Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Single-Payer System Works

[Political Junky]

RealClearPolitics - Video - Gibbs Can't Name Countries Where Single-Payer System Works

You've got to feel sorry for Gibbs having to clean up all the bullshit Obama lays out there.

Unfortunately, President Obama isn't asking for single payer, only a choice of your private plan or public plan.

If a single payer plan is not what he is aiming for, then why was he defending it when he spoke to the AMA?

President Obama spoke very clearly, and emphasized that if you like your present health insurance you'll be able to keep it.

 

[toomuchtime_]

He couldn't answer that? Man, that's pretty inept. He could've said just said "Canada" or "Australia," or the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany if he wanted to get tricky, cuz those aren't exactly single-payer, but they're kinda close.

Germany does not have a single payer system. In Germany, France, Japan, Switzerland, Belgium, the Netherlands and other countries, the government negotiates with private insurance companies to determine what coverage will be offered and what the premium will be, and the people purchase their insurance coverage from the private insurance companies in much the same way we do, but the government provides more generous subsidies to those who can't afford to buy it on their own. The single payer system is found only in Canada and some newly industrialized countries such as South Korea and Taiwan. Here is an excellent resource on the subject.

FRONTLINE: sick around the world: five countries: health care systems -- the four basic models | PBS

Thanks for the link. I was aware that it was multi-payer, but that it has many elements of single-payer systems. Anyway, South Korea and Taiwan, add those to the list. And thanks for the correction. = )

You're very welcome. I prefer the multi payer system to the single payer system because while the insurance companies are not permitted to make a profit on the basic health care coverage, they are allowed to charge enough to cover expenses, and in our single payer system, Medicare, premiums, taxes, were not high enough to cover expenses and that is why Medicare is about to go broke. I am concerned that the same political pressures that led to underfunding Medicare will lead to unrealistically low premiums for a new public plan and that will leave the back door open for the plan to be subsidized by new debt. Even now when the trust fund is almost depleted, the same politicians who are talking about a new public plan are reluctant to raises taxes and premiums for Medicare high enough to cover expenses.

 

[Ame®icano]

Uhh...aaaannnd..uuuuhhh...

This was before he met the teleprompter...

[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ThEAO0lt4Dw&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ThEAO0lt4Dw&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]​

 

[Political Junky]

Uhh...aaaannnd..uuuuhhh...

This was before he met the teleprompter...

[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ThEAO0lt4Dw&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ThEAO0lt4Dw&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]​

Poor Bush couldn't put together a sentence even with teleprompters.

 

[Oddball]

At least Shrubbie's goofyisms were amusing.

Obabbler just comes across as evasive at the least and totally clueless the rest of the time.

 

[Annie]

If a single payer plan is not what he is aiming for, then why was he defending it when he spoke to the AMA?

He'll always defend a universal plan, but also realizes that it would mean dismantling the entire existing system at a time when there's already too much upheaval in the economy. This may come as a surprise, but a majority of Americans WANT HEALTH CARE REFORM. Here is a consolidation of ALL the polls on the subject:

Health Policy

A single payer plan does not necessarily provide universal coverage and universal coverage with low costs and excellent health outcomes can be achieved through a multi payer plan using only private insurance companies, as it is in France, Germany, Japan and other countries. Voters say they want health care reform unless it will raise their costs or taxes or the national debt. In these cases, they are slightly opposed to it.

From your link,

"Would you be willing to pay more -- either in higher health insurance premiums or higher taxes -- in order to increase the number of Americans who have health insurance, or not?"

41% willing
54% not willing

The majority of voters believe needed health care reform can be achieved without spending more money.

"Which comes closer to your opinion? If policymakers made the right changes, they could reform the health care system without spending more money to do it. To make any real reforms to the health care system, policymakers will need to spend more money, either by raising some taxes, taking from other programs or increasing the deficit." Options rotated

60% no need to spend more
34% will need to spend more

Apparently, everyone is in favor of health care reform until you tell them what it will cost, and then most are not in favor of it.

Ok, it doesn't 'always' provide the optimum, though in US, we would expect the best, what do you mean by this?

A single payer plan does not necessarily provide universal coverage and universal coverage with low costs and excellent health outcomes can be achieved through a multi payer plan using only private insurance companies, as it is in France, Germany, Japan and other countries.

so are all the people in France, Germany and Japan thrilled with their health care? The overwhelming majority?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Uhh...aaaannnd..uuuuhhh...

This was before he met the teleprompter...

[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ThEAO0lt4Dw&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ThEAO0lt4Dw&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]​

Poor Bush couldn't put together a sentence even with teleprompters.

There's no question about it: give Obama a good speech to read and he'll turn in an Oscar worthy performance.

 

[Ame®icano]

Poor Bush couldn't put together a sentence even with teleprompters.

Maybe...

But who's talking about Bush, he's past. There are new clowns in the White House.

 

[WillowTree]

Unfortunately, President Obama isn't asking for single payer, only a choice of your private plan or public plan.

If a single payer plan is not what he is aiming for, then why was he defending it when he spoke to the AMA?

President Obama spoke very clearly, and emphasized that if you like your present health insurance you'll be able to keep it.

yes and be taxed for it..is the point innit?

 

[caela]

Unfortunately, President Obama isn't asking for single payer, only a choice of your private plan or public plan.

If a single payer plan is not what he is aiming for, then why was he defending it when he spoke to the AMA?

President Obama spoke very clearly, and emphasized that if you like your present health insurance you'll be able to keep it.

You COULD, but who would keep it when, he's also said, he wants to tax your benefits. So on top of paying your premiums (which may go up if private insurers have to deal with another gov't insurance program when they're already being undercut by Medicare/Medicaid) you'd be taxed on those premiums. OR you can drop your private insurance and join the queue at the gov't line and avoid those extra taxes.

Does the healthcare system need to be revamped? Yes, but it shouldn't be with another program that is unsustainable and designed to make more people even more dependant on the gov't teat.

 

[toomuchtime_]

He'll always defend a universal plan, but also realizes that it would mean dismantling the entire existing system at a time when there's already too much upheaval in the economy. This may come as a surprise, but a majority of Americans WANT HEALTH CARE REFORM. Here is a consolidation of ALL the polls on the subject:

Health Policy

A single payer plan does not necessarily provide universal coverage and universal coverage with low costs and excellent health outcomes can be achieved through a multi payer plan using only private insurance companies, as it is in France, Germany, Japan and other countries. Voters say they want health care reform unless it will raise their costs or taxes or the national debt. In these cases, they are slightly opposed to it.

From your link,

"Would you be willing to pay more -- either in higher health insurance premiums or higher taxes -- in order to increase the number of Americans who have health insurance, or not?"

41% willing
54% not willing

The majority of voters believe needed health care reform can be achieved without spending more money.

"Which comes closer to your opinion? If policymakers made the right changes, they could reform the health care system without spending more money to do it. To make any real reforms to the health care system, policymakers will need to spend more money, either by raising some taxes, taking from other programs or increasing the deficit." Options rotated

60% no need to spend more
34% will need to spend more

Apparently, everyone is in favor of health care reform until you tell them what it will cost, and then most are not in favor of it.

Ok, it doesn't 'always' provide the optimum, though in US, we would expect the best, what do you mean by this?

A single payer plan does not necessarily provide universal coverage and universal coverage with low costs and excellent health outcomes can be achieved through a multi payer plan using only private insurance companies, as it is in France, Germany, Japan and other countries.

so are all the people in France, Germany and Japan thrilled with their health care? The overwhelming majority?

From polls I've seen, the majority of people in the US and in other developed countries are satisfied with their health care coverage.

 

[Annie]

A single payer plan does not necessarily provide universal coverage and universal coverage with low costs and excellent health outcomes can be achieved through a multi payer plan using only private insurance companies, as it is in France, Germany, Japan and other countries. Voters say they want health care reform unless it will raise their costs or taxes or the national debt. In these cases, they are slightly opposed to it.

From your link,

"Would you be willing to pay more -- either in higher health insurance premiums or higher taxes -- in order to increase the number of Americans who have health insurance, or not?"

41% willing
54% not willing

The majority of voters believe needed health care reform can be achieved without spending more money.

"Which comes closer to your opinion? If policymakers made the right changes, they could reform the health care system without spending more money to do it. To make any real reforms to the health care system, policymakers will need to spend more money, either by raising some taxes, taking from other programs or increasing the deficit." Options rotated

60% no need to spend more
34% will need to spend more

Apparently, everyone is in favor of health care reform until you tell them what it will cost, and then most are not in favor of it.

Ok, it doesn't 'always' provide the optimum, though in US, we would expect the best, what do you mean by this?

A single payer plan does not necessarily provide universal coverage and universal coverage with low costs and excellent health outcomes can be achieved through a multi payer plan using only private insurance companies, as it is in France, Germany, Japan and other countries.

so are all the people in France, Germany and Japan thrilled with their health care? The overwhelming majority?

From polls I've seen, the majority of people in the US and in other developed countries are satisfied with their health care coverage.

So why change? From all accounts, for a trillion bucks or more we insure a few more, while screwing up our system. Millions more still left out, to be dealt with later? For how many trillions more?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

He'll always defend a universal plan, but also realizes that it would mean dismantling the entire existing system at a time when there's already too much upheaval in the economy. This may come as a surprise, but a majority of Americans WANT HEALTH CARE REFORM. Here is a consolidation of ALL the polls on the subject:

Health Policy

A single payer plan does not necessarily provide universal coverage and universal coverage with low costs and excellent health outcomes can be achieved through a multi payer plan using only private insurance companies, as it is in France, Germany, Japan and other countries. Voters say they want health care reform unless it will raise their costs or taxes or the national debt. In these cases, they are slightly opposed to it.

From your link,

"Would you be willing to pay more -- either in higher health insurance premiums or higher taxes -- in order to increase the number of Americans who have health insurance, or not?"

41% willing
54% not willing

The majority of voters believe needed health care reform can be achieved without spending more money.

"Which comes closer to your opinion? If policymakers made the right changes, they could reform the health care system without spending more money to do it. To make any real reforms to the health care system, policymakers will need to spend more money, either by raising some taxes, taking from other programs or increasing the deficit." Options rotated

60% no need to spend more
34% will need to spend more

Apparently, everyone is in favor of health care reform until you tell them what it will cost, and then most are not in favor of it.

Ok, it doesn't 'always' provide the optimum, though in US, we would expect the best, what do you mean by this?

A single payer plan does not necessarily provide universal coverage and universal coverage with low costs and excellent health outcomes can be achieved through a multi payer plan using only private insurance companies, as it is in France, Germany, Japan and other countries.

so are all the people in France, Germany and Japan thrilled with their health care? The overwhelming majority?

Don't know about Germany and France but in Japan people are dying because hospitals won't take them.

 

[Toro]

A single payer plan does not necessarily provide universal coverage and universal coverage with low costs and excellent health outcomes can be achieved through a multi payer plan using only private insurance companies, as it is in France, Germany, Japan and other countries. Voters say they want health care reform unless it will raise their costs or taxes or the national debt. In these cases, they are slightly opposed to it.

From your link,

"Would you be willing to pay more -- either in higher health insurance premiums or higher taxes -- in order to increase the number of Americans who have health insurance, or not?"

41% willing
54% not willing

The majority of voters believe needed health care reform can be achieved without spending more money.

"Which comes closer to your opinion? If policymakers made the right changes, they could reform the health care system without spending more money to do it. To make any real reforms to the health care system, policymakers will need to spend more money, either by raising some taxes, taking from other programs or increasing the deficit." Options rotated

60% no need to spend more
34% will need to spend more

Apparently, everyone is in favor of health care reform until you tell them what it will cost, and then most are not in favor of it.

I don't believe Americans will ever adopt a single-payer universal healthcare system. I don't think it is part of their DNA.

In Canada, the attitude is "We don't want corporations delivering our healthcare because they will screw us for profit" whereas in America, the attitude is "We don't want government delivering our healthcare because they screw everything up." That's why I don't pay much attention to the polls on Americans and universal health-care. The extra taxes that Canadians pay for their healthcare run in the thousands of dollars per year. Most Americans get their healthcare through their corporations and don't actually see their expenditures. I highly doubt Americans would swap their health coverage for higher taxes.

The mindset of the two countries is different. Americans are far less tolerant of being taxed whereas Canadians are far less tolerant to having social programs cut.

It should also be noted that most Americans are happy with their own health insurance, even if they are unhappy with the system in general. It is also important to note that most Canadians are happy with Medicare and would not swap it for a US style system. Any political party proposing to switch to an American system in Canada would get crushed at the polls. Likewise, I don't think any party proposing a Canadian system would win in America.

Finally, people have to understand clearly the concept of waiting times, which is subject to a statistical trick. Many discretionary and a few not-so-discretionary health services in Canada have wait times. People often point out MRIs, and that is definitely true. There is a few month wait to get an MRI in Canada. In America, you can get it right now if - and this is important - you can pay for it. Statistically, in the Canadian system, everyone who wants to have an MRI is counted in the wait times and is included in the calculation. In America, those who cannot afford it aren't counted in the wait times because they are not waiting for the procedure. In Canada, those people who couldn't otherwise afford the procedure are plugged into the calculation while those in America who cannot afford an MRI are not. Thus, the actual statistical wait time in America is much longer. If 95% of the population can get an MRI now while 5% can never get it, or can get it when they can afford it 10 years from now, the wait time is a weighted-average calculation of those who can afford it and those who can't. If 95% of Americans can get an MRI right now and 5% cannot get one, and those who cannot get one can be broken down between those who can never afford an MRI and those who will be able to afford one way in the future averages out to an average of a 10 year wait, the mean wait time for an MRI in America is 95%*0 years + 5%*10 years = 0.5 years, or 6 months. If you drop out those who cannot afford the MRI, then it makes the average wait times look much better than they really are, even though 95% of the population can get an MRI now.

 

[Oddball]

I don't believe Americans will ever adopt a single-payer universal healthcare system. I don't think it is part of their DNA.....

Not willingly, anyways.

 

[Diuretic]

......
From polls I've seen, the majority of people in the US and in other developed countries are satisfied with their health care coverage.

Certainly the case here in Australia. Even a right wing federal government didn't dare dismantle it, they would have been tossed out of office at the next election.

 

[Political Junky]

At least Shrubbie's goofyisms were amusing.

Obabbler just comes across as evasive at the least and totally clueless the rest of the time.

Googyisms, yes we laughed, but while being a bumbling fool he lied us into war in Iraq.

 

[Political Junky]

He'll always defend a universal plan, but also realizes that it would mean dismantling the entire existing system at a time when there's already too much upheaval in the economy. This may come as a surprise, but a majority of Americans WANT HEALTH CARE REFORM. Here is a consolidation of ALL the polls on the subject:

Health Policy

A single payer plan does not necessarily provide universal coverage and universal coverage with low costs and excellent health outcomes can be achieved through a multi payer plan using only private insurance companies, as it is in France, Germany, Japan and other countries. Voters say they want health care reform unless it will raise their costs or taxes or the national debt. In these cases, they are slightly opposed to it.

From your link,

"Would you be willing to pay more -- either in higher health insurance premiums or higher taxes -- in order to increase the number of Americans who have health insurance, or not?"

41% willing
54% not willing

The majority of voters believe needed health care reform can be achieved without spending more money.

"Which comes closer to your opinion? If policymakers made the right changes, they could reform the health care system without spending more money to do it. To make any real reforms to the health care system, policymakers will need to spend more money, either by raising some taxes, taking from other programs or increasing the deficit." Options rotated

60% no need to spend more
34% will need to spend more

Apparently, everyone is in favor of health care reform until you tell them what it will cost, and then most are not in favor of it.

Ok, it doesn't 'always' provide the optimum, though in US, we would expect the best, what do you mean by this?

A single payer plan does not necessarily provide universal coverage and universal coverage with low costs and excellent health outcomes can be achieved through a multi payer plan using only private insurance companies, as it is in France, Germany, Japan and other countries.

so are all the people in France, Germany and Japan thrilled with their health care? The overwhelming majority?

In France they definitely are very pleased with their system. The WHO rates it the best in the world. I'm not familiar with Germany's and Japan's.

 

[Annie]

A single payer plan does not necessarily provide universal coverage and universal coverage with low costs and excellent health outcomes can be achieved through a multi payer plan using only private insurance companies, as it is in France, Germany, Japan and other countries. Voters say they want health care reform unless it will raise their costs or taxes or the national debt. In these cases, they are slightly opposed to it.

From your link,

"Would you be willing to pay more -- either in higher health insurance premiums or higher taxes -- in order to increase the number of Americans who have health insurance, or not?"

41% willing
54% not willing

The majority of voters believe needed health care reform can be achieved without spending more money.

"Which comes closer to your opinion? If policymakers made the right changes, they could reform the health care system without spending more money to do it. To make any real reforms to the health care system, policymakers will need to spend more money, either by raising some taxes, taking from other programs or increasing the deficit." Options rotated

60% no need to spend more
34% will need to spend more

Apparently, everyone is in favor of health care reform until you tell them what it will cost, and then most are not in favor of it.

Ok, it doesn't 'always' provide the optimum, though in US, we would expect the best, what do you mean by this?

A single payer plan does not necessarily provide universal coverage and universal coverage with low costs and excellent health outcomes can be achieved through a multi payer plan using only private insurance companies, as it is in France, Germany, Japan and other countries.

so are all the people in France, Germany and Japan thrilled with their health care? The overwhelming majority?

In France they definitely are very pleased with their system. The WHO rates it the best in the world. I'm not familiar with Germany's and Japan's.

Goody for them. Like Gibbs said, 'they like theirs, like we like ours.' So why change?

 

[Sinatra]

Ok, it doesn't 'always' provide the optimum, though in US, we would expect the best, what do you mean by this?

so are all the people in France, Germany and Japan thrilled with their health care? The overwhelming majority?

In France they definitely are very pleased with their system. The WHO rates it the best in the world. I'm not familiar with Germany's and Japan's.

Goody for them. Like Gibbs said, 'they like theirs, like we like ours.' So why change?

Something tells me Gibbs and Biden have been hanging out a lot together...