nothing to help, treat or cure patients. So the ones getting 100% of the money, should be the MP's. If a single payer system is the only way to abolish insurance companies, then so be it.
Fighting against a single payer system is nothing more than fighting in favor of health insurance companies. Who constantly screw the medical professionals out of a lot of money.

Wrong...Why are you deliberately excluding the notion of paying out-of-pocket?
 
OP
YoursTruly

YoursTruly

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2019
Messages
1,431
Reaction score
626
Points
200
Fighting against a single payer system is nothing more than fighting in favor of health insurance companies. Who constantly screw the medical professionals out of a lot of money.

Wrong...Why are you deliberately excluding the notion of paying out-of-pocket?

I suppose if we all had a few hundred thousand $$$ in the bank, to spare, paying out of pocket would be the norm.
 

Natural Citizen

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
15,962
Reaction score
9,994
Points
1,295
One of the biggest mistakes people made with Obamacare was calling it socialist.

It was patently fascist.

What we're seing now with all of this corona nonsense is industry doing the government's dirty work, much the same way. Effectively trying to mandate what have historically been our own personal medical decisions.

They're basically going the paperz pleez route, too.
 

Oddball

Unobtanium Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
Messages
76,364
Reaction score
48,237
Points
2,615
Location
Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
I suppose if we all had a few hundred thousand $$$ in the bank, to spare, paying out of pocket would be the norm.
Insurance was for those kinds of things, not to pay for everything under the sun....Back in the day it was called "hospitalization insurance".

Truth is that nearly all outpatient treatments and procedures are reasonably inexpensive, if paid for out-of-pocket.
 

justinacolmena

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2017
Messages
9,359
Reaction score
2,867
Points
210
Location
alaska, usa
single payer system, ran by medical professionals
Singles can't afford to finance childcare for married couples.
Single men don't want to patronize prostitutes, be dumped from the insurance plan like unwanted boyfriends, or murdered in cold blood by doctors who accept bribes from street women.
Single mothers don't want to forced to cater to every john on the street or pay for being diced and sliced up and C-sectioned in lieu of an abortion.
 
OP
YoursTruly

YoursTruly

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2019
Messages
1,431
Reaction score
626
Points
200
Insurance was for those kinds of things, not to pay for everything under the sun....Back in the day it was called "hospitalization insurance".

We're not "back in the day." We're in the "today." While I do agree, that people shouldn't got to the doctor for every sniffle. BUT there are advantages of doing so.
Are the sniffles a symptom of something more severe? Something that if gone untreated, would turn into something catastrophic?
Plus, throw in the financial aspect of this. High deductibles and out of pocket money that has to be paid before insurance kicks in. It's better to pay a little at a time, to meet the limit, than to be forced to dish out a lot of money at one time.
Truth is that nearly all outpatient treatments and procedures are reasonably inexpensive, if paid for out-of-pocket.

That's true. But there's also a lot of time when someone doesn't have the cash to pay even the greatly reduced price of an outpatient treatment or procedure.
We have a NP in town that takes only payments at the time of visit. No insurance. And she does a pretty good business. I've seen her a few times when I didn't have insurance. Her office visits are $80. That's doable for most people. Where as the doctors that take insurance, their office visits are $120. With my new insurance, office visits cost me $5. Since I have to have insurance, why in the world would I pay $80 when I can pay only $5. Especially when I have to pay the insurance premium, regardless of which doctor I see?
 

MarathonMike

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2014
Messages
26,950
Reaction score
26,711
Points
2,445
Location
The Southwestern Desert
I think the BEST way to solve this problem, is the MP's starting their own nationwide health insurance company.
Who are the "Medical Professionals" that would make up the governing body of this Single Payer system? What group or groups would provide oversight for this governing body and what authority would they have? Please don't say "The Media".
 
OP
YoursTruly

YoursTruly

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2019
Messages
1,431
Reaction score
626
Points
200
Singles can't afford to finance childcare for married couples.
Single men don't want to patronize prostitutes, be dumped from the insurance plan like unwanted boyfriends, or murdered in cold blood by doctors who accept bribes from street women.
Single mothers don't want to forced to cater to every john on the street or pay for being diced and sliced up and C-sectioned in lieu of an abortion.

What are you even talking about? Are you having a bad day? Got some bad news from you your divorce attorney?
 
OP
YoursTruly

YoursTruly

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2019
Messages
1,431
Reaction score
626
Points
200
Who are the "Medical Professionals" that would make up the governing body of this Single Payer system? What group or groups would provide oversight for this governing body and what authority would they have?

I don't have a clue. I don't know any of them personally. I suppose the medical profession can decide who to put in that position. That would be my suggestion.
 

justinacolmena

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2017
Messages
9,359
Reaction score
2,867
Points
210
Location
alaska, usa
Are the sniffles a symptom of something more severe? Something that if gone untreated, would turn into something catastrophic?
Doctors need to re-educated and forced against their will to stop the fear mongering, and coerced into suggesting natural remedies or abstinence from Marijuana smoke or healthier living habits.
 
OP
YoursTruly

YoursTruly

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2019
Messages
1,431
Reaction score
626
Points
200
One of the biggest mistakes people made with Obamacare was calling it socialist.

It was patently fascist.

What we're seing now with all of this corona nonsense is industry doing the government's dirty work, much the same way. Effectively trying to mandate what have historically been our own personal medical decisions.

They're basically going the paperz pleez route, too.

I agree. It was more like a bailout for the insurance companies. As if they even needed a bailout. Their premiums and profits had been on the rise since I started buying health insurance.
 
OP
YoursTruly

YoursTruly

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2019
Messages
1,431
Reaction score
626
Points
200
Doctors need to re-educated and forced against their will to stop the fear mongering, and coerced into suggesting natural remedies or abstinence from Marijuana smoke or healthier living habits.

You're a progressive liberal, aren't you?
 

justinacolmena

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2017
Messages
9,359
Reaction score
2,867
Points
210
Location
alaska, usa
What are you even talking about? Are you having a bad day? Got some bad news from you your divorce attorney?
There's a "doctor" telling people what their marital status is, or whether or not they should be married, or a checkup for STDs or sex flu?

Or is that HOV+AIDS?
 
OP
YoursTruly

YoursTruly

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2019
Messages
1,431
Reaction score
626
Points
200
There's a "doctor" telling people what their marital status is, or whether or not they should be married, or a checkup for STDs or sex flu?

Or is that HOV+AIDS?

Dude, put the meth pipe down and walk away slowly.
 

MarathonMike

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2014
Messages
26,950
Reaction score
26,711
Points
2,445
Location
The Southwestern Desert
I don't have a clue. I don't know any of them personally. I suppose the medical profession can decide who to put in that position. That would be my suggestion.
What I am poking at is that this proposed group of "Medical Professionals" would most likely be a bunch of corrupt old fossils like Dr. Fauci. It would be no better than another Federal government agency in terms of management of corruption and inefficiency. And of course there would be no powerful watchdog entity to keep this MP governing body in check.
 

Mac-7

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2019
Messages
31,768
Reaction score
21,983
Points
2,865
I don't understand why republicans and most conservatives can't support a single payer system, ran by medical professionals. Although I do understand them not wanting it ran by our government. That's understandable. For the simple fact that the government can't run most things that benefit most of "we the people." A good example of this is the USD value. Now, $10hr is a poverty wage. Where as just south of the border, $10hr is an upper class wage.
But I digress. Fighting against a single payer system is nothing more than fighting in favor of health insurance companies. Who constantly screw the medical professionals out of a lot of money.
Healthcare has to be paid for, no matter who you are. Everyone is going to need medical help. And those that help you, will have to get paid. Insurance companies get paid by us. And they pay the MP (Medical professionals). But where they screw the MP's, is how much they pay the MPs for your care.
Example: When I was with Blue Cross Blue shield, I had an osteotomy on my knee. The hospital and doctor billed the insurance company over $100,000. That included all the doctor visits, surgeon visits, physical therapy & drugs. Blue Cross paid a little less than $3,000 in total. My doctor said that Medicare pays them better than Blue Cross. How sick is that?
Counting my premiums, the insurance company got paid a LOT more than the MP's that actually fixed my knee problem. Thousands more.
Let's be honest about this. Health insurance companies (or all of them) are nothing more than money brokers. We pay them and they pay the MP's what they want to pay them. Then they keep the rest for profits.
As a conservative, I'm always in support of cutting out the middle man.
I think the BEST way to solve this problem, is the MP's starting their own nationwide health insurance company. That way, they can own and operate within their own guidelines, with minimum government oversight. Of course, because there's trillions of dollars and millions of Americans involved, there'd have to be some oversight and regulations. But the ultimate decisions, providing there's no fraud or corruption involved, would remain with the MP's.
But in the end, the MP's (medical professionals) would be able to set their own rules, regs and policies. No more running tests that aren't actually necessary. No more endless doctor visits, being treated for something the doctors knows isn't going to be effective. (so they can get more money) No more fighting with the insurance companies as to why the doctor can't run a certain test.
Example: When my gaul stones were causing a lot of pain, the ER doctor wasn't allowed to do a sonogram because I didn't have fever. A simple test to see for sure that I had gaul stones, was not allowed by the insurance company. Not only would the test confirm the doctors suspicions. But would also show the size and scope of the stones. Which would determine if emergency surgery was needed. Or if I could wait to have the surgery.

Bottom line to this, IMO, health insurance companies are nothing more than money brokers and do nothing to help, treat or cure patients. So the ones getting 100% of the money, should be the MP's. If a single payer system is the only way to abolish insurance companies, then so be it.
Liberals tend to argue for socialized medicine as a moral necessity

They argue everyone deserves medical care

which only makes sense if we live in a bubble and are not acquainted with any of lowlife dirtbags lining up for free healthcare

I dont think people who contribute little or nothing are entitled to the same healthcare as those who are carrying the load for society
 

MarathonMike

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2014
Messages
26,950
Reaction score
26,711
Points
2,445
Location
The Southwestern Desert
I don't have a clue. I don't know any of them personally. I suppose the medical profession can decide who to put in that position. That would be my suggestion.
And of course, the drug companies would be pulling the strings behind the curtain in this Brave New World of medicine. The MPs at the top of the pecking order are, shall we say, closely aligned with the success of the drug companies. ;)
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$142.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top